Go to the id21 home page

id21 logo

Insights

id21 logo

Issue #45

Water and sanitation goals

South Africa's 'World in one country' experience

Subsidy or self-respect?

Can social marketing increase demand and uptake of sanitation?

Transforming with technology in India

Soap: the missing ingredient in the water and sanitation mix

Politics and provision

New roles, new rules

Urban sanitation: are the poor being heard?

Water delivery's poor cousins

Sites for sore eyes

id21 Home

id21 Society & Economy

id21 Health

id21 Urban Poverty

id21 Education

About id21

Links

Contact id21

Site map

New roles, new rules: does private sector participation benefit the poor?

The involvement of the private sector in the provision of water and sanitation services is currently one of the more contentious development debates. The issue provokes heated discussions, from international conferences in The Hague, Bonn and Johannesburg to the city streets of Cochabamba or Manila where governments increasingly rely on the private sector involvement.

In collaboration with Tearfund, another UK-based development non-governmental organisation, WaterAid examined the impact of this reorganisation on the rural and urban poor in 12 developing countries. A number of areas of concern emerged where private sector participation (PSP) may either jeopardise, or fail to promote, reliable, affordable and sustainable access to safe drinking water for the poor.

The study found that:

  • As state agencies are scaled down and private companies take over their roles, there is a danger of losing public sector capacity in water and sanitation provision, permanently. Ultimately it is the government's responsibility to ensure that there is universal access to these essential services.
  • While responsibility for service provision changes from public sector to the private sector, the poor generally remain in their old roles as invisible, passive recipients of development. Decisions and contracts are made for them, not with them and they frequently lack access to contract information.
  • Calculations of the costs and financing of water and sanitation services often ignore the complexities of poverty. Increased tariffs to cover costs ignore the fact that poor households may spend proportionately 100 times more of their income on water expenditure compared to the better off. The costs of not having access to water and sanitation services are rarely examined.
  • Although non-interference from political authorities in decision-making can be an advantage, mechanisms of accountability are needed to prevent corruption and inefficiency, whether the operator is public or private.

PSP is not yet as desirable as it could be because, in most developing countries, there is insufficient capacity for regulation, community participation, and enforcement of rights and entitlements. Markets are under development to control monopolistic practices.

A critical analysis of the new roles and new rules created by PSP is needed. A multi-stakeholder review of PSP, similar to the recent World Commission on Dams, should begin. A basic divide remains: opposition to the increasing PSP in water and sanitation services delivery versus the nearly universal promotion by donors of PSP policy. Only a multi-stakeholder review can definitively answer whether PSP benefits the poor.

Further recommendations include:

  • Build government capacity to shape policy reform according to the interest all of their citizens, to regulate services (public or private) and to process grievances. With political will and institutional commitment, locally-made solutions are possible.
  • Develop the readiness and capacity of civil society to engage in private sector contracting processes and encourage the private sector to be open to meaningful engagement with civil society and to understand their roles as businesses in the context of extreme poverty.
  • In urban areas, water utilities may be more flexible than municipal governments in delivering services to the poor, with less political interference. But community organisations acting on behalf of the poor are key to successful partnerships. In Dar es Salaam, the Keko Mwanagan water user committees accessed piped water after negotiating with the Water and Sanitation Authority.
  • Consider cheaper technology and less expensive financing schemes to widen the choice.
  • Change the current precondition for PSP in the awarding of loans and grants to developing countries, to one that ensures the poor are served and included in decision making processes.

Belinda Calaguas, Eric Gutierrez, Joanne Green and Virginia Roaf

Belinda Calaguas
WaterAid
Prince Consort House
27-29 Albert Embankment
London SE1 7UB
UK

T +44 (0) 20 7793 4502
F +44 (0) 20 7793 4545
BelindaCalaguas@WaterAid.org.uk
www.wateraid.org.uk

FREE Information Delivery services from ID21:

Get updates by email: ID21 news

id21 is enabled by the UK Government Department for International Development and hosted by the Institute of Development Studies, at the University of Sussex, UK. Charitable Company No. 877338. ID21 is a oneworld.net partner and a mediachannel affiliate

Right-to-Reply:
Comment on any of the issues raised in this Insights.
Read what others have said.

Top of the page

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Copyright remains with the original authors but (unless stated otherwise) articles may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided id21 and originating author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged. Copyright © 2005 id21. All rights reserved.