Post-construction support and sustainability in community-managed rural water supply

Bakalian, A. and Wakeman, W. (eds) (2009). Post-construction support and sustainability in community-managed rural water supply : case studies in Peru, Bolivia, and Ghana. (Water Sector Board discussion paper series ; no. 14). Washington, DC, USA, Bank-Netherlands Water Partnership (BNWP), World Bank. xvii, 114 p. : 2 boxes, 1 fig., 38 tab. Incl. ref.

Download here

This volume reports the main findings from a multi-country research project on the performance of rural water supply systems in developing countries. Starting in 2004, the research investigated how the provision of support to communities after the construction of a rural water supply project affected project performance in the medium term in three countries: Bolivia, Ghana, and Peru.

Surprisingly, the great majority of the village water systems were found to be performing well.

Positive findings were:

• The demand-driven, community-management model seems to be working, at least in the medium term
• Communities had been involved in pre-construction planning and helped with capital costs
• Community water supply projects were still working
• Villages used post-construction support (PCS) from wherever they could get it
• Consumer satisfaction was high

Negative findings were:

• Households were still using unprotected water sources
• The finances of many village water committees were in poor shape
• Generally, more analysis is required to assess the impact of PCS on sustainability and satisfaction

These findings seem to support the concept of the demand-driven community management model—that communities can and should take full responsibility for their systems. The unsolicited PCS activities that appear most promising are those that help communities to renew and further develop their capacities: post-construction training for system operators and non-technical support visits to help village water committees with administrative functions or water use disputes.

However, it was found that that even those communities whose cost-recovery systems seem to be meeting program objectives—by paying 5–10 percent of capital costs and collecting tariffs to cover operation, maintenance, and repairs—are not moving toward a financially sustainable future in which they can either (1) replace infrastructure when it reaches the end of its economic life, or (2) expand system capacity to accommodate population and economic growth.

In a significant number of villages, the water committees are not collecting tariffs at all, or are collecting too little revenue from households to cover the financial costs of major repairs—much less the costs of system expansion or capital replacement.

The water supply systems in the communities in the study sample are not financially sustainable without new infusions of capital relatively soon—both to replace existing infrastructure and to provide for growth. The sector’s current capital financing model—and the post-construction activities of NGOs and other actors—seem to create a moral hazard that will undermine the principle of community self-reliance in the post-construction phase and discourage communities from making their own investments in water infrastructure to support economic growth.

Achieving long-term financial sustainability in these systems will require better coordination of the policies of NGOs with government and with each other seem. One important role for NGOs in the future could be as catalysts for post-construction support (e.g., training and/or locally-based models for raising capital), rather than as dispensers of subsidies for communities that cannot manage to repair their own water projects.

In summary, the demand-driven, community-management planning model has come a long way towards a working model in the rural water sector. The next frontier seems to be the design of a policy framework that will enable communities to handle the twin challenges of system rehabilitation and expansion.

Nepal, Kathmandu: Five rupee ticket for water

Ranibari Youth Club has started charging money for collecting water from a local stonespout. Consumers willing to collect 20 liter water from the stonespout have to buy a ticket worth five rupees [7 US dollar cents] in advance. [...] Earlier, some consumers do not get to fetch water even after queuing up for the whole day in the stonespout due to a large number of water fetchers.

Biki Khadgi, chairman of Ranibari Youth Club told that the club has started ticket system so that the consumers could get drinking water easily. Ticket system has not only regularized water collection from the stone-spout but also provided employment to the some unemployed youth members of the club. [...] The club stated that it will repair and renovate the stone-spout with the money collected from tickets.

Source: Sharmila Kaduwal, Rajdhani / NGO Forum, 9 May 2009

Barbados: water authority bankrupcy forces water rates increase

The July 1st [2009] increase in water rates is necessary because the Barbados Water Authority (BWA), has been rendered “technically bankrupt”, due to losses in each of the past 13 years, except for 2005/06.

Prime Minister David Thompson [...] pointed out that successive losses had forced the BWA to borrow to sustain its operations and its current finances were inadequate to meet debt-service charges. “Government has had to assist. In the past the BWA has sought to halt the slide through measures aimed at improving revenues, with some success, but efforts to contain costs were not successful,” he said.

Mr. Thompson noted that as the gap between expenses and revenues widened, it had become impossible to honour obligations to suppliers on a timely basis, and this had negatively impacted the BWA’s operations.

“The only viable option is to grant a rate increase at this time to permit the conduct of orderly operations, while giving some breathing space for modernising the organisation and commencing a number of projects critical to the development of the water and wastewater sector,” he indicated.

[W]ith respect to bill payments, Mr. Thompson observed that although water was the smallest utility bill for most households, it was often unpaid. He said: “A survey has revealed that residential customers view the BWA as the number two utility and they all agree that water is the most valuable of the utility services.

“However, this has not translated into willingness to pay, since residential customers account for about 60 per cent of the $26 million in arrears owed to the Authority. Some delinquents claim that their reason for not paying is that the other utilities are more aggressive in terminating for non-payment, or that there is no reward for early payment at the BWA.”

The Prime Minister stressed that whatever the true reason, the number of services due for disconnection was about 10,000 per month, which represented a huge disconnection challenge, given the fact that BWA personnel must go on site to perform this service.

Source: Gillian Applewhaite, BGIS, 18 Jun 2009

WaterAid water source options poster

WaterAid has produced a new poster resource that rates different water supply technology options in relation to their relative capital cost, operational cost, water quantity supplied and water quality supplied.

The poster also provides information on the situations in which certain water supply technologies are most applicable.

Levels of appropriateness are colour coded based on different combinations of the above variables.

The resource can be printed as a poster on A4, A3 or A2. You can download it here:
Water source options – a comparison ( PDF 93KB)

WASHCost project launches new website

Read all about the WASHCost project on its new website. The WASHCost project website aims to share good quality information on the project which is being implemented with local partners in Burkina Faso, Ghana, India and Mozambique. Twelve frequently asked questions on the new site will help you understand what the project is about. Stories from the different countries give insight into why this project is needed.

The project (2008-2012) is researching the life-cycle costs of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services in rural and peri-urban areas in the WASHCost countries. Its rationale is that WASH governance will improve at all levels, as decision makers and stakeholders analyse the costs of sustainable, equitable and efficient services and put their knowledge to use.

Go to the WASHCost website

Public Funding for Sanitation: The Many Faces of Sanitation Subsidies

At the Water Week in August, WSSCC will release its new report, “Public Funding for Sanitation: The Many Faces of Sanitation Subsidies” (working title). The report will clarify the often-contentious global debate on subsidies and sanitation financing, and it provides guidance on how to select the most appropriate funding arrangements in different situations. To be placed on the list for a review copy, send a mail to troubad@who.int

Nigeria: Japan to fund rural water supply and sanitation centre

President Umaru Yar’Adua’s seven point agenda and the Vision 2020 have received a boost from the Japanese Government which [has] agreed to make significant contributions in the area of health, education, water supply, rural electrification and agriculture to the vision as well as significantly enhance its bilateral Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) Loan to Nigeria in line with the determination of the Japanese Government to double the ODA by 2012.

[T]he Japanese Government has agreed to provide assistance [for a] project for enhancing the function of rural water supply and sanitation centre for capacity development in the National Water Resources Institute.

Source: Abayomi Adeshida, Vanguard / allAfrica.com, 05 Jun 2009

El Salvador: Anda to modify potable water subsidy

El Salvador’s national aqueduct and sewerage authority Anda [Administración Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados] will modify the structure of its potable water subsidies for residential, business and industrial clients [ ...]. Anda will now pay a subsidy on the first 20m3 consumed monthly. Previously, the company paid a subsidy of roughly 0.40 colones (US$0.05) for every cubic meter consumed. “According to the World Health Organization, a family can survive on 15m3/m of consumption,” Anda president Francisco José Gómez was quoted as saying. Anda statistics show that 52.6% of the population served by the entity will be covered by the new subsidy, the report said.

Related web site: Wikipedia – Water supply and sanitation in El Salvador

Source: BNamericas/a> [subscription site], 12 Jun 2009

The price tag for adapting to climate change

Countries staring into a gloomy future of low food production, less water, higher storm surges, longer dry periods and other expensive consequences of climate change have been told they can adapt at a cost ranging from several hundred billion dollars to over a trillion dollars.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) [is helping] developing countries calculate the cost of implementing measures not only to mitigate their greenhouse gas emissions but also to adapt to climate change. [...] The assistance is being provided by way of the National Economic and Environmental Development Study (NEEDS) in nine pilot countries: Costa Rica, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Lebanon, Mali, Nigeria, Pakistan and the Philippines.

The study estimates the cost of implementing climate change mitigation and adaptation measures in the country; then national consultants, with the engagement of the ministries of finance and planning, identify policy and finance instruments available to support the identified measures. With the financing priorities worked out, the countries stand a better chance of accessing funds from the Convention, including the Adaptation Fund set up under UNFCCC auspices. The Fund is expected to raise money from a levy of about two percent on credits generated by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

UNFCCC hopes to present the NEEDS study findings at the UN climate change summit in Copenhagen in December 2009, which will look at a new global agreement to come into effect after the first phase of the Kyoto Protocol ends in 2012.

The UNFCCC has come up with a price tag of between US$ 49 billion and $171 billion per year globally for adaptation by 2030, based on investment and financial flows in five sectors: agriculture, forestry and fisheries, water supply, human health, coastal zones, and infrastructure.

“The UNFCCC assessment is perhaps the most rigorous one out there, as it breaks down the costs sectorally and examines the impact in detail,” said Shardul Agrawala, principal economist at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the lead author of a new book [Economic Aspects of Adaptation to Climate Change: Costs, Benefits and Policy Instruments] that takes a critical look at all the studies on adaptation costs.

Most global studies, “while relevant for the international discussion on adaptation and its financing, face serious limitations,” he said. “In most cases, the estimates do not have a direct attribution to specific adaptation activities, nor are the benefits of adaptation investments articulated, and many just stack upon the assumptions made in preceding studies and the results are consequently not truly independent.”

The book, which Agrawala co-wrote with Samuel Fankhauser, principal economist at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, also examined the costs of adapting to climate change drawn up by the Least Developed Countries, with specific projects listed as part of the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) under the UNFCCC.

The cost of implementing all the projects identified by 22 countries, which had submitted their NAPA by the end of 2007, was about US$472 million, but Agrawala noted that the mandate had been limited to identifying priority projects.

NEEDS was a “sensible way to go about integrating adaptation at a higher strategic level examining all the sectors in the national planning process,” he said. “In some sectors it might just need a change in existing policy or regulations.”

[...] Agrawala said funds might be hard to come by in the current economic environment, but it did open a “window of opportunity” because many countries were investing in infrastructure as part of their economic stimulus packages.

Source: IRIN, 30 Mar 2009

Nigeria, Kano State: water subsidies needed, but eventually prices must increase, water board says 10 years

Officials in northern Nigeria’s Kano State rehabilitated a creaking water plant in the small town of Wudil, 30 km south of Kano city in an effort to bring residents cheap, safe water, but some question if the price will stay affordable. [...] Wudil resident Ali Nera, father of nine [said ] he paid US$1.30 every day for water for his family and to maintain his garden, which amounted to 20 percent of his average monthly salary. Now [...] he pays a flat US$2 monthly rate – a 95-percent savings.

The Kano government currently heavily subsidises the water it provides: it costs the state 13 cents to produce one cubic metre of water, but users are only charged one-tenth this cost, which is not sustainable said Yahaya Bala Karaye, managing director of the Kano State Water Board.

“If we charge a higher rate and cover our overhead, they [residents] will be discouraged from patronising us and settle for river water or private water vendors with all the inherent health implications in doing so,” Karaye [said].

Private vendors [...] said water quality depends on whether they get it from the river, or open or closed wells.

Eventually, Karaye said prices must increase. “We are gradually sensitising the people of the importance of clean and safe water and once the people…appreciate the dangers of consuming unsafe water, we would add a small margin on the cost of production of the water we supply the public,” Karaye said.

Source: IRIN, 30 Mar 2009