FONDS AFRICAIN DE DÉVELO

PPEMENT

AFRI

CAN D

EVELOPMENT FUND

BANQUE

AFRICAINE

DE DÉVELOPPEMENT

2010Synthesis Report

Urban and Rural Water Supply and SanitationSynthesis Note

on Evaluation Results

Operations Evaluation DepartmentAfrican Development Bank Group

OverviewThis synthesis note presents the main findings, lessons learned, and recommendations from recent evalu-ations of some African Development Bank Group (AfDB) investments in urban and rural water supply and sanitation in African countries. The evaluations were conducted by the AfDB Operations Evaluation Department (OPEV) and comprise a sector review and eight project performance evaluations (list is annexed).

This Note was prepared by Joseph Mouanda, Evalua-tion officer, under the guidance of Foday Turay, Chief Evaluation Officer, and Mohamed H. Manai, Division Manager, Project and Programme Level Evaluation.

I Scope of AfDB Support for Urban and Rural Water Supply and Sanitation

Prior to 2003, AfDB support for water supply and sanitation was primarily through its sovereign lend-ing. Following the adoption of the Bank’s 2003-2007 Medium-term Strategy (MTS) and its subsequent current 2008-2012 MTS, AfDB support for water and sanitation has been through sovereign lending and three complementary initiatives, namely

i) the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Initiative (RWSSI),

ii) the Multi-donor Water Partnership Program (MDWPP), and

iii) the African Water Facility (AWF).

In 2009, the three initiatives accounted for UA 1.56 billion, and sovereign lending for UA 297.37 million.

Urban and rural water and sanitation form part of the AfDB’s priority areas of support in Africa. Over the 1968-2008 period, total AfDB loan and grant approvals to African countries for urban and rural water supply and sanitation amounted to about UA3.5 billion, accounting for about 5% of overall AfDB assistance to Africa over the period. In 2003-2007, the share of the AfDB’s assistance to the water and sanitation sector was 10% of total assistance.

About 50 percent of the AfDB’s assistance—aimed at enhancing urban rural water supply and sanitation services—is allocated solely for water supply; 9 per-cent for sanitation; and the rest, about 41 percent, for both water supply and sanitation. This support covers both middle—and low—income African countries.

II Main Findings

sanitation project in Zambia poses a threat to the level of bulk water supply and also to the contamination of the water supply system. In addition, beneficiaries’ involvement in project design and implementation is limited.

Finding 2: Ineffective strengthening of urban water supply and sanitation capacity through loan conditions and technical assistance: The performance of the AfDB’s assistance aimed at strengthening capacity in the urban water supply and sanitation sector is unsatisfactory. The sup-port, comprising loan conditions, logistics support, and technical assistance for training and studies, is overwhelmingly biased in favor of water supply. Technical assistance and logistics support is effective

Finding 1: The Performance of Bank-funded water supply and sanitation projects is satisfactory with respect to meeting water supply objectives, but less satisfactory on sanitation and the environment. The projects increase beneficiaries’ access to clean water and provide additional benefits, especially for women and children in terms of reduced workload. However, the disproportionate focus on water supply infrastructure (and less on sanitation and the environment) limits the achievement of expected AfDB-funded project outcomes, especially those for sanitation. In some cases, because waste disposal sites are located near water supply catchments and of water supply line leakages, wastage and contamination pose a problem. For example, neglect of the sanitation and environmental aspects of a Bank-funded water and

in enhancing project implementation; however, loan conditions are ineffective and contribute to delays in delivering project infrastructure outputs. The overall outcome of the Bank’s support is not only limited but also unlikely to be sustainable. Two key factors, among others, limit the effectiveness of AfDB assistance:

i) Weak and unrealistic project design: Loan condi-tions are relatively numerous and are designed without due consideration for the client’s politi-cal and resource capacity to implement them or for the realism of the incentive system in place for enforcing compliance. As a result, compli-ance with loan conditions is low, and project implementation is slow, thus contributing to the late delivery of the main project benefits.

ii) The project approach, which ties capacity build-ing support to infrastructure projects, is also not appropriate: Capacity is built for project implementation rather than for strengthening the capacity of the urban and rural water supply and sanitation sector. A number of nationals in Sub-Saharan countries are trained. But there is high turnover in water supply and sanitation sector projects. And without clear and explicit project exit strategies (including incentives) for both the Bank and clients, project-generated capacity is lost.

The AfDB’s lack of a clear and appropriate policy and strategy for supporting capacity building and institutional development is also a limiting factor.

Finding 3: Weak community/beneficiary par-ticipation in project design and implementation: Although consultation of project beneficiaries is common, overall, beneficiary participation in project design and implementation remains weak. For example, because of weak peri-urban community participation in the engineering design of compo-nents of a Bank–funded project in Zambia, water kiosks were ill-designed and underutilized.

Finding 4: Project implementation delays are common: All Bank-funded interventions reviewed, except the sector-wide approach, were late in delivery. Excep-tions are in the North African countries, which have expanded water supply and sanitation access and have well-articulated policies. Sector-wide sup-port uses national systems and is well coordinated, in particular in North African countries. Project implementation delays reflect weak coordination with respect to water supply and sanitation within governments and to development partners, which include bilateral and multilateral development agen-cies. These development partners often have different procurement rules and procedures. Delays in the release of government budgetary allocations also contribute to implementation delays.

Finding 5: Substantial risks to sustaining project benefits: Notwithstanding the strong commitment of govern-ments to enhance their populations’ access to clean and safe water, a number of factors pose considerable threats to sustaining the benefits of the AfDB invest-ment funding for urban and rural water supply and sanitation. The factors mainly concern

i) Water supply reservoirs, whose level and quality risk declining because of environmental degra-dation and contamination as well as limited new investments;

ii) Water supply line contamination from lack of effective national sanitation and hygiene policies and strategies;

iii) Relatively high, unaccounted-for water wastage due to poor maintenance of water supply lines;

iv) Limited community/beneficiary participation; and

v) Limited long-term financial viability as a result of the non-economic pricing of water.

III Major Lessons Learned

national governments. Borrowers can sign up to loan conditions without taking into account the realism of these conditions and their capacity to implement them. Clarity is also needed in terms of the objectives of the capacity building investment, whether it is in support of the investment project implementation and/or the water supply and sanitation sector.

Lesson 3: Effective community participation in water supply and sanitation investments goes beyond mere consultations and requires better and appropriate approaches and tools. Effective com-munity participation, especially in rural settings, is paramount for enhanced implementation, acceptance and use of water and sanitation services, as well as for ensuring ownership and sustainability.

Lesson 4: Effective coordination of water and sanitation among donors, as well as having a common procurement framework, is vital for project success. This can also be applied to capacity building efforts in monitoring and evaluation in particular.

One of the key lessons learned is the importance of national governments’ commitments to water and the related MDGs.

Lesson 1: Effective integration of water supply, sanitation and environment issues will ensure success in delivery and use of water and sanitation services.

Lesson 2: Clearly separating Bank assistance for hardware project implementation capacity from that for urban and rural water supply and sanitation sector is important.

Although capacity building for hardware project investment implementation and that for the urban and rural water supply and sanitation sector are within the same sector, they have objectives with different horizons. The former is project-based and short-term, while the latter is wider in scale and long term. A project is a time-bound discrete investment, while building sector capacity is a long-term investment requiring a clear long-term policy from the bank and

IV Key Recommendations

Recommendation 3: Encourage adoption of appropriate measures and approaches for strength-ening beneficiary/community participation.

Recommendation 4: Invest in strengthening project coordination, especially in providing an effec-tive mechanism and appropriate incentive system.

Recommendation 5: Encourage national gov-ernments to reflect at least the costs of producing and supplying water to beneficiaries, as well as to provide space for private sector participation in the water sector in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Recommendation 1: Give priority to integrated management of water supply, sanitation and environ-ment, which should encompass support for hardware and software components such as education for improved personal and community sanitary behavior.

Recommendation 2: Approach capacity build-ing, including strengthening of monitoring and evaluation, as a long-term investment in human capital under national urban and rural water supply and sanitation policies and strategies rather than as ad hoc project conditions and technical assistance.

ReferencesList of African Development Bank Group Evaluation Reports ReviewedNo Type Title Year About the Report

1 Sector Review Study on Evaluating Capacity Strengthening of Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Entities in RMCs

2004 The Study reviews a sample of 104 projects and studies from 244 urban water supply and sewerage projects and studies financed by the Bank Group between 1975 and 2002. The sample selection is based on availability of PCRs and PPERs, regional and sub-sectoral distributions and the expected lessons to be drawn.

2 Project Performance Evaluation Nigeria - First Multi State Water Supply Project 2010 -

3 Project Performance Evaluation Morocco - Seven Drinking Water and Sanitation 2010 -

4 Project Performance Evaluation Morocco - Water Sector Structural Adjustment Programme 2010 -

5 Project Completion Report Review Note Mozambique – Maputo Water Rehabilitation Project 2010 -

6 Project Completion Report Review Note Uganda – Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Program 2010 -

7 Project Completion Report Review Note Zambia Central Province Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project 2010 -

8 Project Completion Report Review Note Burkina – Ouagadougou Water Supply Project 2010 -

Annex: Basic Project FactsN° Project Title Approval

DateCompletion Date

Project Cost (UC million)

Cofinancing (UC million)

Key Objective and Coverage

1 Nigeria - First Multi State Water Supply Project

2 October 1992

31 Dec 2007 209.640 ADB :ADF :AISG:CRSG :FMAWR :

116.71612.31438.38037.6204.620

The overall objective is to provide clean water to the urban population of Cross River and Akwa Ibom States, and to improve national capacity for Water Quality Management and Monitoring.The specific objectives are:(i) To increase the water supply from 50,000 m3/day to 438,000 m3/day and sustain the availability of

potable water supply to meet the demands in two urban centers with populations estimated at 4.1 million in the target year of 2015 and in ten semi-urban centers with a total population estimated at 2.3 million in the same target year;

ii) To reorganize and strengthen the Cross River State and the Akwa Ibom State Water Boards so that they can operate autonomously and along commercial lines such that upon the completion of the project they can achieve cost recovery, at least on operations and maintenance costs; and

iii) To establish a network of two National and four Regional Water Quality Reference Laboratories for monitoring the national water bodies as well as to act as references for the national water quality standards.

2 Morocco – Seven Drinking Water and Sanitation

13 Dec 1999 31 Dec 2004 28.00 ADB :FEC :ONEP:

21.001.405.60

To provide drinking water in sufficient quantity and quality to about 240,000 inhabitants in Tiznit (54,000), Tan Tan/ El Ouatia (67,000) and several urban centers and douars along the Tiznit water supply line by improving and extending drinking water facilities for the towns of Tiznit and Tan Tan, including the El Ouatia urban center (Tan Tan beach).

N° Project Title Approval Date

Completion Date

Project Cost (UC million)

Cofinancing (UC million)

Key Objective and Coverage

3 Morocco – Water Sector Structural Adjustment Programme

3 Dec 2003 30 June 2008 178.537 ADB : 178.537 To enhance management of the water sector including the water resources by supporting institutional reforms.

4 Mozambique – Maputo Water Rehabilitation Project

17 June 1999 30 Dec 2008 23.72 ADF : Gvt :

19.664.06

To increase the supply of safe water and sanitation services to the population of Maputo including its peri-urban areas of Hulene/Laulane/Mahotas by rehabilitating and augmenting the Maputo Water Supply System and providing sanitation and hygiene services.

5 Uganda – Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Program

19 Dec 2005 31 Dec 2009 156.40 ADF:Gvt :Beneficiary:NGO :Others:

40.0077.102.702.9033.70

To contribute to sustained access of the Ugandan population to safe water supply and sanitation facilities mainly by providing:a) 14,800 new water supply systems for an additional 3.9 million people;b) 10,300 school latrines for 1.4 million pupils;c) 950,000 hygienic latrines for l 4.4 million people

6 Zambia Central Province Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project

8 Dec 2000 30 June 2007 13.99 ADF :Gvt :

12.411.58

To provide the rural households, schools, health centers and chief palaces in five districts of the central province of Zambia with access to adequate and sustainable water supply, improved sanitation and personal and household hygiene; andTo enable rural communities to control and prevent malaria, and control rate of deforestation in the project area.

7 Burkina – Ouagadougou Drinking Water Supply Project

136.740

(149,695 MCFA)

ADFFEDIDAAFDBEIKFWBADEABIDFKDEAOPEPBOADETAT/ONEAFSD BELGE

M FCFA3,86719,679 44,380 19,089 9,183 12,744 6,165 5,737 8,429 4,120 5,000 11,152 150

To contribute to improvement of access of the population of Ouagadougou to reliable safe water and better sanitation by increasing water supply and distribution, and addressing the problems of erosion and water pollution.

Director: Rakesh Nangia, r.nangia@afdb.orgManager: Project and Programme Level Evaluation: Mohamed Manai, m.manai@afdb.orgManager, High Level Evaluations: Odile Keller, o.keller@afdb.org

Operations Evaluation Department, African Development BankBP 323, 1002 Tunis-Belvedere, TunisiaTel : (216) 71 102 841 Fax : (216) 71 194 460

Helpdesk: opevhelpdesk@afdb.org Website: www.afdb.org/opev

Production of this publication was coordinated by Felicia Avwontom.

Design and Production by Phoenix D

esign Aid, D

enmark. Certified Co2 N

eutral, ISO 9001/14001, D

S 49001 and OH

SAS 18001