A/HRC/24/44 more sustainable (A/HRC/18/33/Add.4, paras. 25-27). In times of crisis the impact of past inappropriate decisions becomes visible. E. Lack of meaningful participation 48. Ensuring participation proves to be a consistent challenge, and lack of participation has negative impacts on sustainability. Such challenges are exacerbated in times of crisis, where the State seeks to avoid the financial costs of participation and is under time pressure to adopt austerity-related measures. However, States are never exempted from their human rights obligations, including the duty to give people the opportunity to pronounce themselves on issues that concern them. Where meaningful participation does not occur, States often misunderstand the barriers to access, and fail to pinpoint how these barriers might be overcome. Lack of participatory processes might result in choices which might simply be unacceptable to the people they aim to serve, hence condemning the said solutions to unsustainability, as they may not be used at all or people might revert to old habits after using the new services for a while. During her mission to Tuvalu the Special Rapporteur witnessed a change of perception among the general public concerning previously rejected ecosanitation solutions, attributable to a new participatory approach comprising education, awareness-raising to address misconceptions, and a redesign of the toilets (A/HRC/24/44/Add.2, para. 30). 49. Furthermore, States might put in place decision-making processes without ensuring meaningful participation by the most disadvantaged, who generally tend to have less ability to voice their opinions and needs. This will have an impact on the use and sustainability of decisions aimed at ensuring water and sanitation. F. A pattern of neglect of the most vulnerable and marginalized 50. What emerges from the above is a pattern of neglect of the needs of the most vulnerable and marginalized groups in society across planning, institutional responsibilities and resource allocation. Disadvantaged groups can often be identified along ethnic, geographic, and socioeconomic divides (see, for example, A/HRC/18/33/Add.4, para. 79). Indigenous peoples, Dalits and Roma are among such groups facing discrimination with whom the Special Rapporteur has met during the course of her mandate.60 Moreover, there are vast gender inequalities – in many poor communities, the task of collecting water overwhelmingly falls to women and girls (see, for example, A/HRC/15/31/Add.3 and Corr.1, para. 22). Persons with disabilities are also disproportionately represented among those lacking access to water and sanitation (A/HRC/15/55, para. 21). Neglect can occur for a variety of reasons: groups and individuals may experience stigmatization, they may live in remote areas making serving them costly, or politicians may be indifferent to their needs. 51. Such inequality tends to become even more aggravated during crises. With a decrease in budget and personal incomes, people are confronted with the need to prioritize among different human rights. Furthermore, in times of crisis there will be an even greater temptation for States and service providers to focus on those who are relatively easy to reach, and no efforts will be made to reach the most marginalized people living, for instance, in remote rural areas. 52. Neglecting the rights of marginalized people violates human rights law and its fundamental principle of non-discrimination. Moreover, doing so might render services unsustainable. When a water and sanitation system is designed for a city or town with a 60 14 See A/HRC/12/24/Add.1, para. 48, A/HRC/15/55, para. 25, A/HRC/18/33/Add.2, para. 33.