Memorandum submitted by AquaFed
AQUAFED
AquaFed is the International Federation of Private
Water Operators. Membership of the Federation is open to companies
of all sizes and from all countries. It aims to contribute to
solving water challenges by making Private Sector know-how and
experience available to the international community. It brings
together more than 200 water companies that serve people in 38
countries.
The Federation represents operators working
in the field that range from very small local businesses, through
mid-size companies to some of the largest international operators.
A high proportion of the companies that are members of AquaFed
are operating in the developing world.
The Federation is an international organisation.
It seeks to support the activities of its members or specific
country based associations by involving itself in issues that
have an international dimension. AquaFed does not operate at a
national or sub-national level. It takes great care not to infringe
on or substitute itself for national or local interests in any
country.
WHY AQUAFED
WAS FORMED
AquaFed was formed to respond to a recurrent
demand from numerous international institutions for the private
sector water operators to create an association that would enable
these institutions to talk with the operators collectively as
an industry. It was created very much in the spirit of paragraph
173 of the International Development Committee's report on Private
Sector Development: "173. Bringing together companies
from a particular sector with donors, governments, NGOs and other
key stakeholders is an important channel for private sector involvement
in development".
Created in 2005, AquaFed is still a young organisation.
It is continuing to grow its membership and its outreach.
For further information about AquaFed, please
visit our web site at www.aquafed.org
AQUAFED'S
WRITTEN EVIDENCE
AquaFed is pleased to have this opportunity
to submit evidence to this important inquiry.
We have taken as our reference the White Paper
"Eliminating World Poverty—Making Governance Work for
the Poor" and the report of the House of Commons International
Development Committee "Private Sector Development".
Both of these are substantial contributions to issues that extend
well beyond the confines of Great Britain, and are likely to have
important repercussions on developing countries for many years
to come.
We reiterate our position of not involving the
Federation in issues that concern domestic policy. In addition,
our role is not to comment on British international policy. We
have reviewed the questions raised in the "call for written
evidence" in the context of the impacts that this important
policy review might have on the whole international development
scene. We are clearly not conversant with all the activities of
DFID or other relevant parts of the British Government. It is
possible that we have overlooked important activities and trust
that if we have, this will not have a negative impact on the value
of our comments for you.
For the avoidance of doubt, in this submission
we represent companies that are operating in developing countries,
including countries that receive British development assistance.
Our response does not necessarily represent the views of the British
private water operators, and our submission should be construed
with this clearly in mind.
Our submission is structured round the main
headings and subsidiary questions raised in the "call for
written evidence". We have converted the headings and sub-headings
of the "Press Notice 55b" into level 1 & 2 headings.
Our comments are structured as level 3 headings and enumerated
paragraphs.
We have limited the areas on which we have commented
to those that call for general comment. We have deliberately avoided
discussing questions that relate specifically to DFID or to British
policy, except for a very small number of cases where we believe
that a general observation may be of use to the inquiry. In attempting
to keep our replies short we may have oversimplified some points
and would be pleased to clarify these if requested.
We trust that these comments will be useful
to your inquiry. Please contact us if you need additional information
or clarification.
REQUEST TO
GIVE ORAL
EVIDENCE
The Federation would very much like to have
the opportunity to complete this written submission by giving
evidence and answering questions about the practical experience
of our members in the delivery of water and sanitation services
in developing countries.
We are aware of a strong and co-ordinated lobby
in a Global Coalition against water privatisation. We have seen
indications that members of this coalition intend to use this
inquiry to pursue their anti-private objectives. Our members are
deeply concerned that this action may seriously misrepresent their
considerable achievements as well as the potential of the private
sector operators to make a contribution to meeting the MDGs and
to solve other water and sanitation deficiencies. We see a danger
that the British Government may find this pressure restricts its
ability to use the services of the private sector to its full
potential, thereby limiting the rate of improvement and effectiveness
of delivering on its policies.
We would be very pleased to have the opportunity
to answer such criticisms if they are made by responding directly
to any questions that the International Development Committee
may wish to put to us.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. AquaFed, the International Federation
of Private Water Operators, is pleased to take this opportunity
to respond to the call to give evidence to the International Development
Committee's inquiry into water and sanitation. In this response,
AquaFed represents companies that are operating in developing
countries including countries that receive British development
assistance. This response does not represent views of British
water operators.
2. Being an international Federation of
private operators, AquaFed has restricted its comments and evidence
to matters of general interest or concern to development at the
worldwide level. We have tried to avoid making any specific points
about British policy or the conduct of DFID, since these are national
issues largely beyond our remit.[33]
3. AquaFed is encouraged by much that the
White Paper contains. We very strongly support the emphasis on
governance, creating effective states and combating corruption.
These are essential prerequisites for development and poverty
alleviation. We look forward to seeing how these policies can
be turned into actions, and how they might lead the way in international
development. Our members would be pleased to be involved, where
appropriate at field level.
4. Water and sanitation feature throughout
the paper, but we consider that these essential services should
have a still higher profile. Water and sanitation services underpin
and enable so many of the other development objectives and all
of the MDGs.
5. Our members' experience at many different
scales in the developing world clearly shows that private sector
operators can make a very useful contribution to water and sanitation
development objectives. In recent years, their contribution has
often been misrepresented. Their ability to perform in the field
has been impaired by many of the issues discussed in the paper,
including lack of good governance and corruption.
6. In our evidence, we make the distinction
between "governmental" and "operational" issues.
Both are essential and need to work in close association and partnership
with each other. Governmental issues can only be carried out by
properly empowered government structures. For water and sanitation,
these usually need to be local governments or water authorities.
Operational activities can be carried out by a wide range of organisations
from public and private sectors, civil society and even individuals.
Almost all the challenges facing water services delivery are the
same irrespective of which sector the operator comes from. Our
evidence therefore advises against treating the sectors separately.
7. International donors and aid agencies
should continue to work to make sure that local decision-makers
have the choice of the full range of options, including effective
methods for supporting the existing public sector, as well as
the various different institutional ways in which the private
sector can be called upon to make its contribution.
8. International donors should contribute
to facilitate access to long-term finance at reasonable interest
rates for local operators, public or private.
9. We have outlined a number of practical
points that we believe would enhance the ability of all operators,
including the private sector, to deliver more and better services
thereby reducing poverty and contributing to meeting the MDGs.
These include actions by donors and governments in:
— Reinforcing rule of law to build
confidence.
— Providing Financial support
and using ODA to catalyse other funding.
— Implementing recent developments
in international financing.
— Involving commercial banks and
micro financing.
— Supporting local governments
and their choice of service delivery model.
— Engaging in capacity building.
— Facilitating transfer of technology
and know-how.
— Stimulating more projects.
— Implementing the right to water.
— Focusing on practical and case
specific solutions.
— Supporting the participation
of operators of all sizes including small-scale operators.
— Encouraging Public Private Partnership
contracts.
— Contributing to the anti-corruption
drive.
— Assisting Water Operators Partnerships.
— Sponsoring and supporting research
and development.
FULL MEMORANDUM
1. WATER SERVICE
DELIVERY
1.1 The role of donors and governments to
ensure water service delivery to poor people.
1.1.1 Water is a local matter
10. Managing and operating drinking water
and sanitation services is a local matter, therefore international
donors and governments can usually only take indirect action to
support those who can work at local level. Long experience of
international aid shows that it can be very difficult for international
donors and government aid agencies to take action that can pass
through a national government and reach the appropriate level
where poverty alleviation and service improvement takes place.
11. It is useful to make the distinction
between those local governments who are normally responsible for
the "governmental" aspects of water and sanitation and
a wider range of "operational" structures that can implement
and operate water services for the community under their direction.[34]
12. Governmental institutions include local
governments, their agencies and authorities, and in some cases
grouping of local governments or regional structures.
13. The operational category includes formal
operators from the public or private sector, public/private joint
ventures, informal suppliers, community-based and NGO operations
and individual self provision. In many respects, the challenges
for all operational service delivery structures are the same,
irrespective of what sector these operators come from.
14. To ensure the most effective delivery
of their promises, donors should recognise this and ensure that
their development aid activities are tailored to the different
needs of the governmental and operational groups of water actors
at a local level.
1.1.2 Bridging the gap between International,
National and Local levels
15. There are a number of issues that are
regularly faced by local governments on one hand and local operators
of all kinds on the other. Probably the most important among these
is the loss of political engagement that often occurs between
national and local levels where water is concerned. Many of the
other difficulties, such as unrealistic economic expectations,
inadequate levels of resources and so on, flow from this.
16. In the same way that water and sanitation
are buried away in the MDGs, it appears that water and sanitation
are still relatively low-profile issues among the development
objectives set by many governments. Since reliable water supply
and effective sanitation and wastewater treatment are fundamental
for any well-functioning society, and they underpin and enable
virtually all the MDGs, these services need to be given the very
highest priority. They in themselves will make a big contribution
to meeting all the other targets.
1.1.3 Targeting results
17. We believe that to improve progress
in the field, donors should encourage individual national governments
to set specific numerical targets for the number of water and
sanitation connections that need to be achieved for the country
in question. Clear numerical targets at country level can only
come from aggregating local data. This approach would enable:
— Local governments to see that
they are involved in the process and clearly articulate their
needs.
— National governments to declare
credible targets at the global level and show their progress in
meeting them.
— Donor governments and aid agencies
to allocate resources to specific objectives against which they
can measure progress and thereby justify to their home constituencies
the effectiveness of their actions.
— UN agencies to have a clear
and accurate picture of the challenge and progress towards meeting
it.
1.1.4 Law and Confidence
18. For donors to local authorities, and
operators alike, the uncertainty about the law and its application
give rise to very low levels of confidence and comfort for those
engaged in committing resources and effort in water and sanitation
over long time periods. The White Paper does a great deal to address
these issues. We are very supportive of these approaches to strengthen
governance and eliminate corruption. Securing law and confidence
is a key to the development of small and mid-size private operators.
1.1.5 Financial Support
19. There is no doubt that financial support
for water and sanitation, particularly in the poorest developing
countries, is essential. It is unlikely that financial grants
will ever be sufficient to meet the need, or be sustainable. Grants
must be used in a way that catalyses the inflow of funds from
non-ODA sources, and does not stifle such flows. Careful attention
should be given to the need to stimulate inflows of funds from
a wide variety of sources, when consideration is being given to
projects involving grant aid or concessional loans.
1.1.6 Capacity building
20. AquaFed supports the view that capacity
building is a means that donors and governments, as well as professional
associations, can use to improve the water and sanitation situation.
Capacity building programmes need to be devised to meet the differing
levels of need within the public sector, right down to Local Government
level. Capacity building is needed for both "governmental"
and "operational" functions. Serious concern needs to
be given to ensuring that capacity building efforts are effective
and sustainable.
21. Medium-term operations and management
contracts between experienced private operators and their local
partners have proved an effective way of building capacity, both
within local governments and within their operational units be
they public or private.
1.1.7 Transfer of Technology and Know-How
22. Aid agencies are not themselves in a
position to make transfers of technology and know-how. This is
particularly the case on the operational side of water services.
In this area, the use of contracts between experienced operators
and the local service provider have shown themselves to be effective.
1.1.8 Stimulating more projects
23. One of the most significant barriers
to progress is that there is a real shortage of credible and workable
projects in the developing countries. This is probably due to
a combination of several of the issues outlined above. Donors
should be giving very serious consideration to how they can stimulate
a much greater number of projects that can be funded and can deliver
results.
1.1.9 Implementing the Right to Water and Sanitation
24. AquaFed, strongly supports the Right
to Access to Water and believes that Governments should take all
steps in their power to recognise and promote its application.
25. The General Comment 15 on the Right
to Water has been widely accepted as a sound legal and human rights
position. We believe that it gives a satisfactory definition of
the rights and responsibilities of governments and water users.
We believe that the challenge now is to convert the terms of this
right into a reality in all countries.
26. Furthermore there is nothing in the
General Comment 15 that excludes the use of the private sector
or any other actor as the means of delivering the right to the
population. Certain pressure groups are attempting to reopen the
issues resolved by the General Comment 15 as a means of excluding
the private sector option. Had they succeeded in this, they would
have placed the many millions of people who enjoy water and sanitation
services supplied by private operators of all sizes in jeopardy
and delayed the extension of services to many others.
27. One of the arguments that is used against
the private sector in this context is the assertion that the profit
motive would be incompatible with the delivery of life supporting
services like water and sanitation. This argument is refuted in
the provision of many other services. It also neglects that many
publicly operated services are required to make profits, pay dividends
and provide funds for non-essential services. These real or pseudo-profits
are often unregulated and at significantly higher levels than
returns of private operators, which are usually regulated.
1.2 Securing the right balance between different
aspects of service provision, including public/private sector
involvement and urban/rural challenges.
1.2.1 What does "the right balance"
mean and who determines this?
28. The water and sanitation needs of the
developing world are enormous, and probably still underestimated,
since global goals only target basic sanitation and do not include
pollution removal. No single sector will have adequate capacity
to meet the need. As amply argued in a recent speech, the World
Bank has rightly stated that the fullest contribution is needed
from each and every stakeholder,[35]
This means public sector, private sector, NGOs and local communities.
All can, and should, be called on to make a contribution to service
delivery. In the face of the size of the problem and its urgency,
establishing some kind of quota, simply to meet ideological or
political criteria makes no sense and could be detrimental to
people in need.
29. All the tools available for both urban
and rural water supply and sanitation should be fully utilised.
There should be no restrictions to the methods used.
30. In the same vein, making an arbitrary
judgment on the balance between urban and rural is artificial.
The objective should be to meet the needs of all those who have
inadequate water and sanitation services, irrespective of where
they are living. If decisions need to be made on the most effective
allocation of limited aid resources, these need to be made in
the light of facts established in the field and of their potential
contribution to meeting the MDGs.
1.2.2 What matters is practical solutions not
theory.
31. Practical solutions invariably require
a deep involvement of many different locally based people. The
private sector in general, and AquaFed's members in particular,
have many practical and solution orientated staff based in the
field. They are already working in most target countries. Private
operators of all sizes have the potential and flexibility to expand
their operations and thereby make a positive contribution to the
national goals and objectives. This potential should be used to
the full and not discounted on grounds of theory or ideology.
1.2.3 Case specific solutions are needed.
32. Conditions are very different from country
to country and between urban and rural. A simplistic focus on
urban and rural can be very misleading, and causes resources to
be concentrated in places where they do not necessarily give the
greatest results. In many rural situations, small-scale or isolated
systems and solutions are applicable. In urban situations, the
constraints are frequently much more complex and integrated solutions
are essential. See also §70.
1.2.4 Local Governments to choose.
33. Local governments have clearly stated
that they want to be allowed to choose the solutions that they
think are best for delivering water and wastewater services to
their communities. This position was very clearly articulated
by representatives of local government in the recent Fourth World
Water Forum in Mexico City. "2. We, Mayors and local elected
representatives, recognise that:... . 2.2. ...Local authorities
should be able to freely choose between various management models;"[36]
34. International donors and aid agencies
should continue to work to make sure that local decision-makers
have clear and unbiased advice on the various alternatives that
they can use. These alternatives should cover the full range of
options including effective methods for supporting the existing
public sector, as well as the various different institutional
ways in which the private sector can be called upon to make its
contribution.
1.2.5 Water for all policy.
35. AquaFed believes that donors and governments
should develop clear pro-poor water for all policies. These need
to take account of the realities and practicalities of sanitation
and water supply in un-served and disadvantaged communities by
including these communities in the project design and implementation.
An incremental approach that overcomes the hurdles in a stepwise
manner is often more realistic than trying to provide connected
network systems immediately. For example, an approach that starts
with collective latrines and progresses eventually to individual
connections to a sewerage and treatment system, or, one starting
with standpipes then evolving to yard taps and finally to individual
connections, may have better results and spread resources more
fruitfully than attempting to provide a networked system from
the outset. This kind of approach enables the improvements to
livelihoods and opening of opportunities to occur sooner for all
the people concerned.
36. Pro-poor policies of this kind need
to recognise the appropriate technologies and management practices
that work best at local level. This includes the use of simple
but appropriate technologies. It also requires the recognition
of very small scale service providers, such as latrine emptiers
or standpipe managers, and the need to encourage or enable these
to progressively upgrade their services and their scale of operations
as the situation evolves.
1.3 DFID's role in enhancing accountability
and overall water governance.
37. In general, we do not feel that AquaFed
should comment on this question. However, we would like to make
two points that reinforce our comments above.
1.3.1 Targeting and Measuring to MDGs contribution.
38. Targeting and measuring the UK contribution
to meeting the MDGs in terms of numbers of connections actually
achieved, as indicated above, would appear to be a very practical
way of increasing overall accountability. This would involve measuring
tangible outputs and comparing these with the financial inputs
to highlight the effectiveness of development policies and actions.
What really matters is allowing more people to gain access to
water and sanitation services by making the best use of the money
available.
1.3.2 Support the anti corruption drive and the
Water Integrity Network.
39. AquaFed is fully supportive of the White
Paper's focus on combating corruption. Although the water sector
is not the worst one, we believe that the corruption is a serious
impediment to the improvement and extension of water services
in very many places throughout the world. It is for this reason
that AquaFed has become an active member of the newly-formed Water
Integrity Network (WIN). We hope that DFID will be able to support
the activities of the WIN both with expertise and with financial
support.
40. In the context of measures to tackle
corruption, it is necessary to underline that there are very significant
differences between the water sector and the extractive industries
sector. Today the largest part of the water sector is managed
and operated by public sector entities. Unfortunately, many of
these are implicated in corrupt practices. As a result of these
factors, we suggest that the model of the Extractive Industry
Transparency Initiative may not be appropriate to the water sector.
We firmly believe that the approach proposed by the WIN will be
more productive.
1.4 Co-operation, co-ordination and capacity-building
between and with water operators, governments and donors (including
public-public and public-private partnerships).
1.4.1 Public-Private Partnerships contracts
(PPPs).
41. Public-Private Partnerships contracts
(PPPs) are arrangements under which public entities, that are
responsible for water and sanitation services, delegate all or
part of the day-to-day management, operation and maintenance and
delivery of these services, through a partnership contract, to
an external private operator. Among the many benefits of these
partnerships are clearly defined performance targets and a good
probability to achieve them.
42. The use of PPP contracts also introduces
competition into activities where the natural monopoly conditions
make competition otherwise difficult. The emergence of competition
between private operators has provided some stimulus to the entrenched
and uncontested monopolies of public sector operators. Indeed,
we now see some public operators that are organised as private
entities are competing in the market for PPP contracts (Italy,
Ghana, Cameroon, etc).
1.4.2 Water Operators Partnerships (WOPs).
43. The concept of Water Operators Partnerships
is being promoted by UNSGAB[37]
to help existing public utilities that are failing and that therefore
need support or change. A WOP entails an experienced operator,
either public or private, providing support to a public utility.
We imagine that DFID will take its part in building efficient
and effective WOPs.
1.5 How DFID can support replication and scaling
up of "best-practice" water and sanitation provision.
44. In general, we do not feel that AquaFed
should comment on this question. However, we would like to make
three points that reinforce our comments above.
1.5.1 DFID's track record.
45. We are aware that DFID has done a great
deal in the past to develop ideas and understanding of a wide
range of subjects linked with the technology, finance, governance
and delivery of water and sanitation services. We would like to
pay tribute to this and to the improvements that this has enabled.
It appears that the considerable amount of useful information,
experience and documentation that DFID has created over the years
has become partly overlooked or forgotten.
1.5.2 Recognise private sector role in transfer
of technology, know how and change management.
46. Within the private sector there are
many businesses delivering materials, equipment, support and services
to the water sector. A great many of these provide training and
transfer of technology linked to their core activity. In addition
to this, private operators are in the position of being expert
integrators of many of the subsidiary products and services provided
by others. This gives them considerable know-how, which they transfer
to their local employees, clients and partners during the course
of their contracts.
47. Furthermore, a frequent barrier to progress
is the difficulty of instituting change in the management and
operation of water and sanitation services. Private sector operators
can and have been used successfully to organise or catalyse change
management.
1.5.3 Focused support of R&D.
48. We note that DFID proposes to use science
to tackle poverty. We strongly support this concept and see a
need to encourage research not only in hard technology, but also
in soft science. However, it is necessary to guard against dubious
science that is aimed at weakening or destroying the private sector's
ability to contribute. This requires proper rigour in commissioning,
managing and reviewing research programmes[38]
and holding researchers accountable for their work to other stakeholders.
2. FINANCING
AND AID
INSTRUMENTS FOR
WATER AND
SANITATION
2.1 Ensuring international financing and aid
instruments for water and sanitation are fit for purpose.
2.1.1 Implementation of Camdessus & Gurria
Panel Recommendations.
49. AquaFed believes that donors and aid
agencies should support, develop and help implement the conclusions
of the Camdessus panel, the Gurria panel and the UNSGAB in particular
through:
— developing financing mechanisms
that provide long-term finance at reasonable interest rates to
local Authorities and their operators;
— promoting cost-recovery mechanisms
that are sustainable over the long term and ensure the affordability
of water services to whole population; and
— using ODA as a catalyst that
allows non-ODA financing flows (local borrowings, auto-financing,
and private investors) to contribute, when they would not be able
to exist without such ODA and thereby to maximize the number of
projects.
We believe that such policies are essential
to all types of operators, public or private, and that they are
crucial for the satisfactory development of mid-size private operators.
2.1.2 Develop more common ground with commercial
banks & investors (including local).
50. AquaFed considers that there is considerable
scope for governments, donors and IFIs to develop more common
ground with commercial banks and private sector investors. For
the most part, commercial banks and private investors are very
reluctant to invest or make loans in developing countries where
the water and sanitation needs are greatest. This applies in most
cases to local finance markets as well as international ones,
because of the perceived risk profile of the water and sanitation
sector.
51. Part of the answer to this lies in the
governance issues already mentioned. There is in our view potential
for cross sectoral collaboration both internationally and in local
markets to address this challenge in other ways.
2.1.3 Microfinance and security.
52. Two difficulties face poor people, particularly
those living in urban slum areas that add considerably to the
challenge of connecting them to water and sanitation services.
These are lack of capital and absence of title. Capital is important
to enable them to pay any lump sum connection charges, and often
more importantly to make the minimum installations in their homes
to benefit from the services, notably bathrooms. Micro-credit
arrangements are one way of overcoming this difficulty, and are
a process that merits further development. They do not overcome
the lack of title, but can mitigate its effects.
2.2 The role of aid in supporting the private
sector's involvement in water and sanitation.
2.2.1 Helping to Provide Stability and Good
Governance.
53. This has already been discussed above.
Helping to provide stability and good governance is possibly the
single most important aspect, and has the advantage of being of
equal value to both private and public operators.
2.2.2 Recognise the value of introducing competition.
54. Acknowledging that there are private
operators of all sizes and that providing opportunities for competitive
bidding is a way to develop local private capabilities and local
private companies. The opportunity for competition also acts as
a stimulus for performance in the public sector.
2.2.3 Mixing public & private finance.
55. Mixing public and private finance to
get the most results from available ODA as has been discussed
above.
2.2.4 Supporting local involvement.
56. Donors and aid agencies should give
support to local governments and local communities. They should
help these to focus priority to meeting the agreed needs of the
population and guard against "ideological" intervention
by non-representative external parties.
2.2.5 Use of guarantees.
57. Support projects with appropriate guarantees
that make projects, which could not exist without such guarantees,
possible.
2.2.6 Support the development of all sizes of
private operators.
58. Donors and aid agencies should support
the development of local private water businesses and acknowledge
that throughout the world there are local water companies of all
sizes. Between small-scale WSPs and large multinational companies,
there are companies of all sizes that adapt themselves to market
conditions. When local conditions improve, companies can grow
as it has been shown in all countries where private operators
coexist with public ones.
2.2.7 Support the development of small scale
operators.
59. There is growing recognition of the
role that small scale operators, both formal and informal, play
in delivering water and sanitation to the poor. These operators
face problems with raising finance for their operations. They
are also particularly vulnerable to the impacts of poor governance
and corruption. For example, they can be very adversely affected
by late payments from municipal clients, delayed transfer of subsidies
or grants due to them, and fraud and illegal activities that are
condoned by public authorities. Donors, governments and international
institutions need to be conscious of these special challenges
of small operators and devise methods and procedures to help small
operators.
3. DFID'S ORGANISATIONAL
CAPACITY FOR
SUPPORT TO
WATER AND
SANITATION
3.1 Internal co-ordination between Policy
Division and country programmes
We do not feel that AquaFed should comment on
this question. However, we would like to make one point that reinforces
our comments above.
3.1.1 Cross sectoral water expertise.
60. We have heard that some people would
like to isolate public sector specialists from private sector
specialists in the internal organisation of DFID. We would like
to stress that most issues of the water sector are not restricted
to "public" on one hand or "private" on the
other. All water operators, public and private, have to face similar
issues: technical challenges, managerial challenges, financial
needs, cost-recovery, customer needs and expectation, need of
long-term policies and targets, support from public authorities,
etc Therefore, separating "public" specialists from
"private" specialists could result in a loss of efficiency
and a false polarisation within the department's activities. In
the countries where access to water must be developed, the polarisation
is between the served and the un-served people.
4. WATER RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT
4.1 How the public and private sectors can
work together to address water pollution.
4.1.1 Private Operators' Contribution.
61. In developed countries, private operators
are used to build, finance and/or operate waste water systems
and waste water treatment plants for the sake of public entities.
It is one of their core businesses for which they carry out research
and develop new technologies. In many developing countries, sanitation
and protection of rivers are lagging far behind drinking water
services despite the negative impacts they have on public health,
economic development and the environment. Many of our members
feel they could contribute more to water de-pollution if governments
were to request them to do so.
5. URBANISATION
AND WATER
5.1 The implications of rapid worldwide urbanisation
for water and sanitation provision.
62. Today, there are still more people lacking
satisfactory access to water in rural areas than in urban areas.
However, rapid urbanisation makes it necessary to address rural
needs and urban needs simultaneously. This is because most of
the new needs are in urban areas. Urban projects are the most
complex because of the high number of different types of stakeholders,
extensive geographical and social interactions and the need to
cope with the existing infrastructure. There is also often the
need to cope with the rehabilitation of historic "legacy"
systems and at the same time face extremely rapid expansion. This
places severe burdens on both the governmental and operational
organisations. Overcoming these challenges requires strong political
will and long-term vision. It also requires clear objectives and
high levels of professionalism in planning, coordination and regulating
institutions as well as in the service delivery activities.
6. IMPROVING
HEALTH AND
EDUCATION THROUGH
WATER AND
SANITATION INTERVENTIONS
6.1 Links between water, sanitation, health
and education.
6.1.1 Access to water brings many socio-economic
benefits.
63. These links are generally well known
to sector specialists, but need to be communicated better to non-experts.
For example, it has been recognised that access to water and sanitation
goals are a key component of the Millennium Development Goals
since their achievement is a prerequisite to the good achievement
of many other objectives.
64. We would like to stress that the development
of access to water and sanitation does not only impact public
health and education but also economic development, poverty reduction,
environmental sustainability.
65. Given this level of knowledge and understanding,
it is disappointing that water supply and even more seriously
sanitation are given low priority in many donor and developing
country policies. These subjects tend to be political orphans,
when in practice they should be seen as catalysts to stimulate
other forms of societal and economic development.
6.1.2 Private sector impact on health improvements—water
and sanitation.
66. Several studies have concluded that
the involvement of private operators in water and sanitation has
led to measurable improvements in public health. For example,
it has been found in Argentina that the privatization of water
systems is associated with a decrease in child mortality of 5
to 8%.[39]
7. GENDER ASPECTS
OF WATER
AND SANITATION
ISSUES
67. It is the experience of many of our
members that access to water and sanitation projects in developing
countries are only real successes when the population takes part
in the design of the project (both infrastructure and operations).
It is crucial to listen to the real needs of various water users.
A "water for all" policy must address all needs. The
water utility cannot identify and understand such needs without
interviewing and involving women, youngsters, slum-dwellers in
stable situations, slum-dwellers in precarious situations, and
many others. Women play an essential role in identifying solutions
and orienting their implementation, particularly in poor communities.
7.1 Links between water, sanitation and women
and girls' health and education.
68. These links are well known by water
professionals, who are motivated to improve the situation. They
are often hindered in their work by lack of understanding, or
cultural and other issues within the communities where they are
working.
October 2006
33 Please see our cover letter from a more detailed
explanation. (Ev 121).Back
34
For clarity and simplicity we have used the terms "governmental"
and "operational" to describe these functions throughout
this paper. Back
35
J Saghir, Keynote plenary speech to IWA World Congress in Beijing,
13 September 2006. Back
36
Local government declaration on water, on the occasion of the
Fourth World Water Forum, Mexico, 21 March 2006, Proposed by the
UCLG Committee on the Local Management of Water and Sanitation. Back
37
United Nations Secretary General's Advisory Board on Water and
Sanitation. Back
38
A good example of such a review is "Gyawali, D, JA Allan
et al, 2006. EU-INCO water research from FP4 to FP6 (1994-2006)-a
critical review. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications
of the European Communities, 86 p. Back
39
"Water for Life: The Impact of the Privatization of Water
Services on Child Mortality"-Sebastián Galiani-Universidad
de San Andrés Paul Gertler-University of California at
Berkeley and NBER and Ernesto Schargrodsky-Universidad Torcuato
Di Tella. Back
| 
