Water Services Trust Fund Financial Support for Improved Access to Water and Sanitation

1. Water Services Trust FundFinancial Support for Improved Access to Water and Sanitation Water Supply and Sanitation: Planning, People & Operation

2. Water supply projects: Different phases .....different emphasis • The initial project planning phase: • Often dominated by social an public health objectives (the good idea, helping poor people) • Emphasis is on sector norms (one kiosk should only serve 200 persons, slums residents consume 20 litres/capita per day (norms become reality.... because no one checks!!) • Process is dominated by financing agencies, politicians, policy makers, NGOs, etc. • The focus on people only and not on sustainability Overview UPC

3. 2. Project implementation phase: • Emphasis tends to be on technical issues • Engineers, drawings, contractors, technical works supervision, procurement, etc. • Slums are perceived as a technical challenge • Kiosks and other infrastructure become part of technical drawings • But... we are working with people (residents) and for people • So.....we need to involve people and understand people (e.g. their preferences and water consumption behaviour) However: • Project planning phase is reflected in the number of kiosks Overview UPC

4. 3. Project operation phase: • Emphasis on financial/operational aspects • Slums are seen as an unprofitable market & slum dwellers are difficult customers • Pro-poor water supply is seen as unsustainable • Problems arise with the Regulator who forces the WSP to adopt low pro-poor tariffs Overview UPC

5. 4. Project evaluation phase: Only at this point all objectives of allstakeholders are being considered: • Residents • The water and sanitation utility and • Kiosk operators (often “discovered” during project evaluation) During project evaluation the disappointment is analysed: • Conclusion: the project is not sustainable. • Why? Overview UPC

6. Why are many pro-poor water supply projects unsustainable ? • Planning phase: main emphasis was on social & public health objectives • Project design based on unrealistic norms • No proper analysis carried out of the demand (market) for treated water based on existing sources of water used • Result: >> too many kiosks: one for every 200 persons (etc.) • Consumption lower than the norm (4 litres instead of 20 litres/capita per day) __________ • Kiosk revenues are low. Both the utility and the kiosk operators complain • WSP tends to ignore customer complaints & does not respond damage reports • Result: neglected infrastructure, erratic supply & poor water quality • Low customer and operator satisfaction levels • Operators loose more customers and are refusing to pay the Utility • Low collection efficiency >> (see no. 1) Overview UPC

7. Lessons learned: • WSS projects should consider all objectives of all main stakeholders during all phases of a project Main stakeholders: • Water Services Boards • Water Service Providers • Residents • Kiosk Operators (if applicable) Overview UPC

8. Main pro-poor water supply objectives: • Social objective (access to safe water) • Public health objective • Financial & commercial objective • Technical objective • Environmental objective • Image objective Overview UPC

9. How to improve project planning? • Not only a focus upon social objectives • Project should allow/enable the WSP to consider technical constraints and future revenue (i.e. the sustainability of the scheme) • Objectives of the kiosk operator should be considered • Assess demand for treated water...so we need to know the current water supply situation (alternative sources of water) We have to respect the choices people make instead of focussing on norms! • Well planned project is based on detailed data. MajiData is providing that information....and more >> • MajiData is also a tool which can be used by WSP to manage their low income urban areas Overview UPC

10. How to improve the technology? Considering other objectives and stakeholders: a few examples • Technical options and designs: Options should be demand driven (low cost areas example)>> • Why can customers, Operators and WSP staff not be involved in the design of kiosks, yard taps etc.? • Customer-Aided Design (CuAD) Overview UPC

11. How to improve project implementation? • Approach should include a community mobilisation, sensitisation & participation concept • Kiosk sites /consider preferences of residents as well as technical considerations and financial constraints Overview UPC

12. How to improve project operation (performance)? • Not only a focus on revenue.....but also on customer care, maintenance & repair and the objectives of the kiosk operator (revenue, business hours, etc.) • In other words, establishing a presence in the low income urban areas Overview UPC

13. How to improve project operation (performance)? • Being present Overview UPC

14. How can we achieve these objectives? The challenge will be to make the objectives of the various stakeholders compatible. How can we do this? • MajiData • CuAD and a number of technology options • Task Team Approach • Toolkit for Urban Water Supply Projects • Emphasis on technical work and accompanying measures • 3 Field Monitors per project: Social-, Engineering, - and Finance FM Overview UPC

15. Community participation (opportunities and limits): Opportunities: • Project planning: data collection, CuAD • Project implementation: kiosk sites , identification of operators, sensitisation of the residents • Project operation: prevention of theft and vandalism, reporting damage, customer complaints • Project evaluation: adopting participative evaluation methods Overview UPC

16. Community participation (opportunities and limits): Limits: • However: schemes should not be managed by communities..... because you need experts for that • Communities should organise themselves. But why should I, being a slum dweller, be made dependent upon my capacity and the capacity of my fellow slum dwellers to organise ourselves and manage a WS scheme Overview UPC

17. Community participation (opportunities and limits): Limits: • Why should I not be given the opportunity to benefit from cross-subsidies and the expertise of a WSP • Why should I not be able to benefit from the protection offered by the regulator? • Empower: but studies show that people are not interested in water democracies... they are interested in easy access to clean water • You pay more, the WSP never gets it back and money disappears Overview UPC

18. Thank You Overview UPC