In this presentation Harold Lockwood examines structural challenges to development aid and proposes a different paradigm: a Service Delivery Approach. For further information see: www.waterservicesthatlast.org

1. Understanding the Service Delivery
Approach: the political economy of
delivering rural water
Harold Lockwood
WaterAid, 23 October 2014
Supporting water sanitation
and hygiene services for life

2. Rural water supply:
we are making progress
• Tens of $ billions invested
• 800 million with new access 1990 – 2010 (JMP,
2012)
• Almost doubling of on-premise piped supplies
• New approaches and knowledge gained
In short , we have become pretty good at providing first time access
Millennium
development goal
on safe drinking
water reaches
target early.
SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH

3. SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Universal access by 2030? ........ mind the
“sustainability gap”

4. Current approaches to rural water
supply are not working
Too many systems are
non-functional at any
one time or broken
beyond repair
Commonly cited figures
average between 30%
and 40%

5. Africa: cost of failing handpmups
Information Collated by Peter Harvey, UNICEF Zambia, May 2007
Investment loss
in sub-Saharan
Africa of
between
US$ 1.2 to 1.3
billion over 20
years
~36%

6. World Bank data Africa
Percentage of rural water systems requiring rehabilitation
World Bank 2007. Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic Water Supply and Sanitation Survey Database.

7. SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Comparing coverage with actual service delivered
And non-functionality is just the tip of the iceberg (n=500)

8. hardware ≠ service

9. Structural challenges to development aid
• Overwhelming focus on infrastructure provision
9
and coverage
• Unrealistic assumptions about
financing, particularly for long
-term recurrent expenditures
• Scale of intervention
(community) cannot address
systemic needs

10. Challenges for governments
• Incomplete and partial decentralisation combined
with lack of incentives and political interference
• Rural sector reform neglected
behind urban bias
• Lack of financing for rural
water and failure to address
recurrent costs

11. Donors and NGOs also challenged
• Lack of engagement with government and
investment to improve overall rural sector
performance
• Poorly harmonised
donors and NGOs
• Fragmented and
‘projectised’
approaches

12. Fragmentation of aid delivery
• 1 region
• 7 different programmatic
approaches
• Different end-user experiences
• Marginalised government

13. Nature of (some) aid is improving
• Aid effectiveness principles and
commitment (Paris +)
• Country ownership and leadership
• Emergence of SWAps – 11 countries in
Africa (AfDB, 2010)
• DP alignment with country systems
(only moderate progress according to
OECD)

14. Adopting a service
delivery approach
to rural water

15. The concept of service delivery
An approach to the provision of
rural water supply services,
which emphasises the entire
life-cycle of a service, consisting
of both the hardware and
software required to provide a
certain level of water service
Source: Lockwood and Smets 2011
SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH

16. SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
A new paradigm?
Investment (capital expenditure)
Investment (operational expenditure)
Service level
Infrastructure Approach Service Delivery Approach
Source: IRC, 2011

17. As sectors evolve, so effort, cost and
institutional requirements also change
Source: Moriarty, 2011
SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH

18. SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
As sectors evolve, so effort, costs and
institutional requirements also change
Danger zone:
as basic
infrastructure is
provided, coverage
risks stagnating at
around 60 – 80
Source: Moriarty, 2011

19. National level government (may also be deconcentrated regional/provincial):
•Policy, institutional and legal
•Defining service levels
•Regulatory and funding frameworks
•Budgetary allocations
•Asset ownership/management (in some cases)
Normative
and policy
functions –
national
level
Service
authority
functions –
Intermediate
level
Decentralised government (district, municipality, commune):
•Planning and coordination
•Financing (taxes and transfers)
•Monitoring and back-stopping, including technical support
•Regulation (delegated)
•Bye-laws
•Asset ownership/management (in some cases)
Service
provider
functions –
system level
Consumers in rural household and communities
Utility
managed
Delegated
private
sector
Community
managed
Municipal
managed
Management Entity:
•System operation
•Maintenance
•Administration
•Financial management
• Asset management
• Consumer interface
Source: Lockwood , 2010

20. SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Moving towards service delivery
• WASH services – beyond functionality
quality, quantity, accessibility, reliability
• A service is indefinite
planning, financing, O&M, monitoring,
support and reinvestment
• Scale matters
district, regional and national
• Capacity development is at the centre
BUILDING BLOCKS FOR SERVICE DELIVERY

21. EXPLAINING TRIPLE-S AND THE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Professionalisaton
of service providers
Move away from
volunteerism;
outsourcing some
specialist tasks
Training and business
practices
Building blocks for service delivery

22. EXPLAINING TRIPLE-S AND THE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Long-term direct
support to
communities
Technical support
and oversight
Monitoring of
services –
regulation ‘light’
Access to goods
Building blocks for service delivery and services

23. EXPLAINING TRIPLE-S AND THE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH Capacity support
for LG and private
sector
Technical support
and oversight
Data aggregation
and screening
Adherence to norms
and technical
Building blocks for service delivery standards

24. EXPLAINING TRIPLE-S AND THE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Monitoring of
service delivery
Service indicators
(quantity, quality,
reliability and
accessibility)
Performance
of service
providers (operators)
Building blocks for service delivery

25. EXPLAINING TRIPLE-S AND THE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Life cycle cost
analysis
Understanding
recurrent and
replacement costs
Direct support ~
$1/p/yr
Improved asset
management Building blocks for service delivery

26. EXPLAINING TRIPLE-S AND THE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Government vision and leadership is critical

27. For further information see:
www.waterservicesthatlast.org/
Contact: h.lockwood@aguaconsult.co.uk
Supporting water sanitation
and hygiene services for life

28. SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACH
Empirical study of rural water supply sectors
2009 - 2010
Triple-S, 2009 – 2010 - http://www.waterservicesthatlast.org/

29. Management models
• Community management still dominates
• Higher coverage trends towards greater
diversity of management models
• Higher population densities trends towards
more professionalised models
Source: Lockwood and Smits; 2011

30. CBM is dominant but evolving
Increasing trend from volunteerism towards
professionalised management:
• Out-sourcing of specific functions (Honduras,
Sri Lanka)
• Applying good business practices (Programa de
cultura empresarial Colombia, USA)
• Full out-sourcing of O&M and
administration for more complex
systems (Ghana, South Africa, USA)

31. WSDB
with PO
Utility
management
Community management Private
management
Intermediate
private providers
Self
supply
Independent
private
providers
Direct
WSDB
Single
towns
piped
scheme
Small
town bulk
water
scheme
Multi town
piped
scheme
Basic High
Community Ownership and
Management (COM)
Other CM
models
Basic
High Basis High Basic
Piped
scheme
Utility
management
Holding
tank with
standpipe
Urban
Water
Board
Water
tanker
Holding
tank with
standpipe
water
vendor
tanker
operator
Limited
mechanized
borehole
Basic
Water
Health
Centre
Private
company
Ghana: many management options
WATSAN
committ-ee
Source: IRC and Aguaconsult; 2010

32. Ghana: CWSA management options
Population size System Management model
< 2,000 Point source Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) committee
2,000-5,000 Non-mechanised systems (e.g. gravity fed
water schemes)
Water and Sanitation Development Board (WSDB) supported by
skilled artisans from within the community, whose services may be
procured when necessary on a retainer basis (indicated as “option
1” in the Community Water and Sanitation Agency (CWSA) Small
Towns O&M Guidelines).
5,001-10,000 Simple boreholes, gravity fed or slow sand
filtration based piped systems
WSDB with certified/reputable firm carries out specialised
functions as and when needed or, preferably, WSDB with
contracted firm/firms performs specialised functions on a periodic
basis
> 10,000 Communities served with complex water
WSDB and a contracted firm (private operator) operate and
Population
size
System Management model
<2000 Point source Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) committee
2,000-5,000 Non-mechanised
systems (e.g. gravity
fed water schemes)
Water and Sanitation Development Board (WSDB) supported by skilled artisans
from within the community, whose services may be procured when necessary
on a retainer basis (indicated as “option 1” in the Community Water and
Sanitation Agency (CWSA) Small Towns O&M Guidelines)
5,001-10,000 Simple boreholes,
gravity fed or slow
sand filtration based
piped systems
WSDB with certified/reputable firm carries out specialised functions as and
when needed or, preferably, WSDB with contracted firm/firms performs
specialised functions on a periodic basis
> 10,000 Communities served
with complex water
supply systems
WSDB and a contracted firm (private operator) operate and maintain the water
supply system

33. Alternative models emerging
• Self supply increasingly recognised and supported -
Ethiopia, Thailand, Uganda - and is a reality to improve sub-standard
services almost everywhere (14 million people in
the USA rely on self-supply)
• Public Private Partnerships, especially for piped schemes
and rural growth centres - O&M contracts to private firms –
Ghana, Burkina Faso, Uganda
• Important implications for capacity of local government to
design, let and manage delegated contracts

34. Evolution of management models
Rural,
growth
centres
levels
service Rural,
and (village)
densities Population Rural,
highly
dispersed
Management approaches Voluntary
based
Semi-professional
Fully
professional
Self
supply
Delegated
contracts
Community
based
management
Public or
private
utilities

35. Professionalization of community
management - or “CBM plus”
• Limits of volunteerism – higher standards,
business approaches and efficiencies
• Demands greater clarity of legal status and
asset ownership
• More and better long-term external support
• Increased need for oversight and regulation