Communal Services in Tajikistan


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Communal Services in Tajikistan

  1. 1. Communal services in Tajikistan: A poverty and social impact assessment<br />C. Stephen Lam<br />Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />13 April 2011<br />
  2. 2. Presentation overview<br /> Communal services: Sectoral overview<br /> Poverty and social impact assessment<br /> Social assistance policy and reform<br /> Lessons learned, recommendations<br />
  3. 3. Key sectoral challenges<br />Tariffs:<br />Have risen as infrastructure has deteriorated<br />Remain too low to finance infrastructure investment<br />Linked to norms, not actual service consumption<br />Budget, donor financing for central water, sanitation projects woefully inadequate <br />Many households are unable, or unwilling, to pay higher tariffs<br />Options to bypass central service are available—especially for sanitation, solid waste collection<br />Expansion of meterage:<br />Possible in some urban areas . . .<br />. . . But nearly impossible in rural areas<br />
  4. 4. Water and sanitation: Context<br />Key institutions:<br />Urban areas: KhojagiManiliyuKommunali (KMK) owns, operates services<br />Rural areas:<br /> The Rural Water Supply Department focuses primarily on irrigation<br /> Sewage systems nearly non-existent<br />2009-2010 reforms let local governments:<br />own services and infrastructure<br />outsource service provision to private firms, non-governmental institutions<br />
  5. 5. Solid waste management: Context<br />Urban areas: KMK owns, operates services<br />Rural areas: No analogous agency to Rural Water Supply Department for solid waste management<br />Institutional vacuum<br />Services mostly absent<br />It’s now possible for local governments to:<br />Own services and infrastructure<br />Outsource service provision to private firms and non-governmental institutions<br />
  6. 6. Inflation rates: Big increases in communal service tariffs<br />Source: National Statistical Agency, UNDP calculations.<br />
  7. 7. Tariffs: Water, sanitation, waste management<br />Do not fully cover costs of operations and upgrades<br />Based on estimated, not actual, use<br />Households benefitting from and paying tariffs for centrally managed services are:<br />Relatively small numbers<br />Mainly in urban areas<br />Short-/ medium-term constraints on raising household tariffs to cost recovery levels:<br />Affordability<br />Willingness to pay (by-pass options available)<br />
  8. 8. Source: KMK<br />
  9. 9. Source: KMK<br />
  10. 10. Water and sanitation: finances<br />2006 Water Sector Development Strategy: Tajikistan’s investment needs ≈ $1 billion<br />Huge financing gaps:<br />2009 state budget for spending on water sector ≈ $1.1 million<br />Donors provided $1.5 million<br />Donor-financed projects:<br />Concentrated in urban areas<br />Largely absent in rural areas<br />
  11. 11. Solid waste management: finances<br />Investment in service infrastructure below WSS levels<br />Donor-financed projects underway in urban areas<br />EBRD $4 million loan<br />Netherlands $4 million grant<br />EC $1.7 million grant to Dushanbe for upgrade, including landfills for next 15 years<br />In rural areas, international organizations not implementing projects<br />
  12. 12. Focus groups<br />Discussions held in:<br />late 2010, early 2011<br />Dushanbe, villages outside capital<br />Results indicate that:<br />Households view:<br />Service quality, dependability as low<br />Tariffs as high<br />Consumers see need for more funding, but do not see themselves as funding source<br />
  13. 13. Prospects for improvements<br />Services can be improved via:<br />Implementation of local governance reforms <br />Outsourcing to private- , third-sector service providers<br /> Appropriate oversight needed<br />Much depends on:<br />Large infrastructure projects funded by donors, central government<br />Local governments’ abilities to finance infrastructure expansion<br />
  14. 14. Improvements in governance and legal environment<br />Legal framework for local provision of communal services in place<br />Many local government officials and technical staff do not understand how relevant legislation pertains to their offices and responsibilities<br />Government officials and service personnel need training to:<br />Upgrade knowledge and technical skills to maintain and operate infrastructure<br />Supervise service providers<br />Attract private capital and know-how<br />Engage with consumer organizations<br />Provide better customer service<br />
  15. 15. Social assistance policy and reform<br />Social assistance policies:<br />Have not significantly reduced poverty<br />Are now undergoing reform<br />Case for linking social assistance to communal service tariffs is weak:<br />Most poor rural households are not paying tariffs for communal services<br />It’s better to link social assistance to low income levels<br />
  16. 16. Lessons learned and recommendations<br />Proper legal framework needed for local governments to establish and appropriately manage service providers <br />Local governments need to be accountable to their constituencies<br />Public participation should be an element of local decision-making<br />Introduction of water meters should be accelerated<br />Public education about conservation and meterage should accompany service provision<br />Communal service providers, local officials need capacity development<br />
  17. 17. Thank you<br />