Building Collective Actionagainst corruption in thewater sector#WWWeek 2019
Building Collective Actionagainst corruption in thewater sectorJames Leten – Senior Programme Manager - SIWI
What is ‘Collective Action’?
Prof. Elinor Ostrom – in « Governing Commons »:
« Collective action occurs when more than one individual is required to contribute to an joint effort in order to achieve an outcome.”
2004. International Food Policy Research Institute, FOCUS 11, BRIEF 2
Collective action problemWhen individuals seek out short-term,self-centered benefits … without contributing.
“Benefiting without paying the costs”.
How can we limit freeriding?
Not to miss the collective benefits?
1. Number of participants
2. The generated benefit of participation (important rapid return on investment ?)
3. Heterogeneity of members
4. Communication
Structural variables - Prof E. Ostrom
Why looking at corruption as a « Collective Action » problem?Because …
… progress in understanding human behaviour
… similarities between “governance of integrity” and “governance of commons”
… individual benefits are higher when actors collaborate to suppress corruption.
Paradigme shift after a decennia of poor perfomance of anti-corruption initiatives
© SIWI | siwi.org
Principal-Agent:
• Principal delegates the responsability of integrity to agent
• Self-interested humans
• Incentive: fear of beingpunished;punishment cost is greaterthan benefits of corruption
Change of paradigme
© SIWI | siwi.org
Principal-Agent:
• Dependency on principledPrincipals
• Existence of many principals withdiverging interests
• Conflict of interests betweenPrincipals and Agents
• Expensive monitoring individuals
• Difficult in weak institutionalenvironnement with lowcapacities
Limitations
© SIWI | siwi.org
Principal-Agent:
• Principal delegates the responsability of integrity to agent
• Self-interested humans
• Incentive: fear of beingpunished greater than benefitsof corruption
Collective action:
• Looking for a collective behaviour change
• Humans interested in collective benefits
• Building COMMON GOOD
• Building interpersonal trust and trust in institutions
• Impartiality / professionalism
Change of paradigme
© SIWI | siwi.org
• Common agenda / shared vision ->Water governance agenda
« Appeals to head and heart, and hands »
• Shared measurement system -> agreed indicators to measure success
• Mutually reinforcing activities -> recognise interconnectedness of actors and outcomes
• Continual and open communication -> building trust and commonvocabulary
• Backbone support organisation -> dedicated and skilled staff to manage the above points
Characteristics of a collective action
Ex. National Water Integrity
Coalition
« Collective actions » have their own challenges
In having a
Common understanding of context and problem
Common expression of norm change desire
In developing a coherent CA enabling framework
Minimizing freeriding
Continuouslybuilding trust
we do …we can …we want …
change
CHANGE process
Water Integrity Risk Assessments and Analysis
Consensus building
Commitments, planning &
coordination
Implementation and
institutionalization of reforms
achieving
Water Governance Coalitions
Expressed demand for improved water governance
Common vision on desired water governance
National Water Governance agendas
National good water governance principles, standards and guidelines
Water integrity risk assessments
Capacities and action plans developed for strengthening of accountability mechanisms
Action plan enforced
Governance standards applied
Successes and failures monitored, assessed and analysed
Knowledge generated and shared
Poor Water Governance
IMPROVED STATETRANSFORMATION
Social intolerance to corruption. Intolerance
is loudly voiced
Integrity is the “new norm”
Good governance in practice
© SIWI | siwi.org
• Strong commitment from individuals
• Increasing requests from national WRM & WSP institutions
• No national agendas on water governance
• Key to Sustainable Management of water resources and service provision
• A solution to Non-Revenue Water
Conclusions From SIWI’s Water Integrity Capacity-Building Programmes
http://watergovernance.org/Programmes/water integrity /MENA
ShukranMerciThank you
!
Contact: [email protected]
Laos : Improving Integrity in water utilities through ISO normsDr Avi Sarkar, UN-Habitat
To enhance efficiency, transparency and accountability of water utilities of theMekong Region
Main actions:
• Adoption of Quality Management Systems, leading to certification of selected
water utilities to ISO 9001:2015;
• Integrity trainings
OBJECTIVE
3 Countries of the Mekong basin:
▪ Cambodia
▪ Laos
▪ Vietnam
GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE
Ministry of Public Works and Transport
Water Utilities
UN-Agencies
Communities
▪ The project created synergies between
different stakeholders involved in water
management
▪ A regional study was conducted to determine
the current standards of operation and
identify ways to improve performance
FRAMEWORK
National level capacity building on ISO 9001:2015 in
Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.
- Quality Management System trainings in 12
public water supply utilities.
- 2 water supply utilities selected for ISO 9001certification: Kampong Cham in Cambodia and
NPSE Attapeu in Laos.
- 2 Quality Manuals developed.
- In 2018 NPSE Attapeu in Laos was awarded the
ISO certification for quality management
systems. The certification is the first of its kind
for any water utility in Laos.
ISO 9001:2015
WATER INTEGRITY
Capacity building of national and sub-national water
utilities on water integrity so as to enhance operational
and management efficiency.
- Trainings provided to 10 national officials and 30
water utilities officials from 12 target cities.
- Strategy Framework for Water Supply and
Sanitation Sector in Emerging Towns developed.
5 Collective Action Variables for success were incorporated:
• The heterogeneity of participants was essential for getting better outcomes. Female
and male local authorities, as well as officers from water utilities and UN-Habitat were
involved in the whole process;
• Workshops with small number of participants were preferred, in order to improve the
quality of the training;
• Workshops and meetings were designed in order to having face-to-face communication
that allowed effective follow-up of the processes;
• Trust was built through the dissemination of information among the stakeholders
involved;
• Benefits of water integrity were explained in the trainings to all participants.
LESSONS LEARNED
THANK YOU
Kenya: Improving Integrity in the water sector through regulationEng. Peter Njaggah, Director, Technical Services, Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB)
The KENYAN Constitution and Water Act 2016
Actions against corruption are well grounded in the
constitution and the primary law
Article 10: National values and principles of
governance (transparency & accountability)
Chapter 4: Bill of rights- right to safe and adequate
water. Right to reasonable standards of sanitation.
Chapter 6: Leadership and Integrity- Accountability
to the public for decision and actions.
Wasreb is one of the organisations created under
legal framework with a mandate to regulate water
service provision.
Key integrity issues in the sector
NRW among utilities at 41%
More than 60% of the utilities still do not recover
O&M costs and have outdated tariffs
Non-compliance with appointment process of utility
boards/corporate governance guidelines
Conflict between national and county governments
over roles in asset development
Sector reporting process has stalled
August 27, 2019Water Services Regulatory Board
34
ROLE OF WASREB
▪ Licensing Water Service Providers (WSPs)
▪ Setting standards for provision of water services (access, governance, tariffs, service)
▪ Monitoring the implementation of standards set, incl. the implementation of the National Water Services Strategy
▪ Facilitating information provision on water services (Development of data base incl.WARIS, Majidata, Majivoice; public reporting, participation, Redress/Complaints)
▪ Enforcing compliance to standards set, incl. prosecution of offences
▪ Advising Cabinet Secretary on matters of water services
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Consumers, Users
National Water
Storage Authority
(NWSA)
Water
TribunalWater Sector
Trust Fund
(WSTF)
Ministry of Water and Sanitation
Water Resources Authority
(WRA)
Water Services Regulatory Board
(WASREB)
Basin Water Resources Committee
(BWRC)
Water Works Development Agencies
(WWDAs)
Water Resources User Associations
(WRUAs)
Water Services Providers
(WSPs)
Natio
na
l Le
ve
lR
eg
ion
al
Le
ve
lL
oca
l L
evel
Policy
Form
ula
tion
Regula
tion
Serv
ice P
rovis
ion
Consum
ption, U
se
Upward feedback/ engagement/
complaints resolution
Sensitization
Water Action
Groups
(WAGs)
ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER ACTION
GROUPS in 2010.
Sensitisation and information
▪ Assist in providing information on WSS services & building consumer awareness on rights & responsibilities
Consultation, participation
▪ Institutionalize consumer participation in planning and services
Complaints resolution and feedback
▪ Empower consumers, give them a voice, improve accountability
▪ Support WASREB in monitoring compliance with service standards
Community-based volunteer groups designed to facilitate
A central web portal
orders, tracks and
escalates complaints
Customers
submit
feedback to
portal with
basic mobile
phones
Regulator generates
reports for analysis on
systemic sector
problems for decision
making and
recommendation
Utilities receive and resolve
complaints through internal
work flow; feedback to
customers; WAGs monitor &
periodically engage
COMPLAINTS HANDLING:
E-SYSTEM (MAJIVOICE) DEVELOPED
Benchmarking
Utilities (WSPs)
Commercial:
Water Coverage
Sanitation Coverage
Non-Revenue Water
Metering Ratio
Service level:
Drinking Water Quality
Hours of Supply
Financial:
O+M Cost Coverage
Collection Efficiency
Personnel Expenditures as % of O+M Cost
Personnel: Staff Productivity
Corporate governance
Creditworthiness
Pro poor indicator38
Sector benchmarks (good/acceptable/not acceptable) have, inter alia, been defined for the following key performance indicators (KPIs):
≥90% 30
≤50% 0
≥90% 15
≤50% 0
≥95% 10
≤90% 0
≥95% 5
≤90% 0
≥95% 10
≤90% 0
≥95% 5
≤90% 0
≥20 20
≤10 0
≥16 20
≤6 0
≤20% 25
≥40% 0
≥150% 25
≤90% 0
≥95% 20
≤85% 0
≤5 20
≥8 0
≤7 20
≥11 0
≤9 20
≥14 0
100% 15
≤80% 0
200
Perf
orm
ance
Scor
e
N/A N/A
Indicators
1 Water Coverage
Sector Benchmarks Scoring Regime
Goo
d
3
Compliance -
Residual Chlorine>95%
Acce
ptab
le
Not
Acc
epta
ble
>90% 80-90% <80%
90-95%
90-95% <90%
2 Sanitation Coverage >90% 80-90% <80%
Drinking Water Quality
>95% 90-95% <90%No. of tests -
Residual Chlorine
No. of tests -
Bacteriological Quality>95% <90%
>95% 90-95% <90%Compliance -
Bacteriological Quality
6 O+M Cost Coverage ≥150%
8
4 Hours of Supply
Population >100,000 21-24
Population <100,000 17-24
5
7
<9Medium & Small (3 or
more towns)
>95%
Non-Revenue Water
40-45% >45%
<20%
<30% 30-40%
>30%
>40%
>14
20-30%
<7 7-11
Total Maximum Score
9 Metering Ratio
Personnel Expenditure
as Percentage of O&M
Costs
10
Large and Very Large
Companies
Medium Companies
Small Companies
100% 95-99% <95%
<40%
<20% 20-25%
16-20
12-16
Staff Productivity (Staff
per 1000 Connections)Medium & Small (less
than 3 towns)
Large & Very Large
Companies
Collection Efficiency
<5
85-95%
100-149%
5-8
9-14
<85%
>8
>11
<16
<12
≤99%
>25%
HOW SECTOR PERFORMANCE ARE USED:
PERFORMANCE REPORTING
❑ Competition among utilities
❑ Accountability to the public
❑ Cabinet Secretary, parliament, county governments and donors use the data for decision-making and reporting
❑ Media takes data to highlight issues in the sector, incl. integrity
39
PRIORITY ISSUES FOR WASREB
▪ Licensing of WSPs
▪ Strengthening Governance in Sector
▪ Ensuring financial sustainability in sector
▪ Regulating small scale providers/community water supply systems
▪ Developing regulatory framework for sanitation
▪ Pro-poor Regulation
▪ Enhancing compliance to Regulations
▪ Strengthening Institutional Capacity
Thank you
Egypt: Experiences in waterintegrity and anti corruptionpracticesGhada Abd El Wahab, General Manager, Holding Company for Water and Wastewater
Eng. Rasha Zakaria , Senior Advisor Water and Wastewater Management Programme. German International Cooperation (GIZ) GmbH
43
HCWW was established in 2004 with the mission of
Managing the Water and Wastewater Companies to provide services according to the Egyptian standards and following sustainable economical and developmental basis.
Number of Affiliated Companies : 25
Water service Coverage : 97%
Wastewater service Coverage : 50%
Number of Employees : 133,000
Egypt Population 99 Million
Service region : 27 Governorates
Challenges
Poor collection
rates
Excess number of employees
Large number of
illegal connections
Low customers’ satisfaction
rates
Wasting resources (Natural/ Financial)
Water Integrity (WI) - Background
2015 - 2016
2017 - 2018
2019 - 2021
Setting anti-corruption system
Building institutional & individual capacitiesSelected processes standardization
Processes standardization on sectoral level
WI Approach and Implementation
• Individual meetings
• Advocacy sessions
Management commitment
• Teams identification
• Capacity building
WI Departments • Regional WGs
• Risk analysis
• Prevention measures
• Action plans
Process Analysis
• Process revision
• Sharing with Acs
• Standardization nationwide
Process Standardization
Outputs
• Institutional development and capacity building
– 25 WI departments, 70 employees
– 37 capacity building measures
– Networking and experience sharing activities.
Achievements (cont.)
• Supporting tools
– 9 Toolboxes for risk analysis
– 2 Best practices handbooks
– Awareness Raising tools (banners, posters, “Ideal Worker” competition).
• Results
– 22 Analyzed processes in a participatory way.
– 10 Standardized processes at the national level.
Success Stories
Standardized Recruitment procedures for all ACs (HCWW)
Commercial Manual for all ACs (HCWW)
Bar Code for meter reading (QR) (Gharbia Company)
Reallocating excess Staff (Alex Wastewater Company)
Collaborating with the Government in drafting the first Egyptian integrity and transparency law
Besides being a prime cause of poor economic growth, poor governance breeds corruption, which cripples investments, wastes resources and
diminishes confidence.
Ahmed ZewailEgyptian Scientist1999 Noble prize winner in chemistry
Thank you for your attention ☺
ستماعكم ن ا س ☺شكرا لح
Mrs. Ghada Abd El Wahab
HR Development &Water Integrity General Manager
Holding Company for Water and Wastewater –HCWW-Egypt
Email: [email protected]
Eng. Rasha ZakariaSenior Advisor and Deputy Head of Programme
Water and Wastewater Management Programme, GIZ
Email: [email protected]
Argentina: Anti-corruption, an institutional change
José Luis Inglese, President, AySA Buenos Aires Water Utility
WHAT IS AYSA
Area of action
AySA is the main Company that provides drinking water and sanitation services in Argentina, leader in the Region and one of the largest providers in the world
Inhabitantsof the concession
14,3 million
Areaof the concession
3.300 Km2
Buenos Aires Cityand
Municipalities of26Buenos Aires Province
52 KM
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
MODEL FOR A MANAGEMENT OF EXCELLENCE
Commitment to Quality
Objetive: • Reach 100% of the Company under a Certified Quality Management System
IMPLEMENTED STANDARDS
ISO 9001Quality Management Systems.
ISO 14001EnvironmentalManagement Systems.
OSHAS 18001Occupational Health and Safety Management System.
ISO/IEC 17025Technical Competencefor Calibration and Testing Laboratories.
Central Laboratory and Water Meter Calibration Laboratory.
IRAM 13 and 90003Application Guides.
2014
2017
“National Award
for Quality”
“Impulse Idea Award 2017”
Recognitions
2016
“Citizenship Business Award 2017”
2017
“Ibero American Quality Award”
Awarded by FPNC
Awarded by
FUNDIBEQ
Awarded by AmCHAM
2017
“Excellence and Leadership 2017”
Awarded by MAGAZINE
CALIDAD EMPRESARIA
2018
“Global WaterAwards 2018”
Awarded by
Global Water Summit
Awarded by IDEA
u$s 702 millionIN OPERATING COSTS
Results as of 31-Dec 2018
AYSA IN FIGURES
For the first time since 2008, The company has achieved a
BREAKEVEN POINT
u$s 704 millionIN INCOME
Results as of 31-Dec 2018
El Jagüel Wastewater Treatment Plant - Esteban Echeverría - Buenos Aires - Argentina
Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant –La Matanza - Buenos Aires - Argentina
HOW IT PROVIDES SERVICES
Gral. San Martín Water Treatment Plant -Palermo - Buenos Aires - Argentina
Juan Manuel de Rosas Water TreatmentPlant - Tigre - Buenos Aires - Argentina
SANITATION
115WORKS
COMPLETED
DRINKING WATER
87 WORKS
COMPLETED
91WORKSUNDER EXECUTION
73WORKS UNDER EXECUTION Water3 Treatment Plants
+500Groundwater Pumps
DRINKING WATER
Average Production
5,9 million
m3/day
Water Network
+23.000
Waste WaterTreatment Plants21
SANITATION
Average Treatment
2,6 million
m3/day
Sewerage Network
16.000
kilometers
+kilometers
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Expansion Hurlingham
u$s 76 M*
al servicio de agua desagües cloacales
Expansion SOUTHWEST
Wastewater Treatment Plant
INVESTMENT
259.200Average Treatment
m3/día
4 7
Works at the OLYMPIC VILLAGE
NEEDED INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE
METROPOLITAN AREA PLAN
Objectives
Total Investment
People
to the water service to the sewerage service
4.000.000 7.000.000 People
Incorporate Incorporate
270.000Inhabitants Served u$s 74 M*
INVESTMENT
4.800Inhabitants Served
Fiorito Lanús
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Total Investment
u$s 12.000 M
Wastewater Treatment Plant
MORE THAN 200 TENDERS PER
YEAR FOR $500 MILLIONS
THE FORMER PROBLEM
1. PRINTED FOR CONSTRUCTION WORKS “TOR” HAD
TO BE BOUGHT AT HEADQUATERS OF THE COMPANY
2. TENDERERS AND OFFICIALS OF THE COMPANY
KNEW WHO WERE GOING TO PRESENT PROPOSAL
3. OFTENLY TENDERERS AND OFFICIALS ARRANGE
WHO WILL BE THE WINNER AND INCREASES PRICES
AND REDUCE THE NUMBER OF FIRMS TO SUBMIT
PROPOSALS
THE SOLUTION
1. SIMPLIFY THE PROCCESS TO BE ADMITED AS
TENDERER AND ON LINE INSCRIPTION
2. “TOR” PUBLISHED FOR FREE IN THE COMPANY´S
WEB PAGE AND COULD BE DOWNLOADED
ANONIMOUSLY
3. NOBODY KNEW WHO WERE GOING TO PRESENT
PROPOSAL UNTIL CLOSING DATE AND HOUR
THE KEYS
1. COMMITMENT FROM THE TOP
2. REDUCED BUREAUCRACY
3. TECHNOLOGY TO FACILITATE TRANSPARENCY
RESULTS
1. MORE PROPOSALS PER TENDER PROCCESS:
AVERAGE FROM 3.7 to 7.1
2. MORE COMPETITORS: 208 DIFFERENT FIRMS IN
203 PROCCESES FROM 2016 TO 2018
3. LOWER PRICES: WINNER OFFER FROM +9% TO
-21% COMPARED WITH ESTIMATED BUDGET
Questions?
Group discussion
SIWI: An integrity collective action at national level requires collaboration between different type of actors: regulators, municipalities, water utilities, CBOs, … how would you initiate and/or facilitate these interactions? Could you share your lessons about what works / what doesn’t work?
LAOS: Raising the integrity of an organisationcould be the product of a collective action. Which different individual benefits for the different staff members would you identify that would aid in their engagement
KENYA: Civil society play important roles in water resources management and services delivery, and definitely also in addressing anti-corruption, for example in social accountability. Where and how could civil society support anti-corruption efforts of regulators, utilities or private sector?
EGYPT: A collective action requires an enabling environment. How could a policy and legal framework create more space for anti-corruption and integrity collaboration
ARGENTINA: Contributing to a common objective requires that individuals and organisations trust each other. They should trust that the other parties contribute at the expected level. What would you propose as trust building activities and processes?
1 2
3 4
5
Closing Remarks
Diana Cáceres, Latin America Coordinator
Thank you!
#WWWeek 2019