Masroor AhmadSr. Water and Sanitation Specialist, WSP, WB, Islamabad

PAKISTAN WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATIONSECTOR STUDY

PAKISTAN URBAN FORUM

STUDY OVERVIEW

KARACHIJANUARY 11, 2014

Study Objectives & Scope

• To assess the provision of services disaggregated by province & region

• To provide a framework for governments to take informed decisions on improving service delivery

• To identify the priority areas for reform and investment• Takes stock of the sector across a range of technical, financial,

environmental, and institutional dimensions• Identifies the key issues of the sector and draws on international

experiences • It is the first comprehensive study that captures both water and

sanitation in both urban and rural areas across the entire country

Process & Partners

• National Launch of Concept – April 2012• Planning Commission – Coordination • Consultative sessions with PHEDs, LGDs, PnDs,

DoF, WASAs, KWSB, (selected)TMAs and CSOs in four provinces and three regions

• Reality check - sharing early findings with provinces & regions

• Soft launch of National Sector Study – April 2013• Brainstorming on What Next….

Output

• The sector work comprises three volumes each covering four provinces & three regions.

Water Sanitation

Urban Rural National Urban Rural National

Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Unimproved

Country Year Total Improved (%)

Piped on Premises (%)

Total Improved (%)

Total Improved (%) Improved (%) Improved (%) Improved (%) Open Defecation

(%)

Bangladesh 1990 87 26 75 77 58 34 39 33

2010 85 20 80 81 57 55 56 4

India 1990 88 49 63 69 51 7 18 75

2010 97 48 90 92 58 23 34 51

Nepal 1990 96 43 74 76 37 7 10 80

2010 93 53 88 89 48 27 31 49

Pakistan 1990 95 56 81 85 72 7 27 52

2010 96 58 89 92 72 34 48 23

Sri Lanka 1990 91 37 62 67 85 67 70 14

2010 99 67 90 91 88 93 92 0

Access to Water and Sanitation in the South Asia Region

Pakistan Summary:• Above average for water supply• Middling for sanitation

South Asia International Comparisons

Water Sanitation

Urban Rural National Urban Rural National

Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Unimproved

Country YearTotal

Improved (%)

Piped on Premises (%)

Total Improved

(%)Piped on

Premises (%)Total

Improved (%)

Total Improved

(%)

Total Improved

(%)

Total Improved

(%)

Open Defecation

(%)

Total for SAR1990 90 53 66 8 72 57 12 24 67

2010 96 51 88 13 90 64 30 41 41

Total for LAC1990 95 87 64 37 85 80 38 68 18

2010 98 92 81 61 94 84 60 80 4

Total for World1990 95 81 62 18 76 76 29 49 25

2010 96 80 81 29 89 79 47 63 15

Summary for South Asia:• Comparable or better in access to improved water supplies• Below international comparators for quality of service – piped water supply• Below international comparators for sanitation

Urban Water Supply and Urban Sanitation

Countries with the Largest Numbers of People Practicing Open Defecation• The quality of service in the rural sanitation sub sector is best considered in terms of the level of

open defecation. Overall the rate of Open Defecation (OD) is 40 million people, 34% of the rural population which places Pakistan as the third largest OD country after India (626 million, 78% of rural population) and Indonesia (63 million and 55% of rural population)

150

626

63

40

38

34 19 1514

12 9.7 9.5 8.6

7.7

7.2Rest to the World India

Indonesia Pakistan

Ethiopia Nigeria

Sudan Nepal

China Niger

Burkina Faso Mozambique

Cambodia Madagascar

Brazil

9

Investment Requirements • Rs 163 Bn is estimated investment required for the three

years 2013-15 to achieving the Pakistan’s MDG for 2015 of 100% access to water supply and 67% access to improved sanitation

• Estimated rural water investment was at Rs 54.09 billion and rural sanitation at Rs 92.21 billion giving a total rural requirement of Rs 146.3 billion.

• This is equivalent to about 0.31% of annual GDP over the three year period with rural accounting for about 90% of the total

10

AJK Balochistan FATA GB KPK Punjab Sindh0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

Drinking Water and Sanitation Allocations as Proportion to Provincial ADP 2011-12

Urban Summary• No city has 24/7 service, high risk of water-borne epidemics• No utility is financially self sustaining, not even recovering OpEx• 10% of wastewater is treated, leading to environmental degradation • 10 % -15% consumer metering which undermines good commercial

practices • Current sector investment is around 0.16 percent of GDP versus

international comparators in the region of 0.2 percent to 0.4 percent

• High levels of Non revenue water; high energy consumption costs ranging from 19-57% of operating expenditure

• Institutional structure is fragmented with almost nil autonomy (independent management decision making), poor governance (weak accountability reporting & monitoring) and limited financial space (compromising service quality)

Urban Recommendations• Improve Institutional Autonomy and Accountability

• Regional utilities (intermediate towns) - NSUSC• Corporate utilities (million+ cites) WSSP in Peshawar• Public reporting of performance

• Encourage Cost Recovery from User Fees with emphasis on technical and commercial efficiency

• Increase the Level of Public Funding and make it contingent on delivering results (Performance Based Finance)

• Undertake Pilot Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)• Scale Up Wastewater Treatment to protect water sources• Improve the Knowledge Gap on Service Provision (P-WOPs

utilities network)• Special focus on Urban Slums (CLC unit in Faisalabad –

WASA)

13

Rural WaterThe two main models for rural water service delivery that currently exist are the following:

1. Provincial or regional level institutions such as PHEDs in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan, and Sindh develop the schemes and subsequently operate them.

2. In Punjab, AJK, and FATA, provincial- or regional-level institutions such as PHEDs develop the schemes, and they are subsequently operated and maintained by community-based organizations

• Punjab, AJK and GB have shown very good financial sustainability with high levels of cost recovery (and in a number of cases revenues exceed operating costs).

• PCRWR, however, found that up to 50% of schemes are not operational• Domestic Private Entrepreneurs models ?

Source FailureMajor defects in machinery / rising main / distribution network / etc...

Technical

(49%)

Non Payment of duesRevenue not matching expenditurePoor cost recoveryNon-representative CBOCommunity conflictTheft of major components like electric motor, transformer, etc...

Financial / Managerial(51%)Lack of funds

63%

Missing/theft/dam-aged elec-

trical/Mech Parts14%

Breakage in Transmission/

Networks8%

Water Shortage

8%

Lack of interest4%

Community dispute/ Non-payment of electricity bill

2% Others1%

Reasons for Non-Functioning Schemes in Sindh

Diagnosis of Failure of Rural Water Supply Schemes in Punjab

Department (PHED) is operating on “Zero” operational (O&M) budget

4100 schemes, 2870 functional

Every CBO is a mini PHED

The level of services varies from district to district and within districts

Realignment & extension of rising main & networks

Strong women participation

Computerized billing, Rs 70-150/month bill

Savings (up to 5 M) & investments

Stand bye arrangements (generators, motor, pumps etc)

Water ++

100% water metering CBOs NGOs

“Zero” WAPDA arrears 24x7 model CBOs members Entrepreneurs Serving as models for other provinces

Punjab CBOs Model

Demand Responsive Approach to Rural Water Supplies in South Asia

Communities contributing to CAPEX

Communities involved in entire Scheme Cycle

Communities Managing O&M

Oversight Mechanisms

Communities willing to PAY for WSS Services

India Upfront contribution ranging from Rs 300 to Rs 1,000 per HH

Planning, Designing, Implementing, Managing Schemes

Small Schemes: O&M managed by Village Level CommitteesLarge Schemes: O&M contracted out

Social Audits by Communities

50% to 100% O&M Cost Recovery through User Charges

Bangladesh 5,000 Tk per HH (Max 10% of CAPEX)

Planning and Designing

Water points – Community managed; Small Schemes- Operator managed

Local Government (Union Parishad)

100% O&M cost recovery from users

Sri Lanka Max of 10% of CAPEX

Like India Multi village – Local govt. Single Village - Communities

NWSDB and local govt.

100% from user charges

Nepal Cash contribution is 2.5% and total (with in-kind ) is 20%)

All Community level schemes – managed by WSUCs (user committee)

Dept of Water Supply and Sewerage (mandated)

100%

How is Rs 100 spent?

0 20 40 60 80 100

Supply driven

Demand driven

RsInstitutional Exp

IEC, HRD, NGO Etc.Loss due to overprovision

Loss due to defunct schemesResources used for O&M (net of recovery)

Actually provides infrastructure services

DATA FROM COST EFFECTIVENESS STUDY

Rural Recommendations• Roles and Responsibilities of Key Agencies must be clarified

and CBOs given a Central Role• Long term backstopping needed for sustainability• Investment support programs from (Federal and Provincial

Levels) should be expanded and focused on the delivery of outcomes

• Reinforce Policies of O&M Cost Recovery from User Fees• Introduce Training and Capacity Building to Support

Transitions to New Roles• Begin to Address Knowledge Gaps – particularly the high

level of non-functionality• Target Outcome achievements in Sanitation Sector through

PATS • Develop sector-wide M&E system

What Next (2013-2016)

• Supporting Provinces/Regions/utilities in implementing recommendations

• National Programmatic Support TA – (Technical Advisory Program – TAP)

• Focus on developing results based, financeable, opportunities, e.g.1. Performance based leakage reduction in urban areas2. Wastewater treatment PPPs3. Root cause assessment of non-function RWSS schemes

as pre-cursor to performance based rehab financing

THANK YOU

Urban Cities & Population • By 2030, about 50 percent of Pakistan’s

population, or about 137 million people, will be living in urban areas

• Number of million+ cities will increase from 8 in 2012 to at least 12

• Population density quadrupled from 42 persons per kilometer in 1951 to 166 persons in 1998

• About 40 percent of the population in the larger cities currently live in katchiabadis (Planning Commission)

Characteristics of Well Performing UtilityWell run water service providers tend to have:

• Autonomy—financial and managerial—to operate the provider without undue interference on a day-to-day basis and in the long-term interests of the community

• Accountability—to a range of stakeholders to demonstrate that they provide the services and performance expected of them, whether that performance be technical or financial

• Customer orientation—to ensure that the provision of service to customers is the focus of management and staff

• Market orientation—to ensure that the service is provided as efficiently as possible and thus minimizes costs to both customers and government (as a sector financier).

NWSC Key Achievements(from Audited Accounts of NWSC, 1998 to 2012)

24

Performance Indicator 1998 2012

Service Coverage 48% 77%

Total Connections 50,826 295,000

New Connections per year 3,317 23,400

Metered Connections 37,217293,730

Staff per 1000 Connections 36 6

Collection Efficiency 60% 96%

NRW 50% 32.6%

Proportion Metered Accounts 65% 99.0 %

Annual Turnover (Billion Shs) 21 155

Surplus (Before. Dep.) (Millions USD)

4.0 (loss) 13.8 (Surplus) or Ushs 36.1 billion

25

PSLM 2010-11 (Population in 2012 = 183.5M) JMP 2012 update (Population in 2010173.5)

Province/Region Punjab% (Million)

KP% (Million)

Sindh % (Million)

Baluchistan% (Million)

AJK% (Million)

FATA% (Million)

w/o access to improved water (Urban )

9% (4.1M) 8% (0.3M) 4% (1M) 4% (0.1M) 15% (1M) NA 4% (6M)

AJK Balochistan Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Punjab Sindh 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Level of Water Service in Province/Region

26

Urban water coverage in 2010 is just below the 2015 target of 97%, and urban sanitation is well below with 2010 coverage at 72% versus a 2015 target of 86%

Pakistan

Water Supply Coverage Estimates

Urban (%) Rural (%) Total (%)

1990 2008 2010 1990 2008 2010 1990 2008 2010

Improved Water 95 96 96 81 88 89 85 91 92

Piped on premises 56 57 58 8 21 23 23 34 36

Other unimproved 39 39 38 73 67 66 63 57 56

Unimproved 5 4 4 8 7 6 6 6 5

PakistanSanitation Coverage Estimates

Urban (%) Rural (%) Total (%)1990 2008 2010 1990 2008 2010 1990 2008 2010

Improved facilities

72 72 72 7 31 34 27 45 48

Shared facilities

6 6 6 1 5 6 3 5 6

Other unimproved

14 18 18 20 26 26 18 24 23

Open defecation

8 4 4 72 38 34 52 26 23

National Coverage

Cost inefficiencies higher in Supply driven Schemes (Piped Water)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Demand driven

Supply driven

Rs / KLCapital cost O&M cost

Supplementary source cost Coping cost

Institutional cost SO/NGO cost

Indirect power subsidy

DATA FROM COST EFFECTIVENESS STUDY

Institutional Arrangement & Sector Actors/Institutions

• The 1973 Constitution assigns policy, planning, and financing responsibility to provinces and service provision to LGs

• The 18th amendment has resulted in fiscal, administrative and functional decentralization of several sectors to provinces

Currently, five actors are providing services across the country:

• Households (self provision). According to the PSLM 2010-11, at least 46% in urban areas and 84% of households in rural areas receive water through hand-pumps, motor-pumps, and dug wells in urban areas. According to the MICS 42% of households in urban areas and 95% in rural areas are not connected to a public sewer in urban areas

• Communities operate and maintain (O&M) of smaller rural water supply and sanitation systems

• PHED is responsible for construction and major O&M of rural water supply and sanitation, and construction and major O&M of urban water supply and sanitation. PHEDs are responsible for all engineering works for rural and urban areas except for the million+ cities

• WASAs/KWSB Million+ cities of Lahore, Faisalabad, Gujranwala, Rawalpindi, Multan & Quetta have WASAs and Karachi has KW&SB as service providers

• Municipalities Intermediate towns have municipalities/municipal administrations as service providers

- Slide 5 on institutional arrangements should come after Slide 6 Access to W & S in the South Asia area. Best to bring in the regional context up front. Island of success & achievements like UU Punjab to Sindh to KP, OPP in Karachi, Corporate Urban utility in Peshawar no mention on OPP?