National Policy Dialogue on Finance Strategy for Rural Water
Supply and SanitationArmenia: Developing Policy
Package
Yerevan 2 July 2007
Jochem Jantzen, Jochem Jantzen, Director TMEDirector TME
http://www.tme.nu/english/Arm_Steering_Committee.htmhttp://www.tme.nu/english/Arm_Steering_Committee.htm
EAP Task Force
Structure of presentation
Baseline scenario conclusions Activities MDGs (Poverty Reduction Strategy
Paper) MWSS (Minimal Water Supply
Standards) Combined approach Institutional (cross subsidisation) Conclusions
EAP Task Force
Activities
Collection of additional information for settlement without service of Water companiesFinancial issues (expenditures, water tariffs,
budget contribution)Water supply (piped water? type of
connections, regularity, amount of water), Sanitation (pit latrine, septic tank, sewerage)
Additional information of Water Companies
Develop POLICY SCENARIO(S)
EAP Task Force
Conclusions, Baseline scenario
Infrastructure development in rural areas (±50% on plot supply, 100 villages without public supply, sanitation not developed)
Revenues for rural water supply and sanitation are not sufficient (user charges and budget contributions)
Institutional issues (2/3 of rural settlements NOT served by water companies, no possibility for cross subsidisation)
Affordability no problem for most rural households (at current charge levels)
EAP Task Force
POLICY scenarios
Several Possibilities:
Future targets based on:
Millennium Development Goals for rural WSS
Minimal Water Supply Standards for rural WSS
Combined approach
EAP Task Force
WHO Water Supply Standards (1)
EAP Task Force
Service level Distance/time volumes of water Public health risk Intervention
No access > 1 km / > 30 min round-trip
Very low - 5 lcd Very high Hygiene practice compromised . Basic consumption may be compromised.
Very high Provision of basic level of service Hygiene education
Basic access < 1 km / < 30 min round-trip
Approx. 20 lcd High Hygiene may be compromised Laundry may occur off-plot
High Hygiene education Provision of improved level of service
Intermediate access
Water provided on plot (yard tap)
Approx. 50 lcd Low Hygiene may not be compromised Laundry may occur on-plot
Low Hygiene promotion still yields health gains Encourage optimal access
Optimal access
Water provided within the house
100 - 200 lcd Very Low Hygiene may not be compromised Laundry may occur on-plot
Very low Hygiene promotion still yields health gains
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
Millennium Development Goals for rural WSS (official) “improved supply”:
> 20 lcd< 1 km or 30 min roundtrip
Current supply ± 45 lcdAt least 75% served within 100 meter
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, rural WSS:
– On plot supply 70% (now ±50%)– 24 hour regularityEAP Task Force
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper:
45% on plot supply (2001) to
70% on plot supply (2012) At least 100 lcd supply (our proposal)
Consequences for sanitation (septic tank / sewerage needed)EAP Task Force
stand post29%
yard tap16%
in house
29%
own supply
26%
in house / yard
tap70%
stand post10%
own supply
20%
Minimal Water Supply Standards (MWSS)
– Minimal service level for water: 50 lcd– Maximal 100 meters from dwelling– Preferably regular public supply (8 hrs/d)– At least “protected” (own) supply
EAP Task Force
stand post29%
yard tap16%
in house
29%
own supply
26%
stand pipe29%
yard tap16%
in house
29%
MWSS, other13%
MWSS, publ tap13%
Combined approach (MDGs & MWSS)– On plot supply 45% to 70%
– On plot supply: 100 lcd, MWSS: 50 lcd– Maximal 100 meters from dwelling– Preferably regular public supply (8 hrs/d)– At least “protected” supply
– Consequences for sanitation (septic tank / sewerage needed)
EAP Task Force
stand post29%
yard tap16%
in house
29%
own supply
26%
in house /
yard tap70%
MWSS stand post15%
MWSS other15%
Summary of possible POLICY scenarios MDG targets for rural WS MWSS for rural WS Combined MDG and MWSS for rural WS
in dwelling
29%
in building
16%public tap
29%
own supply
26%
in dwelling in building public tap own supply
EAP Task Force
MDG (PRSP)
in dwelling/building
70%
public tap10%
own supply
20%
in dwelling/building public tap own supply
in building
16%
in dwelling
28%
public tap30%
MWSS, other13%
MWSS, publ tap
13%
in dwelling in building public tapMWSS,public tap MWSS, other
MWSS, publ tap
15%
MWSS, other15%
MDG (PRSP)
in dwelling/building
70%
in dwelling/building MWSS,public tap MWSS, other
Institutional set up <> cross subsidisation Large cost differences: € 2 >> € 20/cap/y
EAP Task Force
€ 0
€ 5
€ 10
€ 15
€ 20
€ 25intake OM intake investdistrib OM distrib capext renov
Average costs per cap
Institutional set up <> cross subsidisation Without cross subsidisation, affordability
will limit possibilities of reaching targets (National) regulator should:
– Force settlements to cooperate and establish Water companies
– Give incentives to settlements to cooperate and establish Watercompanies by Financial incentives
EAP Task Force
Conclusions and further activities (1)
Proposals for further quantitative analysis Simulate the 2 out of 3 scenarios
MDGs (PRSP),
MWSS
MDGs and MWSS combined Within scenarios:
Apply “average” approach
Illustrate “cost-effective” approach
(partial simulation)
EAP Task Force
Conclusions and further activities (2)
Summary of quantitative targets
EAP Task Force
policy option MDG
(PRSP)
MWSS MDG &
MWSS
combinedon plot supply (coverage)
70% 50% (or more)
70%
on plot supply (lcd)
10000% min 50 10000%
other supply (lcd) (stand pipe, indiv)
min 50 min 50 min 50
distance, maximal (meter)
100 (75%) 100 (100%)
100 (100%)
sanitation (septic or sewer)
70% n.a. 70%
Conclusions and further activities (3)
Proposals for further qualitative analysis
Propose “business model” which can overcome the problem of too small service areas (if all settlement would solve problems individual)
“Solidarity for Water” (i.e. French concept): regional water utilities with uniform tariffs and “cross subsidisation”
EAP Task Force
Recommended
