WatSan - SD with Impact by Local Governance Support Program in ARMM

WATER AND SANITATION Writer Reginald Indon Editors Chay Florentino-Hofile単a Giselle Baretto-Lapitan Project Management Amihan Perez Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs (ACSPPA) Technical and Editorial Team Rene "Bong' Garrucho, LGSP Mags Maglana, LGSP Abdul Jim Hassan, LGSP Rizal Barandino, LGSP Myn Garcia, LGSP Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation - International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF) Art Direction, Cover Design & Layout Jet Hermida Photography Gil Nartea

WATSAN WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES FOR ALL

Water And Sanitation Services For All Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government Copyright @2003 Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) All rights reserved The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program encourages the use, translation, adaptation and copying of this material for non-commercial use, with appropriate credit given to LGSP. Although reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this book, the publisher and/or contributor and/or editor can not accept any liability for any consequence arising from the use thereof or from any information contained herein. ISBN 971-8597-03-4 Printed and bound in Manila, Philippines Published by: Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) Unit 1507 Jollibee Plaza Emerald Ave., 1600 Pasig City, Philippines Tel. Nos. (632) 637-3511 to 13 www.lgsp.org.ph Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs (ACSPPA) ACSPPA, Fr. Arrupe Road, Social Development Complex Ateneo de Manila University, Loyola Heights, 1108 Quezon City This project was undertaken with the financial support of the Government of Canada provided through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

A JOINT PROJECT OF

Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA)

IMPLEMENTED BY

Agriteam Canada www.agriteam.ca

Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) www.fcm.ca

Canadian International Development Agency

CONTENTS FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PREFACE ACRONYMS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION

i iii v vii ix 1

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THE WATER AND SANITATION SITUATION Key Concepts Advantages and Benefits of Adequate and Safe Watsan Services Water and Sanitation Situation International and National Targets Existing Environment Guiding Principles for LGUs

7 7 9 9 11 12 16

CHAPTER 2: LGU MANDATES IN WATSAN PROVISION Water Supply Provision and Sanitation and Drainage Provisions National Policy on Urban Sewerage and Sanitation of 1994 NEDA Board Resolution No. 5 (series of 1998) NEDA Board Resolution No. 6 (series of 1996)

21 21 23 25 29

CHAPTER 3: IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES Implementation and Policy Issues Adequate Water and Sanitation for All: Guiding Principles

33 33 36

CHAPTER 4: GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION Community-Managed Approach Cases Social Privatization Approach Case Privatization Approach Case

57 58 70 75

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

CONTENTS

CHAPTER 5: REFERENCES AND TOOLS Potential Sites for Study Tours References ENDNOTES ANNEX: Water Supply Technology Options Sanitation Technology Options Sustainability of Community-Based Rural Water Supply Organizations Directory

79 79 83 87 89 89 93 107 113

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

FOREWORD

he Department of the Interior and Local Government is pleased to acknowledge the latest publication of the Philippines Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP), Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government; a series of books on eight (8) service delivery areas, which include Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Health, Agriculture, Local Economic Development, Solid Waste Management, Watershed and Coastal Resource Management. One of the biggest challenges in promoting responsive and efficient local governance is to be able to meaningfully deliver quality public services to communities as mandated in the Local Government Code. Faced with continued high incidence of poverty, it is imperative to strengthen the role of LGUs in service delivery as they explore new approaches for improving their performance. Strategies and mechanisms for effective service delivery must take into consideration issues of poverty reduction, peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s participation, the promotion of gender equality, environmental sustainability and economic and social equity for more long- term results. There is also a need to acquire knowledge, create new structures, and undertake innovative programs that are more responsive to the needs of the communities and develop linkages and partnerships within and between communities as part of an integrated approach to providing relevant and sustainable services to their constituencies. Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government offer local government units and their partners easy-to-use, comprehensive resource material with which to take up this challenge. By providing LGUs with practical technologies, tested models and replicable exemplary practices, Service Delivery with Impact encourages LGUs to be innovative, proactive and creative in addressing the real problems and issues in providing and enhancing services, taking into account increased community participation and strategic private sector/civil society organizational partnerships. We hope that in using these resource books, LGUs will be better equipped with new ideas, tools and inspiration to make a

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

FOREWORD

difference by expanding their knowledge and selection of replicable choices in delivering basic services with increased impact. The DILG, therefore, congratulates the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) for this milestone in its continuing efforts to promote efficient, responsive, transparent and accountable governance.

HON. JOSE D. LINA, JR. Secretary Department of the Interior and Local Government

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

his publication is the result of the collaboration of the following individuals and institutions that support the improvement of the delivery of water and sanitation services by local governments to their constituents The Local Government Support Program led by Alix Yule, Marion Maceda Villanueva and Rene â&#x20AC;&#x153;Bongâ&#x20AC;? Garrucho for providing the necessary direction and support Rory Villaluna, Lyn Capistrano, Carmelo Gendrano and other staff of PCWS-ITNF for undertaking the research and roundtable discussion and preparing the technical report which was the main reference for this resource book; and for assisting in the review of the manuscript Participants to the Roundtable Discussion on Water and Sanitation held last August 7, 2002 in Davao City. Their expertise and animated exchange of opinions helped shape the technical report on which this publication is based: Mayor Gregorio Facula of Braulio Dujali; Florencio Leray, Arthur Moralde, Mel Villacin, and Alejandro C. Sumiling of Quezon, Bukidnon; Rolando A. Balago of Misamis Oriental, Lorena Navallasca of Iloilo; Dr. Jarvis Punsalan of Capiz; Delia Guinto of Carmona and Ellen Pascua of DILG Sarah Coll-Black of CIDA; Lizette Cardenas of SWAPP; Ratan Budhathoki of NEWAH; Ruben P. Cajigas of Leaf Foundation and Cherry B. Al-ag of OIDCI LGSP Manager Victor A. Ozarraga and Program Officers Victor C. Alfaro, Aser Realubit, and Abduljim Hassan

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

III

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Rizal Barandino for providing feedback that helped ensure that the resource book offers information that is practical and applicable to LGU needs and requirements Reginald Indon for effective rendering of the technical reports Chay Florentino Hofilena and Giselle Baretto-Lapitan for the excellent editorial work Amihan Perez and the Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs for their efficient coordination and management of the project Mags Z. Maglana for providing overall content supervision and coordinating with the technical writer Myn Garcia for providing technical and creative direction and overall supervision of the design, layout and production Sef Carandang, Russell Fari単as, Gigi Barazon and the rest of the LGSP administrative staff for providing support

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

PREFACE

ervice Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government are the product of a series of roundtable discussions, critical review of tested models and technologies, and case analyses of replicable exemplary practices in the Philippines conducted by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) in eight (8) service sectors that local government units (LGUs) are mandated to deliver. These include Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Health, Agriculture, Local Economic Development, Solid Waste Management, Watershed and Coastal Resource Management. The devolution of powers as mandated in the Local Government Code has been a core pillar of decentralization in the Philippines. Yet despite opportunities for LGUs to make a meaningful difference in the lives of the people by maximizing these devolved powers, issues related to poverty persist and improvements in effective and efficient service delivery remain a challenge. With LGSPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work in support of over 200 LGUs for the past several years came the recognition of the need to enhance capacities in service delivery, specifically to clarify the understanding and optimize the role of local government units in providing improved services. This gap presented the motivation for LGSP to develop these resource books for LGUs. Not a â&#x20AC;&#x153;how to manual,â&#x20AC;? Service Delivery with Impact features strategies and a myriad of proven approaches designed to offer innovative ways for local governments to increase their capacities to better deliver quality services to their constituencies. Each resource book focuses on highlighting the important areas of skills and knowledge that contribute to improved services. Service Delivery with Impact provides practical insights on how LGUs can apply guiding principles, tested and appropriate technology, and lessons learned from exemplary cases to their organization and in partnership with their communities.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

PREFACE

This series of resource books hopes to serve as a helpful and comprehensive reference to inspire and enable LGUs to significantly contribute to improving the quality of life of their constituency through responsive and efficient governance. Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ACRONYMS ADB AusAID BWSA BWSI CARWASA CDF DANIDA DFWSA DWSDC JBIC KfW LGSP LGU LWUA MWSS NEDA NGO O&M ODA PCWS-ITNF PSP RWSA SSF SZOPAD UN USAID USC-WRC WATSAN WB

Asian Development Bank Australian Agency for International Development Barangay Waterworks and Sanitation Association Bayan Water Services, Inc. Casay Rural Water and Sanitation Association Countryside Development Fund Danish International Development Agency Doña Flavia Water and Sanitation Association Darangan Water Service Development Cooperative Japanese Bank for International Cooperation Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW) The German Development Bank Local Government Support Program Local Government Unit Local Water Utilities Authority Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System National Economic and Development Authority Non-Government Organization Operation and Maintenance Overseas Development Assistance Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation – International Training Network Foundation Private Sector Participation Rural Waterworks and Sanitation Association SZOPAD Social Fund Special Zone of Peace and Development United Nations United States Agency for International Development University of San Carlos Water Resource Center Water and Sanitation World Bank

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

VII

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE WATER AND SANITATION SITUATION Access to safe water and sanitation is essential not only for human survival, but also to improve the lives of people, particularly the poor. Safe water and sanitation are necessary building blocks in the development of healthier and more productive communities. Yet access to safe water and sanitation services continues to be a major concern among many Filipinos. Philippine statistics, for instance, show that only 67 percent of the urban population and 87 percent of the rural population has access to water, while only 69 percent of the population nationwide has sanitation facilities. The problem is directly linked to issues and problems related to the policy, institutional, technical, financial, socio-cultural, and economic environments.

MEETING THE CHALLENGE The challenge posed to LGUs is to enhance and re-imagine their involvement in water and sanitation service delivery. As will be shown in this Resource Book, LGU experiences in water and sanitation projectsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;particularly those which have used the community-managed and socially privatized institutional arrangementsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;show tremendous promise in terms of project success and sustainability. Such LGU efforts eventually achieved capital development and water-sanitation service efficiency, but also encouraged the growth of strong local democracy and institution building. The experiences of community-managed systems (in DoĂąa Flavia, Casay and New Bulatukan) and of a socially-privatized system (in Darangan) reveal that these two institutional arrangements are fast emerging as alternative and viable models of community-based water systems, compared to the traditional models of government-controlled or private corporation-controlled water systems.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Community management and social privatization do not mean lesser government involvement. On the contrary, government agencies and LGUs, in particular, will continue to play a vital role in providing a favorable policy climate for greater community participation in WATSAN service delivery, and in ensuring sustained institutional support for the organizations involved.

THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES Certain guiding principles help enhance project implementation. In the experience of water and sanitation advocates and practitioners and as articulated by the Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF), these include (1) ensuring sustainability of potable water supply and sanitation services, (2) effective implementation of water and sanitation projects, (3) developing a culture of Operation and Maintenance (O&M), and (4) ensuring the formation of viable institutional arrangements. In practice, these guiding principles involve using appropriate technologies, ensuring community participation, and transparent and conscientious resource and project management during project implementation. It likewise involves investing in social preparation, institution building, and capabilitybuilding in order to guarantee project continuity and sustainability. By adhering to these implementing guide principles, LGUs stand to benefit from enhanced community access to safe, efficient, and affordable water and sanitation systems; lower project and O&M costs; and expanded government-private sector-civil society collaboration.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

INTRODUCTION INFORMATION: A BASIC TOOL FOR LGUS The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program has put together this resource book in response to the need to develop and disseminate knowledge on the importance of water and sanitation and the issues and problems surrounding this sector. This resource book is a collection of ideas, practical technologies, tested models, and good practices related to water and sanitation service delivery that can be systematically disseminated and used by LGUs and their partners. Although this resource book focuses on ways of improving water and sanitation service delivery, it likewise tackles issues relating to poverty levels, gender promotion, people participation, and economic and social equity and how these themes are connected to water and sanitation service delivery. This resource book was developed in collaboration with the Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation窶的nternational Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF). The PCWS-ITNF is a non-government organization concerned with public information, research, community organizing, advocacy, and training for the awareness, appreciation, protection, and conservation of Philippine water resources. It aims to heighten awareness among public and private institutions on development issues affecting water and sanitation policy reforms and water resource management.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

INTRODUCTION

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS BOOK The specific objective of the book is to provide local government officials and those helping LGUs develop capacity in service delivery with: 1. An overview of the policy environment governing the water and sanitation sector; 2. Ideas on sustainable and cost-effective technologies, models, and practices related to water and sanitation; 3. An understanding of the tremendous impact of water and sanitation projects on poverty reduction and community development, and; 4. A vision of the evolving and critical role of local government units in providing water and sanitation services. A companion book published by the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP), titled â&#x20AC;&#x153;Resource Finder: Financial and Technical Assistance for LGUs,â&#x20AC;? provides additional information on the different types of assistance that LGUs can access from government agencies, government financing institutions, ODA, and civil society organizations. Water and sanitation is among the service areas covered by the Resource Finder.

PARTS OF THE RESOURCE BOOK Chapter 1: Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation. This chapter discusses the situation of the water and sanitation sector in the global and national arena. It introduces LGUs to the challenges at hand, while highlighting key concepts, the importance of water and sanitation services, their potential impacts on communities, and guiding principles for LGUs.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

INTRODUCTION

Chapter 2: LGU Mandates in WatSan Provision. This chapter contains the mandates for LGUs concerning water and sanitation service delivery and the fundamental role of LGUs as catalysts for development and social change. Chapter 3: Implementation & Policy Issues and Guiding Principles. This section discusses the different issues and recommendations related to water and sanitation projects. It provides LGUs a general idea about the various factors and elements that hinder the development of water and sanitation services. This section also presents the key elements needed to facilitate the success of water and sanitation projects. Chapter 4: Good Practices in WatSan Provision. This portion features the experience of five (5) water and sanitation projects. The chapter explores two emerging approaches to water and sanitation service deliveryâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;community-managed water systems and the social privatization approachâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and looks into the nuances between these two systems. This chapter shows how these approaches engage communities and promote direct access to water and sanitation. Apparently, these systems also nearly match the financial and technological capacity level of LGUs. This chapter also explores a case involving water service provision using the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) model as a variant of privatization. These and the other potential sites identified in Chapter 5 can be visited by interested parties should they want to directly verify and further learn from the cited experiences. Chapter 5: References and Tools. This chapter presents other potential sites for possible study tours, listing some of the models and approaches to water and sanitation service delivery (i.e., barangay water and sanitation associations, water service development cooperatives, private sector participation through concession arrangement, and Design-Build-Lease models, government-owned and controlled water districts, among others). This chapter also identifies materials and tools that can be used by LGUs and other users as reference. S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

INTRODUCTION

The annex section of this resource book provides illustrated options for water supply and sanitation technologies and discusses what works and what does not in terms of sustaining community rural water supply organizations. A section also provides contact details pertaining to the different water districts and private water firms operating in the country as well as NGOs and other organizations that provide support to the water sector.

SUGGESTED USES OF THIS RESOURCE BOOK LGUs are encouraged to review Chapters 1, 2, and 3 in order to adequately understand: (1) the basic components related to water and sanitation service delivery, (2) the mandated roles of LGUs as prescribed by existing legislation and government regulations, (3) the issues and problems surrounding water and sanitation, and (4) the suggested guiding principles involved in implementing water and sanitation projects. This information is handy when LGUs shape and deliberate on the emphasis of their water and sanitation programs. LGUs can also use this resource book to expand their list of choices (e.g., technology, financing options, management style, institutional arrangement) on how they can provide, or improve, water and sanitation services in their locality. LGUs are urged to review Chapters 4 and 5 in order to gain insights or inspiration from the experiences of other LGUs that have implemented their own water and sanitation projects. Further, these chapters provide an appreciation of the emerging new role of LGUs vis-Ă -vis the growing popularity of communitymanaged and socially privatized water and sanitation systems. This knowledge will help LGUs in designing, allocating resources for, and implementing specific water and sanitation projects.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation

Overview of the WaTSAN Situation

CHAPTER

❙ KEY CONCEPTS ◗ WATER AND SANITATION Water supply refers to the supply of water for domestic, municipal, industrial, and commercial uses1. Sanitation, meanwhile, involves proper containment and processing of human waste and wastewater until these are safe enough for release into the environment. Water and sanitation are universally considered basic human needs, and form part of the broader water sector, which includes irrigation, hydropower, drainage, and flood control.

◗ WATER SUPPLY SERVICE Water supply can be categorized into three levels: Level I (point source), Level II (communal faucet system or standpost), and Level III (waterworks system or individual household connections). Level I system refers to a protected well or a developed spring with an outlet but without a distribution system. This is generally adaptable for rural areas where the houses are thinly scattered. This system normally services an average of 15 households.

Water supply n. refers to the supply of water for domestic, municipal, industrial, and commercial uses. Sanitation n. involves proper containment and processing of human waste and wastewater until these are safe enough for release into the environment.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION

Level II system consists of a source, a reservoir, a piped distribution network, and communal faucets. Usually, one faucet serves four to six households and is generally suited for rural and urban fringe areas where houses are clustered densely. Level III system is composed of a source, a reservoir, a piped distribution network, and household taps. It is generally suited for densely populated urban areas.

â&#x2014;&#x2014; TYPES OF TOILET FACILITIES Type I facilities require a small amount of water to wash excreta into the receiving space or pit (e.g., pour-flush toilets). A non-water carriage toilet facility does not require water to wash excreta into the receiving space or pit (e.g., ventilated improved pit latrine, sanitary pit privy). Type II facilities are water carriage type facilities, having a pour-flush or flush-type toilet facility and a septic vault/tank as the disposal facility. Type III facilities are water carriage facilities with pour-flush type toilet facilities connected to septic tanks, sewerage system, or treatment plants

â&#x2014;&#x2014; LEVELS OF TOILET USE Toilet use can be classified as communal, public, school, or household use. Two or more households share communal toilets. Public toilet facilities are intended for public use, and are located in markets, bus stations, etc. School toilet facilities are located in schools and are essentially for the use of students. Individual households use household toilet facilities.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation 1

❙ ADVANTAGES AND BENEFITS OF ADEQUATE AND SAFE WATSAN SERVICES Safe water and sanitation are vital to human existence, and serve as fundamental economic resources upon which survival and livelihood depend. Access to safe and affordable supply of drinking water is universally recognized as a basic human need for the present generation and a precondition for the development and care of the next. Without adequate and appropriate water and sanitation facilities, diseases can easily spread through water contamination. Thus, improved water and sanitation services can lead to significant and tangible improvements in people’s well-being and way of life. Access to water supply and sanitation services often results in lesser water-borne and water-washed diseases. People can be more productive as more time can be spent at work and at school. The reduction in incidence of diarrhea or other diseases caused by contaminated water, considerably improves health and nutrition. Furthermore, better health results in improved self-worth and status, especially among women. An efficient and dependable water supply brings about higher levels of industry confidence in the quality and supply of such a vital resource. Standards of urban infrastructure—including housing— are likewise enhanced, while resources for leisure, recreation, and tourism are significantly improved.

❙ WATER AND SANITATION SITUATION Yet access to water and sanitation services continues to be a major concern not only among Filipinos, but also worldwide, especially among the poorer sectors. This problem is directly linked to issues and problems related to the policy, institutional, technical, financial, socio-cultural, and economic environments. S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION

In the Philippines, only 67 % of the urban population and 87 % of the rural population has access to water, while only

According to statistics, an estimated 2.9 billion people lack access to adequate sanitation services while 1.2 billion people in the world lack access to safe water. As a result, more than 3.3 million people die every year from diarrheal diseases. At any one time, 1.5 million people suffer from parasitic worm infections caused by human excreta and solid wastes in the environment. Thousands of children under the age of four die every year due to diarrhea, the highest number of cases said to be found in Africa. In the Philippines, only 67 percent of the urban population and 87 percent of the rural population has access to water, while only 69 percent of the population nationwide has sanitation facilities. In Metro Manila, about 900,000 or 7.67% of the population have access to safe sanitation facilities.2 The situation is attributed to many Filipinos not owning land and therefore being unable to provide for their own toilets.

69 % of the population nationwide has sanitation facilities.

In addition, access to sanitation is especially lacking because of the following factors:

Lack of political will Low prestige and recognition Ineffective promotion and low public awareness Poor policy at all levels Poor institutional frameworks Inadequate and poorly used resources Neglect of consumer preferences Inappropriate approaches

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation 1

â?&#x2122; INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL TARGETS Given the enormous challenge of providing and improving water and sanitation services, the UN Millennium Goals seek to reduce by half the number of those without access to safe water supply and sanitation by the year 2015. A worldwide movement called Vision 21 was also created to give priority to hygiene and sanitation and in sharing the management of water resources. There is also the WASH Campaign, a global alliance for making safe water, sanitation, and hygiene a reality for all. WASH is a global effort of the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council, launched at the International Conference on Freshwater in December 2001. The campaign aims to: (1) raise consciousness about sanitation and hygiene, (2) gain the commitment of political, social, and opinion leaders around the world and, (3) ultimately bring about the structural and behavioral changes that will provide a permanent solution to this preventable international crisis. The Philippine government, meanwhile, expects to increase water supply coverage to 93 percent in rural areas, 90 percent in Metro Manila, and 87 percent in the other urban areas. For sanitation, the target is to cover close to 76 percent of the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s total population. To achieve these targets, the national government has determined a course of action that is firmly established in the Medium Term Development Plan for 1999-2004 Policies and Strategies. These are to: 1. Create an independent authority that will formulate national policies on water resources management, regulation, utilization, planning and conservation. 2. Pursue sustainable development and management of water resources. 3. Promote an integrated approach to link social and economic development with the protection of natural resources and ecosystems. 4. Provide a favorable environment for LGUs, with assistance from the Department of the Interior and Local Government, and private sector participation (PSP) in the provision of water supply and sanitation services.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION

5. Pursue private sector participation in providing water supply and sanitation facilities, especially in other urban areas. 6. Enhance information campaign and training in proper waste disposal and ecological and environmental preservation with special emphasis on womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s participation. 7. Develop and provide incentives for contiguous water districts to amalgamate into single business entities. 8. Harness the resources of the private sector in improving water services and sewerage facilities in Metro Manila and other urban areas. 9. Adopt a holistic approach to water resources development. 10. Develop standards for regulation of service efficiency. 11. Pursue the enactment of an independent authority. 12. Encourage the development of sewerage and sanitation facilities. 13. Encourage the reuse and recycling of water and the harvesting and impounding of rainwater. 14. Pursue the preservation of the environment. 15. Continue the improvement of financial and technical evaluations of water districts to address water services sustainability. 16. Support the creation of river basin authorities to effect integrated water resources management. 17. Pursue and strengthen the strict enforcement of water-related laws, rules and regulations, and adopt stiff and proportionate penalties for violators.

â?&#x2122; EXISTING ENVIRONMENT â&#x2014;&#x2014; INSTITUTIONAL The major government units responsible for regulating the water sector in the country are the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), National Water Resources Board (NWRB), and local government units. These government units monitor and regulate the water tariffs (i.e., water rates) charged by private sector water districts and concessionaires. 12

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation 1

The MWSS has a regulatory office specifically mandated to ensure that the terms and conditions under which private concessionaries operate are strictly followed. The LWUA oversees the water districts. The NWRB issues the water permits and regulates non-water district water providers. Other government units also responsible for economic regulation of water resources at the national level are the following: 1. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) for general administration and institution-building support to local government units. 2. Presidential Task Force for Water Resources Development and Management - This agency, under the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), is the oversight body for efficient water use and sourcing. 3. Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for pollution control. 4. Department of Health (DOH) for water quality regulation and setting standards on testing, treatment, and surveillance 5. Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) for setting technical standards for engineering surveys, design and operation, and maintenance. 6. Department of Budget and Management (DBM) for budget releases and allocation planning. 7. National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) for overall planning and policy coordination and formulation. 8. Department of Finance (DOF) for the management of financial resources. For sanitation, the NEDA is involved in coordination and planning. The DOH is mainly concerned with policy formulation and provides hygiene education and toilet bowls through specific projects. At the local level, the Municipal/City Health Officers are the health promoters and also help oversee water quality. Meanwhile, the DENR concerns itself with the protection of bodies of water and the environment.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION

Although there are various government agencies involved in the water and sanitation sector, there is often a lack of coordination in planning and policy formulation. In turn, this has resulted in the implementation of lopsided and incongruent development initiatives. Until now, many areas in the country have no access to water. And in some areas where water and sanitation services are available, the quality of service is far from satisfactory. The problem is linked to revenue losses of service providers caused by the poor collection of water payments and increasing cost of water leakages and pilferages. Revenue losses have limited the capacity of service providers to finance service expansion and improvements. Further compounding the problem is the lack of reliable data on the water and sanitation situation in the country, which prevents development planners and decision-makers from formulating appropriate solutions to the problems. In addition, the wide range of agencies in the sector (resulting in duplication of functions and fragmented planning) often causes the slow and weak enforcement of water and sanitation policies, laws, rules, and regulations. In a nutshell, the water and sanitation sector is weighed down by a lack of leadership and institutional efficiency.

◗ PLANNING AND POLICY There exists enough legislation and government policies that govern the water and sanitation sector but these are not being sufficiently implemented. These include, but are not limited to, the following:

1991 Local Government Code Water Code and Sanitation Code of the Philippines 1988-2000 Water Supply and Sanitation Sector NEDA Board Resolution Number 4, 5, and 6 (series of 1994)

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation 1

Amended Build-Operate-Transfer Law (Republic Act 7718) ICC Policy Papers and Medium-Term Development Plan 1999-2004. (The LGU mandates are further taken up in Chapter 2 of this resource book.) The task ahead is to translate these policies into concrete action and practices, especially at the local and community levels. It is also important to develop policies and action plans that regard water as a limited resource that must be conserved and managed efficiently. Because water supply is very limited, all its competing uses (drinking, irrigation, industrial, and commercial) have their own economic value. The challenge is to find a way to efficiently conserve and manage water, and to strike a balance among the competing uses of water. Chapter 4 of this resource book will show how some local government units have taken the initiative to develop water and sanitation projects in their areas.

◗ FINANCING Funding is a major factor affecting the water and sanitation sector, as will be shown in Chapter 4. Traditionally, funding for water and sanitation projects have come from any or a combination of the following sources:

National government subsidies Internal cash generation of national government entities (LWUA) Public and private financial institutions (government and commercial banks) ODA grants and loans Investments from international sources (ADB, JBIC, and WB) Private sector investments Proceeds from the Countryside Development Fund Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) and internally generated revenues of local government units

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION

This is not to say that funding has always been available. In fact, fund scarcity is a major problem, especially since the sector has to compete for financial market resources and has not always been given the highest priority by the previous and current administrations. In 1993 to 1998, for instance, only two percent of the national government infrastructure program was allocated to water resources. This was further subdivided for irrigation, water supply, sewerage, sanitation, flood control, drainage, and other infrastructure projects. Financing can come from external or internal sources. External sources include loans (e.g., from the LWUA), Countryside Development Funds of national legislators, grants, and national government programs. Internal sources, meanwhile, include LGU resources, Internal Revenue Allotment and Social Development Funds, LGU manpower, material stocks and equipment, and community resources.3

❙ GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR LGUS LGU interventions for water and sanitation may involve the following: (1) construction of new systems, (2) rehabilitation of existing systems, (3) upgrade or expansion, (4) multiple sources and systems and (5) the “do-nothing” option. It will be helpful to take note of the Dublin Principles when LGUs prepare their responses to local water and sanitation challenges. Basically, the Dublin Principles states that water and sanitation service provision should be comprehensive, that existing autonomous institutions should be tapped as project partners, and that water resources should be treated as an economic resource. (More of the Dublin Principles is discussed in Chapter 3.) Informed by Philippine and global experiences in community-based water and sanitation service provision, the Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation recommends four guiding principles for LGUs:

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Overview of the Water and Sanitation Situation 1

1. Ensure sustainability of potable water supply and sanitation services. Ensuring sustainability means using appropriate technology, fostering community participation, and ensuring transparent and conscientious resource and project management. 2. Effectively implement water and sanitation projects. Effective implementation means applying these sustainability factors (i.e., appropriate technology, community participation, transparent and conscientious management) during specific stages of the project cycle. 3. Develop a culture of operation and maintenance. Often, too much emphasis is given to the actual construction of a water and sanitation facility. Yet very little attention is given to operation and maintenanceâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; an equally important factor to consider in ensuring the sustainability of water and sanitation projects. This principle requires that the community-beneficiary is not only willing to accept responsibility for operating and maintaining the water and sanitation facility, but also capable of handling the task and challenge of running such a facility.

Guiding Principles for LGUs 1. Ensure sustainability of potable water supply and sanitation services 2. Efficiently implement water and sanitation projects 3. Develop a culture of operation and maintenance 4. Employ viable institutional arrangements

4. Employ viable institutional arrangements. There are different options that an LGU can explore and take regarding institutional arrangements for water and sanitation. However, this Resource Book particularly highlights two options in water and sanitation systems provision: privatization and communitymanaged models. This is because there seem to be a growing interest among LGUs in these models, even if the latter has not been identified as a management model by the NEDA. Although there can be many types of privatization, the most well known is the corporate privatization model. The Magdalena case study illustrates this type of privatization model.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION

There is another approach to privatization that seems to be a reaction to corporate privatization, yet distinct from community-managed modelsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;social privatization. Social privatization involves running public services as an enterprise but with an orientation to plow profits back in pursuit of social objectives. Darangan, featured in Chapter 4, is an example of this approach. Community management has become the leading concept for implementing water supply systems in rural areas in developing countries. The idea that communities themselves should operate and maintain water supply systems came partly from an eroded belief in the idea that only central governments can secure the service requirements of their populations, and partly from the positive belief that communities possess the skills and motivation to meet their own essential needs. The cases of DoĂąa Flavia, Casay and New Bulatukan featured in Chapter 4, are examples of community-managed systems.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

LGU MANDATES in watsan provision

CHAPTER

❙ WATER SUPPLY PROVISION AND SANITATION AND DRAINAGE PROVISIONS ◗ LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE

Excerpts from the Local Government Code, R.A. 7160 – An Act Providing for Local Government Code 1991 (Approved by President Corazon Aquino, October 10, 1991) CHAPTER 2. General Powers and Attributes of Local Government Units SEC. 17. Basic Services and Facilities. (a) Local government units shall endeavor to be self-reliant and shall continue exercising the powers and discharging the duties and functions currently vested upon them. They shall also discharge the functions and responsibilities of national agencies and offices devolved to them pursuant to this Code. Local government units shall likewise exercise such other powers and discharge other functions and responsibilities as necessary, appropriate or incidental to efficient and effective provision of the basic services and facilities enumerated herein. (b) Such basic services and facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: Barangay (iii) Services and facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation, beautification, and solid waste collection; (v) Maintenance of… water supply systems;

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 2

Municipality (vi) Services and facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation; (viii) Infrastructure facilities intended primarily to service the needs of the residents of the municipality and which are funded out of municipal funds, including, but not limited to … communal irrigation, small water impounding projects and other similar projects; artesian wells, spring development, rainwater collectors, and water supply system;… drainage, and sewerage and flood control;…. Province (vii) Infrastructure facilities intended to service the needs of the residents of the province and which are funded out of provincial funds including, but not limited to… inter-municipal waterworks, and irrigation systems… drainage and sewerage, flood control,… City All the services and facilities of the municipality and province…

◗ LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IRR Excerpts from the Rules and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 (Approved by President Corazon Aquino, February 6, 1992) Basic Services and Facilities Art. 25. Responsibility for Delivery of Basic Services and Facilities. The LGUs shall, in addition to their existing functions and responsibilities, provide basic services and facilities devolved to them covering, but not limited to, the following: Barangay (c) Services and facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation, beautification, and solid waste collection; 22

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

LGU MANDATES in watsan provision 2

(e) Maintenance of… water supply systems;… Municipality (f ) Provision of… services or facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation; (g) Construction and maintenance of infrastructure facilities funded by the municipality to serve the needs of the residents including, but not limited to: (4) Communal irrigation, small water impounding projects and other similar projects; (6) Artesian wells, spring development, rainwater collectors and water supply systems (7) … sewerage and flood control; Province (g) Construction and maintenance of infrastructure facilities funded by the province to serve the needs of the residents including, but not limited to: (2) Inter-municipal waterworks… and irrigation systems… drainage and sewerage, flood control…. City All services and facilities provided by the municipality and the province.

❙ NATIONAL POLICY ON URBAN SEWERAGE AND SANITATION OF 1994 ◗ NEDA BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 5, SERIES OF 1994 Approving the recommendations of the Infrastructure Committee (INFRACOM) on the National Policy, Strategy and Action Plan for Urban Sewerage (Liquid Waste) and Sanitation Be it resolved, as it is hereby resolved to approve as the same is hereby approved and confirmed the following recommendations of the INFRACOM:

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 2

A. NATIONAL POLICY 1. Provision of improved sewerage/sanitation services in urban areas shall be considered a high priority. 2. On-site sanitation facilities for all urban households/establishments readily adaptable to further sewerage systems shall be required. 3. All new subdivisions/housing developments shall provide simplified or conventional sewerage system/sanitation facilities. 4. Conventional or low-cost sewerage for central business districts and for potentially highincome residential areas where economically and financially viable shall be provided. 5. Treatment of industrial as well as collected city/municipality wastewaters to established standards set forth by the DENR prior to disposal into the drainage system shall be acquired. 6. Provision of services shall be based on consumer demand and willingness to pay. B. NATIONAL STRATEGY 1. A sanitation/sewerage program and a Central Sanitation/Sewerage Program Support Office (CPSO) to coordinate sub-sector activities at the national level and to assist LGUs to plan and manage sanitation/sewerage programs at the community level shall be established. 2. External sources of assistance shall be explored and provided as may be appropriate to enable Municipal Development Fund (MDF) facility or other financing sources to extend loans to LGUs for sanitation and sewerage projects. 3. LGUs shall primarily be the implementers of the sanitation/sewerage programs with the national government providing assistance to develop their capacities in the following areas: community participation, sub-sector planning, program management, regulation of development, selection of technologies, financial management, constructions supervision, O & M, monitoring and reporting.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

LGU MANDATES in watsan provision 2

❙ NEDA BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 5, S. 1998 ◗ DELINEATION OF AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES RULE 3 DEFINITION OF TERMS Article 5. Definition of Terms. For purposes of these Implementing Rules and Regulations, the following terms shall be construed to mean as follows: a. Levels of Service. Based on NEDA Board Resolution No. 12 (series of 1995), approving the common definition of terms relative to water supply, sewerage and on-site sanitation, levels of service are defined as follows: Level I (point source) – a protected well or a developed spring with an outlet but without a distribution system; generally adaptable for rural areas where the houses are thinly scattered. A level I facility normally serves an average of 15 households. Level II (communal faucet system or stand posts) – a system composed of a source, a reservoir, a piped distribution network, and communal faucets. Usually, one faucet serves four to six households. It is generally suited for rural and urban fringe areas where houses are clustered densely to justify a simple piped system. Level III (waterworks system or individual house connections) – a system with source, a reservoir, a piped distribution network, and household taps. It is generally suited for densely populated urban areas. b. A financially viable water supply system refers to a system wherein its revenues can cover for all costs related to capital and operation and maintenance, including providing for reasonable reserves for future expansion. For those systems managed by water districts, a financially

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 2

viable system is one that is able to generate revenues directly from user payments sufficient to cover all costs. For LGU-managed systems, capital and operations maintenance costs shall be covered through a combination of user fees, general municipal taxes and other incomes available to the LGUs. RULE 4 ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT Article 6. General. The Local Government Code of 1991 mandates the decentralization and devolution of authority to LGUs in providing for certain basic services, which include safe potable water. At the local level, the LGUs are responsible for providing reliable water supply to their constituents, whether these are in the form of levels I, II or III systems, depending on the expressed demand by the community for these services. LGUs may both directly provide and finance these services, or involve the private sector to participate in both provision and financing through concession, management or service contracts. Article 7. Financing and Cost Recovery. In financing water supply investments, the LGUs may tap their Internal Revenue Allotment and/or locally generated revenues, or leverage these resources to borrow from government and private financial institutions. The amount that an LGU can borrow, including the required equity, is dependent on its current and expected revenue performance, as well as the amount of user charges and equity contributions from the community shall be a local decision of the LGUs concerned. For any national government grant that may be provided for the development of level I systems, the LGU and beneficiaries concerned shall be required to provide any remaining amount as equity to the investment. No subsidies from the national government shall be provided for levels II and III systems. In providing for Level III service, the LGUs may opt to form a water district or an LGU company, provide a franchise to a private party or participate in a joint venture with a private party. Except in areas 26

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

LGU MANDATES in watsan provision 2

with water districts, LGUs shall maintain overall responsibility for ensuring consumer satisfaction through the exercise of institutional and/or contractual regulatory powers over local water utilities, in collaboration with other national regulatory agencies, and by instituting a system of public performance audit. Cost recovery through user payments shall be encouraged for both capital and operation and maintenance costs. However, at the minimum, user payments shall be required to cover the operation and maintenance costs in all service levels. For LGU-owned, operated and/or guaranteed systems, any shortfall in revenues required for loan repayment shall be financed by the LGU from its Internal Revenue Allotment and/or locally-generated revenues, following a process of negotiation between the LGU and the beneficiaries concerned on the level of user payments. For systems managed by local water districts, full cost recovery, through user charges, is required by LWUA. In areas where there are existing local water districts, LGUs may finance rehabilitation works and/or expansion of the existing water works system on the following conditions: a. The local water district concerned is not in LWUAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current program of assistance, that is, it is not included in any loan of LWUA with a financing institution, and b. Endorsement by the local water district concerned should have been secured. In the event that the local water district is servicing a loan from LWUA, the local water district shall seek clearance from LWUA prior to entering into an agreement with the LGU concerned on any program of system expansion. Article 8. Management of Systems. LGUs shall adopt commercial principles in the operation and management of water utilities in order to provide cost-effective and reliable services to consumers, whether management of the system is a direct responsibility of the LGU or is contracted out by the LGU to the private sector. An LGU may also consider amalgamating or consolidating its system with S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 2

that of its neighboring LGUs in order to benefit from economies of scale that could expand water supply services to consumers at the lowest possible cost. For the operation and management of Levels I and II systems, the LGUs shall initiate the formation of Barangay and Rural Waterworks and Sanitation Associations (BWSAs/RWSAs), respectively, through a participatory approach involving consultation with all stakeholders (Article 20) and assist in their registration with the appropriate authorities (Article 21). Upon request, LGUs may accredit duly registered RWSAs/BWSAs in order to enable them to avail of financial assistance from local governments. LGUs shall have overall supervision of RWSAs and BWSAs. Article 9. Project Planning and Development. Provinces and cities/municipalities shall be required to prepare, and update on an annual basis, provincial and city/municipal sector plans that are consistent with a national sector plan. These sector plans shall be integrated into the local investment programs. Water supply projects shall be identified from the local investment program. A financing program of foreign and nationally/locally-generated resources, including private sector resources, shall support the local investment program. Article 10. Approval and Award of Contracts. The LGUs shall be required to conduct public bidding, in accordance with the provisions of Law, including Presidential Decree No. 1594, as amended, Executive Order No. 164, Executive Order No. 302 and other applicable laws, and shall have the final authority to approve and award contracts for water supply and sanitation projects within their jurisdictions. Article 11. Application for Water Rights. LGUs of the concerned water utility shall apply for water rights from the National Water Resources Board prior to implementing a project that would require extraction of water. Article 12. Public Performance Audit. The LGUs shall establish a system of public performance audit for public and private water utilities focusing on critical performance indicators. Upon

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

LGU MANDATES in watsan provision 2

request of the LGUs, DILG may provide technical assistance for the purpose, in coordination with appropriate national government agencies.

â?&#x2122; NEDA BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 6 (SERIES OF 1996) APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE (INFRACOM) ON THE EXECUTING AGENCY ARRANGEMENT FOR THE DEVOLVED INFRASTRUCTURE ACTIVITIES / FACILITIES Matrix of Financing and Management Options

Option

Description

LGU-Financed and Managed

The LGU finances the investment from its income and other resources available to it (e.g. IRA, locally-generated taxes, grants) or borrows from financial institution. It then establishes a profit center within the LGU office with a separate cost accounting system. Under this arrangement, the LGU directly manages the operations of the commercial risk.

Service Contract

The LGU finances the investment and directly operates and manages the system. It enters into contract with a private party to undertake billing and collection and/or repair and maintenance activities for a fee. The LGU maintains a profit center within the LGU office and assumes the commercial risk.

Management Contract

The LGU finances the investment and enters into contract with a private party to manage the system. The private party collects the water tariffs set by the LGU, operates and manages the system and in turn, is paid a management fee by the LGU. The LGU maintains a profit center within the LGU office and assumes the commercial risk.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 2

Option

Description

Lease Contract

The LGU finances the capital expenditures and leases the facility to the private sector. The private sector assumes the commercial risks and the responsibility to operation and maintenance. To recover its costs, the private party is allowed to collect user fees as well as any other charges on behalf of the LGU.

Concession Contract

The LGU enters into contract with a private party to undertake the investment. The private party assumes the assets of the LGU and undertakes to expand the services according to the terms and conditions of the contract. The private party is allowed to operate the system and to collect user fees to recover its costs and earn a reasonable return on its investment. After the contract expires, the system reverts to the LGU or may be contracted out again by the LGU.

Creation of a Local Water District

The LGU may create a local water district. The local water district finances the investment from a loan from the Local Water Utilities and Administration (LWUA) and operates and manages the system. The local water district is then supervised by LWUA.

LGU Company

The LGU may form a water company to handle the provision of the service. The water company shall be duly registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and shall have share holdings which can be sold to the private sector in the future. The LGU appoints the board members to be selected from the private sector who would then manage the company along commercial principles.

Build-Operate-Transfer

Under the BOT scheme, the private sector finances the investment or any of its variants (per RA6970 as amended), operates it for a certain period of time after which the asset is transferred to the LGU. The private party is allowed to collect user fees to recover its costs and earn a reasonable rate of return on its investment. The LGU and the BOT proponent negotiate on the risk sharing.

Joint Venture Agreement

Under a joint venture agreement, the LGU and the private party share in the risks of the project and operate the system through a shared management and organizational structure.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES And GUIDING PRINCIPLES

CHAPTER

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES

This chapter looks into some of the major implementation and policy issues and problems surrounding water and sanitation, which, for purposes of this Resource Book, are being presented in two categories: LWUA/water district level and LGU level. LGUs can respond to these issues and problems by taking into account certain guiding principles, which will later be spelled out within the Chapter. Chapter 4 further illustrates how these guiding principles are being applied at the field level.

â?&#x2122; IMPLEMENTATION AND POLICY ISSUES â&#x2014;&#x2014; LWUA AND WATER DISTRICT LEVEL Water districts are public water supply utilities outside Metro Manila that are responsible for water supply and sewerage development and operation and management [Level III service] in urban areas. A Water District is a local corporate entity governed by a Board of Directors appointed by the local government, and managed by a General Manager appointed by the Water District Board. The creation of a water district is based on a transfer of ownership of assets from the local government. Water districts are established under the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA). Funding is a major issue. Funds generated internally by the LWUA and water districts are often limited. The lack of funds is one major reason why the LWUA provides loans to only a few viable water districts, and why water districts find it extremely difficult to pay their loan obligations to the LWUA. The result is a loss of financial viability for both the LWUA and water districts.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 3

The relatively low-cost loans provided by the LWUA have also discouraged water districts from trying to access private sector resources (bank loans). The problem is further compounded by the fact that the LWUA no longer receives any budget from the national budget. This means less money allocated for operation, maintenance, and upgrading of existing water systems. Because the LWUA and the water districts lack the necessary capital to finance systems upgrading and expansion, they are unable to meet their coverage targets. There are three experiences of water districts featured in this resource book: Davao Water District, Manila Water and Maynilad. The first is semi-public, while the last two involve the private sector through the consignment arrangement. LGUs wishing to know more about water districts can find more information in Chapter 5.

â&#x2014;&#x2014; LGU LEVEL There are five major LGU issues related to providing water supply and sanitation services: Institutional Because water and sanitation are not the only problems confronting communities, water and sanitation projects must compete for LGU scarce resources. Likewise, communities compete with each other for water resources. Yet at the same time, different water uses (potable, irrigation, and industrial) compete with each other. To make matters worse, inadequate attention given to sanitation issues imperils the health and environmental benefits of an improved water supply. Since water and sanitation projects are normally viewed as high-profile development projects, unscrupulous politicians can use them as a political tool. Thus, it is important to regard water and sanitation projects as more than an infrastructure problem and repackage them as social enterprises.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

Technical In many instances, water and sanitation systems are designed with little rational basis mostly because there is a real lack of knowledge about various low-cost technology options. As a result, inappropriate technology is often applied, which can mean higher project costs. The rising cost of project inputs, graft and corruption, improper operation and maintenance of the system, and the need or tendency to obtain water from more distant sources also contribute immensely to the rising cost of water supply service. Thus, poverty stricken communities and areas (specifically in areas without surface or ground water), should give serious thought to using rainwater and technologies to reduce their investment on water systems. Likewise, there is a need to develop project designs and options for water and sanitation projects in coastal areas. Financial LGU financing for large-scale water systems is very limited (e.g., there are strict limitations on LGU borrowing) as sanitation and sewerage projects are simply not a priority. In addition, capacity building is not regarded as an important investment cost. Instead, there is a preference for short-term, mostly heavily subsidized projects that yield also short-term returns. Exacerbating the problem is the publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s indifference to rising water costs primarily because water is regarded as a free resource. Because rate increases are often viewed with suspicion and associated with graft, some social preparation may be necessary to change this mindset. Although water must be affordable, there are expensive water systems that charge very high water tariffs. Such water systems ultimately tend to discriminate against those who cannot afford the cost of water. As shown in the case of the Magdalena Water System Project in Laguna, the need

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 3

to recoup investment and generate profit ultimately failed to provide the community with affordable water (Chapter 4). Environmental Water sources are quickly being depleted due to environmental degradation. In many areas, saltwater and pollutants have seeped into groundwater sources, resulting in poorer water quality. Meanwhile, unabated population growth and inadequate provision for wastewater management contribute to increasing waste and wastewater problems. These problems eventually lead to water source and environmental degradation. Socio-cultural Increasing population puts an enormous demand on water resources. What makes this worse is that only a minority has good access to water. Likewise, there is a growing mentality among people that water closet toilets, washing machines, and the like are the idealâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;thus negating the option of using more appropriate, alternative, and less costly technologies.

â?&#x2122; ADEQUATE WATER AND SANITATION FOR ALL: GUIDING PRINCIPLES The assessment of the water sector in the Philippines is based on the Dublin Principles4 that should serve as overall guides in the delivery of water and sanitation for all. The first principle states that management of water and sanitation should be comprehensive and is within the framework of a national water strategy that reflects social, economic, and environmental objectives. Formulation of this strategy should be participatory in manner, and should be based on an accurate assessment of the water resources of the area. Furthermore, strategies should take into account the impact of infrastructure projects and programs across the different sectors.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

The second principle deals with the institutions at the national and regional levels that manage water resources. These institutions should plan, issue and monitor water permits, collect and analyze data, and regulate water services, with respect to pricing and quality of service. These institutional efforts should emphasize decentralization, stakeholder participation, and gender considerations. The third principle, named the economic and social principle, states that water should be treated as an economic good. Subsidies should be transparent and justified; cost recovery policies should be clear; economic instruments should be used to provide incentives for performance by providers and efficiency by users; and, special efforts should be made to meet the needs of the poor. There are four guiding principles for LGUs and other groups that are interested in pursuing water supply and sanitation projects. These guiding principles help LGUs to identify the general activities that are necessary to ensure the success of their water and sanitation projects. These principles were culled from many experiences in providing water and sanitation to communities across the globe.

Dublin Principles 1. Comprehensive management of water and sanitation falls within the framework of national water strategy 2. National and regional institutions that manage water resources shall emphasize decentralization, participation and gender 3. Water should be treated as an economic good

As articulated by the Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF), these guiding principle are: (1) ensure sustainability of potable water supply and sanitation services, (2) ensure effective implementation of water and sanitation projects, (3) develop a culture of operation and maintenance, and (4) employ viable institutional arrangements.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 3

◗ ENSURING SUSTAINABILITY OF POTABLE WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION SERVICES From experience and study over the years, the PCWS-ITNF has found that the common elements of project sustainability are: (a) using appropriate technology; (b) fostering community participation; (c) and ensuring transparent and conscientious resource management. Appropriate technology For any given community situation, there is usually a wide choice of technology options for water supply provision: Water source – ground like springs and wells, surface water (check gates and dam reservoirs), rainwater Water treatment – disinfection (use of chlorinators, ultraviolet, and slow sand filter); use of settler tanks and filter areas to remove turbidity; removal of dissolved and unwanted substances (desalination, charcoal filtration, flocculation) Water transmission – motorized or manual pumps, public taps (community faucets), household connections Service level – taps at source (level 1), public tap stands (level 2), and individual household connections (level 3). Type of intervention – do nothing at all; build, expand, or rehabilitate a system; have various sources, systems and technologies serve a community. For sanitation, one has the various wet and dry on-site technologies (human waste is contained, treated, and released into the environment at the site of its generation), and offsite technologies (human waste is conveyed to a central treatment facility).5

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

For the two-thirds of Filipinos who live in rural and semi-rural areas, the onsite sanitation options available to them seem to be affordable enough. However, for the rest who live in urban areas and whose wastewater can only be treated off-site, a per capita construction cost of P4,000 to P7,000 will translate into unacceptable sewage treatment charges of P200 to P350 per household, per month, if present West-originated technologies are adopted. Treatment options that are less expensive should thus be developed. The most appropriate technology is the one that delivers the most benefits at the least cost. Thus, one important way of determining the most appropriate combination is through the cost-benefit ratio. Costs are easy to estimate: depreciation, interest on investment, and operating costs. The environmental impact of the project also has to be taken into account: the disturbance caused by construction of the system; the value of the water extracted from the ecosystem; and the cost of mitigating the increased wastewater that is generated. The type of technology to be used is also determined by the capacity of the source.

Parameters for Evaluating WatSan Technologies a. What savings are made in the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s waterfetching efforts? b. How much household labor is saved? c. What are the benefits on health? d. What livelihood is created in the use of a particular technology?

Benefits need to be more thoroughly examined. Each technology option has to be investigated using the following parameters: (a) what savings are made in the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s water-fetching efforts? (b) how much household labor is saved? (c) what are the benefits on health? and (d) what livelihood is created in the use of a particular technology? Aside from using cost-benefit analysis to ascertain which appropriate technology to use, it is also important to establish who will receive these benefits in the community. Ideally, everybody should equally benefit. If this is not possible, the poor, the women, the very young, and very old should benefit the most since they are most disadvantaged. S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 3

The technology must also be knowledge and human resources intensive rather than capital intensive; local, rather than imported resource intensive; and operated and maintained by local residents. Hence, the strategy is to maximize the use of local resources and assets. Hence, it essential for key stakeholders (which include the local government, the community, and technical people) to acquire the necessary technological aptitude, proficiencies, and confidence needed for the construction, operation, and maintenance of water and sanitation systems. This can be done through training, research and study, and hands-on exposure. The proper selection and design of technology can save 30 percent or more of project construction and running costs. Community participation If a project is to be sustainable, it is important to get the community involved from the very start. The community must express a need for such a project and they must be informed of the available technology options and their implications at the project planning stage. They should be allowed to make an informed choice from these options so that they will â&#x20AC;&#x153;ownâ&#x20AC;? the project. It is equally important for the community to acquire the skills in the operation and maintenance of the system, not just through training, but also from their direct involvement in the project. A community has numerous local resources that they can reasonably volunteer for use in the project, such as time, manpower, materials, finances, management structures, right-of-way acquisition, supervision and monitoring, the security of project personnel, materials and equipment. The use of these local resources not only reduces the cost of the project for the LGU, but also indicates: (a) the importance placed by the community on the project, and (b) the willingness of the community to sustain the project.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

To facilitate community participation, the political structures (mayor, vicemayor, barangay captains, and councils) and political (LGOO and MPDC) and technical officers of LGUs need to acquire the necessary skills for effectively engaging the community in a rational manner. These skills include developing LGU communication skills and instilling a development orientation among LGU workers. Technical officers should be able to explain and convey technical ideas and plans in a way that the community can understand. Enhanced LGU capacity for community organizing can strengthen peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s involvement in water and sanitation projects. Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s involvement is important because community participation can save project costs by 30 percent. The participation of women and other marginalized groups in the community should be ensured. Both men and women from poor communities must be mobilized to take part in the community management system. This provides them opportunities to meaningfully participate in the betterment of their lives.

Graft and inefficiency do not only waste government resources, they also perpetuate a culture of corruption and distrust of government. People will not sustain projects and systems that are tainted by graft

Organizing for sanitation, meanwhile, is more difficult than organizing for water supply. In a community in Indonesia, it took two decades to improve sanitation coverage from 17 percent to 85 percent. Yet one cannot go around sanitation issues. Aside from linking hygiene, water supply, and the environment with sanitation, a possible strategy would be to make sanitation more attractive by linking it to resource recovery.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

Transparent and conscientious resource and project management Graft and inefficiency do not only waste government resources, they also perpetuate a culture of corruption and distrust of government. People will not sustain projects and systems that are tainted by graft. There is no other way of fostering good governance than for the LGU to lead by example. LGUs can facilitate transparency by: 1. Ensuring accountable and transparent records and the free flow of information. 2. Putting in place financial and procurement management. 3. Being informed about current and reasonable prices of project inputs obtained through fair and thorough canvassing; when and where possible, involving the community in the canvassing and procuring of materials. 4. Ensuring community participation and the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to understand the project and discern values. 5. Timely and thorough monitoring (especially on financial and procurement matters) 6. Maintaining check-and-balance systems. 7. Adopting transformational political leadership, that is, emphasizing on meeting the general communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests over individual needs. Transparent and conscientious resource and project management can reduce project costs and increase sustainability by 30 percent or more. The matrix on the next page offers a framework on how LGUs can address specific water and sanitation issues and concerns through appropriate technology, community participation, and transparent and conscientious resource and project management.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

HOW SUSTAINABILITY FACTORS CAN ADDRESS WATER SANITATION ISSUES AND CONCERNS

Issue/ Concern

Sustainability Factor Appropriate Technology

Community Participation

Depleting water sources

Watershed management Multiple water sources Water conservation technologies

Community-based watershed management Water conservation education

Deteriorating water quality

Watershed management Multiple water sources and water conservation technologies Water treatment technologies

Education and use of proper waste disposal methods

Increasing waste and wastewater problems

Waste and wastewater disposal technologies

Same as above

Increasing population

Designs to account for long term population increase Multiple water source technologies

Rising material expectations among people

Less materialist technologies

Consumer education

Transparent and Conscientious Resource and Project Management

Less materialist attitudes

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

Issue/ Concern

Sustainability Factor Appropriate Technology

Community Participation

Transparent & Conscientious Resource & Project Management

Some have very good access to water, others have less

Thorough analysis of social equity in sharing benefits and costs

Community-based, propoor consensus on who will have priority in water service Cost-sharing

Gaps in the knowledge and practice of appropriate technologies

Continued upgrading of knowledge and capability for the practice of appropriate technologies

Information and skills dissemination in the community

Proficiency of people who will implement projects using these technologies

Rising investment costs of water supply service

Selection of technologies with the greatest costbenefit ratio

Community counterparts Financial recovery measures

Avoidance of graft and inefficiency in projects Good financial and procurement management

Unacceptability to the public of the rising cost of this basic social service

Appraisal by the community of technologies

Consumer education Appraisal by the community of rational basis of prices, technologies and water tariff (or communitybased formulated and approved water rates

Complete transparency during, and efficiency of, project implementation

Water supply and sanitation competing for resources with other governmental responsibilities

Selection of most appropriate technologies using cost-benefit measures and prioritizing this over other government expenditures

Community counterpart Financial recovery measures

Avoidance of graft and inefficiency in project Good financial and procurement management

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

Issue/ Concern

Sustainability Factor Appropriate Technology

Community Participation

Competing uses of water Comparative costbenefit analyses Provision for payment by users for environmental impact

Community consensus on resource-sharing

Inadequate attention given to sanitation

Promotion of appropriate sanitation solutions

Promotion of sanitation awareness and facilitating access of households to building their sanitation systems and changing hygiene behavior

Inadequate operation and maintenance of water supply and sanitation systems

Low-cost, appropriate operation and management solutions

Emergence of representative, democratic and responsible communitybased operation and management organization

Training

Transparent & Conscientious Resource & Project Management

Responsible, responsive, efficient, transparent and graft-free administration of system by operation and management organization.

◗ EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER AND SANITATION PROJECTS In order for project implementation to be effective, each of the key sustainability factors (i.e., appropriate technology, community participation, conscientious and transparent management) must be applied at each stage of the project. The following is a simple run-down of what should be accomplished per project stage.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

Planning and technology selection stage Preparation of several plan options, each examining social equity, economic and environmental costs and benefits Community is apprised of the plan options with the highest cost-benefit ratios; their consequences; their roles and responsibilities (e.g., counterparts during construction and sustainable and rational tariff structure) so that they can make an informed choice of the most optimal plan Plan should include provisions for transparent and accountable management Community organizing stage Community accepts their roles and responsibilities in the project A representative and responsible body (to be involved in project implementation and to assume responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the system) is elected and trained The body is involved in monitoring project implementation Construction stage Use of appropriate construction technologies The community provides counterparts (e.g., materials, manpower, equipment, right-of-way, safeguarding of project assets, management, and monitoring) Transparent and conscientious construction management, especially in procurement and financial matters

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

Operation and maintenance stage Use of appropriate operation and maintenance technologies Body accepts responsibility for operation and maintenance and is trained for such, along with financial and administrative management skills Democratic management and safeguards to make sure that transparent and conscientious system management is institutionalized

◗ DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF WATER AND SANITATION SYSTEMS Operation and maintenance planning should start at the design stage of a project rather than be an afterthought. Too often, much of the water sector is construction-oriented rather than operations and maintenance-oriented. A lot of money can be spent all at once during construction, while operation and maintenance is a continuing, yet involved and low-budget, activity. The community should be willing to accept the responsibilities for operation and maintenance: to pay the sustainable and rational water tariffs and to select a democratic and responsible communitybased operation and maintenance organization. It is important for this organization to be willing to acquire the necessary technical, financial, and administrative skills. Outside resources for operation and maintenance should likewise be identified (replacement parts, equipment, services, information and knowledge). With conscientious attention given to operation and maintenance, water and sanitation systems can serve the communities for their full service life of up to 50 years and even expand to meet future community needs. (Proper turn-over of projects from the funding agency or LGU to the communitybeneficiary should help ensure that water associations are held responsible for the operations and maintenance of projects.)

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

â&#x2014;&#x2014; EMPLOYING VIABLE INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS LGUs can explore the various institutional, financial and management arrangements for water and sanitation as prescribed by NEDA Resolution No. 6 (series of 1996) featured in Chapter 2 of this Resource Book. These viable institutional options include LGU-financed and managed, private sector participation or privatization (e.g., service contract, management contract, lease contract, concession contract, Build-Operation-Transfer, and joint venture agreement), and creation of a Local Water District and/or LGU Company. The Resource Book particularly highlights two options in water and sanitation systems provision: privatization and community-managed models. LGUs seem to be very interested in these models, even if the NEDA has not identified the latter as a management model for water and sanitation projects. Privatization refers to the provision of publicly funded services and activities in the areas of social services, welfare, and employment by non-governmental entities.6 Although there can be many types of privatization, the most well known is the corporate privatization model. The Magdalena case study is an example of corporate privatization. Community-managed Water Systems Community management has become the leading concept for implementing water supply systems in rural areas in developing countries. It was seen as an answer to the large-scale breakdown of water supply systems and the failure of governments to either provide clean water or devise a system where other agencies would supply it reliably and consistently. The idea that communities should operate and maintain water supply systems themselves came partly from a growing skepticism in the idea that only central governments can secure the needs of their populations, and partly from the conviction that communities have the skills and motivation to meet their own essential needs.7

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

Community-managed water supply systems work well when people are involved, when their needs are clearly established, when the capacity building is built into the process, and the local management structures are emphasized. Other enhancing factors include: prior and informed consultation, clarity of ownership and responsibilities, indigenous leadership, and personal and collective responsibilities in carrying out the work ahead. However, experience from the field reveals that there are some considerations in implementing community-based water systems. The following are the major characteristics of a community-managed water project: Participation in decision-making between the support groups (NGOs, LGUs) and primary stakeholders (user groups) is crucial. This should take place in a continual process of shared decision-making at all stages of the project cycle. Participation helps the community develop its sense of responsibility and control over the local operation, maintenance, and management of the water or sanitation system. However, participation should not be limited to labor and money contributions. Community members are able to make informed choices in terms of choice and location of water/sanitation system, technology and level of service, operation, maintenance and management. Capacity building is an output, especially the development of skills in management, planning, analysis, decision-making, and problem solving. Provision for the transfer of responsibility is built in from the beginning of the project, clearly recognizing that this is a process, not an event. Officers should not hold the same positions for a very long time. Paid jobs in service operation and management are created wherever possible. Reliance on volunteer labor is reduced or eliminated. Technology is kept very simple to maintain and repair, where possible, with a reliable supply of spare parts and technical assistance available locally.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

Approximate Cost/Level of Effort for Implementing a Community-managed Water Project Establishing a community-managed project need not be too expensive. Investments in capacity building are a necessary ingredient to increase the sustainability of a water and sanitation project. While cost for community organizing (CO) work and skills training may vary, the following needs to be considered when replicating a similar approach in other areas: 1. The hiring of a full time CO worker who will initially receive training and guidance on how to organize the men and women of a barangay into a viable user's group that will be involved in the decision-making processes of a water and sanitation project. 2. Adequate budget for barangay level trainings and follow-up capability-building activities. 3. Continuous supervision and monitoring that focus on sustainability indicators both at the community level (users' group level) and support group level (LGU or federation). 4. Adequate time to allow the community association to develop and consolidate. The time frame for this kind of project varies. For instance, the time frame of six months to one year helped significantly to sustain the momentum of one community association in managing its water systems. 5. Support for other activities such as networking and linkage building. The continuous flow of visitors to the demonstration project plus the assistance required from the other barangays kept the community association active and alert. These kinds of support from other communities served as a challenge to the community association to run its affairs well.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

The indicators of successful community-managed water and sanitation services are:

Effectively sustained functioning system/service with effective financing and management. Effective use that is safe and environmentally sound. Demand-responsive service. Division of burdens and benefits.

The Doña Flavia, Casay and New Bulatukan associations exemplify a community-managed institutional arrangement. In these cases, integrating and investing in social infrastructure development and capability building in water-sanitation projects facilitate the growth of viable local organizations that could eventually take over the responsibility of managing, operating, and maintaining the water delivery system. Also clear in both cases is the involvement of LGUs in the development of local organizations and in the provision of continuing local support to these organizations. This harmonious relationship between the LGUs and the local organizations has facilitated the growth of viable and sustainable water and sanitation systems that provide affordable and efficient water and sanitation services. Social Privatization

Social privatization Social privatization is another approach to privatization that seems to have emerged particularly as a reaction to corporate privation, yet is distinct from community-managed models. Social privatization involves running public services as an enterprise but with an orientation to plow profits back in pursuit of social objectives. Advocates of social privatization are concerned that large and, in some instances, transnational corporations have taken over water and sanitation service provision in many countries with increasingly negative repercussions to poor segments of the population. The discourse on social privatization, however, continues to evolve.

involves running public services as an enterprise but with an orientation to plow profits back in pursuit of social objectives

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

3 WATER AND SANITATION

As will be shown in Chapter 4, the experience of Darangan exemplifies a socially privatized institutional arrangement. The Darangan case shows communities being directly responsible for the ownership, management, operation, and maintenance of their water and sanitation systems. This experience has resulted in the development of viable water and sanitation systems, as well as in the growth of strong social organizations. The process of social privatization has the potential to contribute to poverty reduction and can lead to entrepreneurship and strong local democracy. Social privatization features:

Participatory decision-making Community consultation Access to relevant information Socially sensitive tariff structure ensuring that the poor can afford their basic water requirement Legal identity Ownership of the water supply system and the process of acquiring the system and its actual management Institutional autonomy and protection from political interference Venue for livelihood opportunities and the practice of local democracy Investment in long-term community building relationships Partnership with NGOs and civil society groups Continuing education Deliberate efforts to enable the poor to benefit from the water service

In social privatization, it is the community that shoulders the cost of owning, managing, operating, and maintaining water and sanitation systems, including the cost of building the community's sense of ownership over the process. The water users themselves own the service. Thus, social privatization also presents a new dimension to resource ownership-from the traditional centralized, huge water utility ownership to the several user-owned utility system.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

IMPLEMENTATION & POLICY ISSUES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3

Social privatization maintains its self-help character and mechanisms for community consultation and participation. It does not encourage the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few. As a result, it promotes a more equitable distribution of resources. Social privatization benefits the poor. The social privatization process makes communities more confident about their own abilities and they are able to overcome their apathy toward government programs. The learning opportunities can contribute to community empowerment and the creation of a healthy environment. Community Management versus Social Privatization Social privatization and community management of water and sanitation systems have many elements and characteristics in common. In some instances it has been said that social privatization is an advanced form of community-managed systems. Both systems present the merits and advantages of several user-owned systems in contrast to a centralized, huge water utility, which is susceptible to political interference and even terrorism. However, community-managed and social privatization systems significantly differ on the source of the investment involved in setting up the system. Community-managed systems can be funded from LGUs, from civil society organizations, and from bilateral or multilateral donors. It has been observed that since the investment did not come from the community, the motivation to generate income that would sustain and expand operations is consequently not as strong. On the other hand, social privatization involves systems that are installed using financial resources partly or wholly raised by the community. Because community resources are at stake, the entrepreneurial spirit is usually more pronounced. Hence, the group (usually a cooperative or an association) strives to operate the water system efficiently and effectively to generate profit that can be used for social ends.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION

CHAPTER

his section of the resource book highlights the experiences of five different water and sanitation projects. The first three case studies (Doña Flavia, Casay, and New Bulatukan) illustrate the community-managed water supply system; the next case study (Darangan Water Service Development Cooperative) demonstrates the social privatization approach, and the last case study (Magdalena) shows an example of the privatization approach.

The following are some of the key lessons and exemplary practices featured in the five case studies.

Social privatization is an alternative to privatization or the corporate control over water. There is a need to increase the autonomy and accountability of service providers. Incentives, regulation, and awareness for sustainable water use must be developed. The use of shared water resources and developing cooperation must be managed. Water information, consultation and partnerships need to be enhanced. Preparing and adapting a water policy and action program involves investing in capacity building, monitoring and learning.

Not all the cases featured in this section are good practices that will work in any situation. Rather, they show different ways of responding to institutional, financial, technical, and socio-cultural issues that local government units have to deal with when trying to deliver water and sanitation services.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

Community-Managed Approach Cases DOÑA FLAVIA WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION ASSOCIATION (DFWSA) Contact Information Coordinator MPDC Office Doña Flavia, Municipality of San Luis, Agusan del Sur DFWSA Chairman Doña Flavia, Municipality of San Luis, Agusan del Sur Tel: 085-8300078 or 0919-5400360

BRIEF DESCRIPTION Barangay Doña Flavia, considered the commercial center of the municipality of San Luis, is the most populated barangay. Yet, access to safe water in the community was very limited due to that fact that only eight shallow wells provided for the area’s potable water needs. The challenge was to expand the community’s access to safe water by introducing a water and sanitation system that was creative, gender sensitive, highly participatory, and with a high potential for sustainability and replication.

A budget of P500,000 was allocated for the water supply infrastructure. The municipal government contracted a private construction firm to develop and install the water system. As construction of the water system progressed, capacity building activities were also conducted. Capacity building was a major component of the project, which was intended for the community involved as well as the local government. The empowerment of disadvantaged groups in the communities, particularly the women, was particularly emphasized. A total of 2,687 people or 429 households were expected to benefit from the project. Since it began operation in 1998, the Doña Flavia project has been replicated in eight other barangays in San Luis where water supply and sanitation associations were also established. Through the support of the provincial government, these associations later formed themselves into a federation, which served as a forum for community members to dialogue directly with the government and with private entities on issues and problems related to water and sanitation.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Community-Managed Approach DOÑA FLAVIA

Today, the Doña Flavia project is considered a successful initiative in building partnerships among the local government unit (both at the municipality and provincial levels), the community, civil society organizations, donors, and to a certain extent, even the private sector.

HIGHLIGHTS Key features The DFWSA was ultimately responsible for the following:

Efficient functioning of the water system (spare parts, special skills and equipment) Optimal utilization of the system Further training in accounting and systems management Expansion of system when capacity is needed Rehabilitation, when required Water quality surveillance Resource mobilization

The Doña Flavia experience highlights the importance of capacity building in a water and sanitation project. It features the many activities that go into the capacity building process, and how these activities eventually precipitate the formation of larger grassroots organizations and networks. The DFWSA experience likewise highlights the need to build the capacities of communities as well as the capacities of LGUs. This is deemed necessary because LGUs are not limited to providing logistical support for community-managed projects; LGUs also function as social partners of the community. It is this government-community relationship that spells success and sustainability.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

DOÑA FLAVIA

Community-Managed Approach

Role of the LGU The LGUs concerned took the initiative by not only supporting the DFWSA project, but also advocating the replication of the project in other areas of the province. The provincial government of Agusan del Sur, through its Provincial Water and Sanitation Center (PWSC), played a key role in promoting expanded LGU and community-based water and sanitation projects within the province. In 1999, two documents were prepared by the PWSC. These documents now form part of the framework on how water and sanitation projects are to be implemented in the Agusan del Sur province and municipalities. These documents are also being considered in other water sanitation projects of the national government. Required Capacities Training and continuous learning are vital to enhancing the capacities of the community and the LGU. In the case of Doña Flavia, three-day training and seminar-workshops were conducted by the PCWS-ITNF. These included: Orientation training and action planning workshop for community organizers, which focused in identifying community issues and needs that will be incorporated into action plans. Trainor’s training seminar-workshop for WATSAN project implementors, which covered topics such as basic skills on WATSAN O&M and strategies for technology transfer. Community training on organizational management, operation and maintenance, sanitation and hygiene promotion, which focused on the technical aspects of managing the water facilities, computing for water tariffs covering operation and maintenance funds, and an orientation on sanitation and hygiene promotion activities.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Community-Managed Approach DOÑA FLAVIA

The training covered the technical and administrative aspects of running a water supply system. The training also included the social aspects involved in forming, expanding, and sustaining organizations that will continue to look after the water system for generations to come.

IMPLEMENTING GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT REPLICATION Surfacing of issues/problems. Develop and initiate systems that help identify potential and existing problems, and how these should be handled. In particular, there is a need to focus on risks, root causes of problems, and issues concerning gender and poverty during the establishment and operations of the system. Other areas to look into are: (a) user contributions during implementation, (b) user voice and choice in planning and designing the water supply system, (c) satisfaction of user demand, (d) ratio of user-perceived costs/benefits for men/women and rich/poor, (e) division of burdens and benefits. Process documentation. Continuously document the processes involved (e.g., capacity building, administrative and implementation procedures). The lessons learned from field experiences will be very useful to the water sector. This kind of documentation will help clarify issues, concerns, and approaches in the field of community-managed water and sanitation programs. Provision of needed technical inputs on issues/problems identified. Technical inputs are needed for issues and problems in the following areas: the design, construction, and O&M of the water supply system, community organizing, and training. Some social preparation is needed to make the community willing to manage and operate the water system, and pay regular tariffs for operation and maintenance. Social preparation involves providing the people with easy to understand information. It also means evaluating—with the community—which of the technical options will benefit the greatest number of people at the least cost.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

DOÑA FLAVIA

Community-Managed Approach

Creation of a support group/office. Utilize local resource persons trained on the job. Identifying possible solutions provides clues in linking solutions to resources. Community initiatives for water supply and sanitation projects should be supported by government and non-government organizations. The support from others makes people more confident in their own abilities and overcomes the apathy felt towards government programs. Access to adequate water supply and sanitation is essential to a life of dignity and humane existence. Identification of next “action steps”. Continuing education, learning opportunities, and work planning are required when implementing a similar project. On the other hand, capacity building requires separate investments in resources, time, and personnel. Time scales for construction work and capacity building are different. Meanwhile, the staff/implementors should prepare an exit plan so that responsibility for program continuity is passed on to capable community leaders. Other stakeholders such as the LGUs, NGOs, etc. should also be clear about the phase out plans. Provisions for sustainability. The implementation of the Doña Flavia project had sustainability in mind right at the very start. Sustainability of projects may be measured in terms of seven main factors or components as follows:

Participation Leadership Capability building Equity and access Revenue generation and cost recovery Use of local resources Environmental stewardship

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Community-Managed Approach DOÑA FLAVIA

CHAMPIONS/ADVOCATES/PROMOTERS Provincial and municipal LGU officers, the Municipal Planning and Development Office, the Provincial Water and Sanitation Center, the PCWS-ITNF, the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program, and the DFWSSA.

RESULTS Benefits include: (a) creative display of local governance initiative, (b) formation of viable community organization with strong democratic values, and (c) enhanced and sustained water services for 429 households in Doña Flavia. Other results included: 1. The Doña Flavia model was replicated in eight other barangays in San Luis where level 2 water projects were being developed. The municipal administration chose to prioritize the provision of basic water services and has tried to replicate the community management model for new water projects. 2. The officers and key actors in the Doña Flavia association are now being tapped as “big brothers/sisters,” recognized for providing a good model for a water supply project. They are now assisting the LGUs in setting up community management systems for water supply projects in other barangays. 3. Formation of a municipal federation of barangay waterworks and sanitation associations (BWSA).

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

Community-Managed Approach Cases CASAY RURAL WATER AND SANITATION ASSOCIATION, INC. Contact Information

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Casay Rural Water and Sanitation Association, Inc. Barangay Casay, Dalaguete, Cebu

The Casay Rural Water and Sanitation Association, Inc. (CARWASA)8 operates in Barangay Casay in Dalaguete, Cebu. It began in 1983 as a waterworks project of the provincial government of Cebu and USAID. In 1984, the operation of the water supply project was transferred to CARWASA. However, the transfer of operations to the water association had been ambiguous. The association was not prepared to handle the administrative, managerial, and technical aspects of running the water system. As a result, there had been no real income from 1984 to 1992. The problem was resolved when non-government organizations like the University of San Carlos Water Resource Center and Plan International worked with Casay residents to strengthen their water association and to acquire the skills in repairing, operating, and maintaining their water supply system. The Provincial Planning and Development Office of the Dalaguete LGU and the Dalaguete Water District helped by providing logistical support (e.g., installation of water meters). Today, CARWASA manages its own water system and is in the process of getting a water right from the National Water Resources Board. Its monthly collection ranges from P50,000 to P60,000. The CARWASA water supply system is a 210-foot deep well with a submersible pump, a cylindrical type reservoir with a capacity of 18,000 gallons, and gravity flow distribution. The system sits on land that was purchased by CARWASA through its own funds generated mostly from water tariffs. Through a P50,000 grant from Plan International, CARWASA is

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Community-Managed Approach CASAY

also currently engaged in a watershed program, which yields a P10,000 monthly income for the association. Although the system was designed to serve 400 households, the system currently serves a load close to 540 households. As a result, water shortage is now being experienced.

HIGHLIGHTS Key Features Funds for the waterworks came from the USAID, half of which was a grant and the other half a loan counterpart of the provincial government. When the waterworks became operational in 1984, CARWASA started paying monthly amortizations of P1,226 to the provincial government of Cebu. For 20 years, starting in 1984, CARWASA is required to pay the P422,700 loan with an interest rate of four percent per annum. However, providing funds for water projects and transferring ownership and management of such projects to the community proved to be insufficient. It was also important to prepare local management structures and technical personnel who will effectively operate the project. This was where training for institution- and capacity-building was vital. Role of LGUs The provincial government of Cebu initiated the water project. It provided the funds for the construction of the water facility and later, also funded the expansion and improvement of the system.

FACTORS Required Capacities CARWASA needed to continually undergo skills training in repairing, operating, and maintaining their water supply system, especially after its water service expansion project in 1992. Continued local government support was also necessary, especially in terms of logistical support. In 1992, the provincial government was instrumental in improving and expanding the water services of CARWASA.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

CASAY

Community-Managed Approach

Delivery The provincial government of Cebu and USAID provided the funds to construct the water facility. Upon completion, the management and operation of the water facility was transferred to CARWASA. Afterward, the University of San Carlos Water Resource Center and PLAN International provided skills development and institutional strengthening.

CHAMPIONS/ADVOCATES/PROMOTERS The provincial government through its Provincial Planning and Development Office, CARWASA, the University of San Carlos Water Resource Center, the Cebu Federation of Waterworks Association, Inc., and Plan International.

RESULTS The project provided good quality water to a total of 539 household connections and several communal faucets in strategic locations. The monthly collection ranged from P50,000 to P60,000 and income was about P10,000 a month. CARWASA had diversified its initiatives. It soon expects to earn income from the mango trees watershed project.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Community-Managed Approach Cases NEW BULATUKAN SPRING DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION BRIEF DESCRIPTION Contact Information

New Bulatukan is a community of over 1,350 indigenous peoples and Christian settlers in Makilala, North Cotabato province. In 1998, the community applied for a special grant for the construction of their own water supply system. This move was a response to the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s problem of accessing safe drinking water. The new water system was envisioned to reduce the time spent in fetching drinking water and to facilitate the protection of uphill spring sources and creeks.

New Bulatukan Spring Development Association Barangay New Bulatukan, Makilala, North Cotabato

In 1999, the SZOPAD Social Fund9 provided for the project cost of P985,632. Although a private contractor was tasked with the actual construction of the water system facility, the residents of New Bulatukan provided some of the labor, food, lodging, and other needed requirements as construction work progressed. Upon completion of the water system, the community, which by then had formed itself into the New Bulatukan Spring Development Association, took over the management, operation, and maintenance of the water system facility. The new water system currently provides water to 140 households in New Bulatukan. The communal water supply system in New Bulatukan consists of a spring box, about 1,300 meters of 63-millimeter transmission pipe, two suspended crossings, distribution pipe, a ground level reservoir and ten communal tap stands.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

NEW BULATUKAN

Community-Managed Approach

HIGHLIGHTS Features and Components The experience highlights the potential of government-community partnership and involvement in expanding and improving water service delivery to specific communities. Yet the New Bulatukan experience also shows that communal water systems work if given the proper support: (a) institution- and capacity-building as an integral component of the project, (b) developing local management structures, (c) ensuring the use of appropriate water system technology, among others.

FACTORS Required Capacities A year after the installation of the water system, the water association underwent extensive training under the guidance of the PCWS-ITNF. After the training, the association formally registered with the SEC to gain legal identity. Once it was able to do so, the association planned to apply for a water permit from the National Water Resources Board (NWRB). The move will allow the water association to have exclusive rights over the use of the spring source. Part of the responsibilities of the New Bulatukan Spring Development Association is overseeing the operation and maintenance of the communal water system. Specific people are assigned as caretakers. Funding for operation and maintenance are sourced from the monthly dues of the members and fundraising activities such as raffles, organization dues, and fines. Basic plumbing tools are available in the community, which were purchased using association funds.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Community-Managed Approach

NEW BULATUKAN

Required Resources The SZOPAD Social Fund provided much of the logistical and financial requirements to complete the projects. However, the community contributed their time, labor, food, lodging and other needed requirements as the construction work progressedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;estimated to equal five percent of the total project cost.

CHAMPIONS/ADVOCATES/PROMOTERS The SZOPAD Social Fund, local government officials, PCWS-ITNF, and New Bulatukan Spring Development Association.

RESULTS The New Bulatukan experience shows how the community can acquire and manage its own water supply service and how this can benefit the poor. Other communities can learn that things work well when people are involved, when their needs are clearly established, when the capacity building is built into the process, and the local management structures are emphasized. The new water system is also helping people improve their livelihood options. This motivates the community to properly manage its communal water system.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

CASE STUDY 1 Community-Managed Approach Cases Social Privatization Approach Case DARANGAN WATER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE (DWSDC) BRIEF DESCRIPTION Contact Information

The DWSDC is the first water cooperative in the country. It has since been recognized for its work, receiving the most outstanding service cooperative award in 1996. It is recognized by the government and by the cooperative community as one of the more innovative and dynamic cooperatives in the country. Its services are competitive; it is a self-help organization whose funding comes from member shares, fees, savings, and patronage; it has diversified its services to its members; and has benefited not only its members, but its community and other water cooperatives as well.

DWSDC Manager 83 National Road, Darangan Darangan, Binangonan, Rizal Province Tel: 652-1588

In 1968, members of the Darangan barangay council identified water as a primary concern of the community. In an effort to raise awareness of water supply among Darangan residents, a series of community consultations were conducted by the barangay council, which later precipitated the formation of the cooperative. Through a P75,000 grant from the provincial government, the DWSDC was able to purchase and install a submersible pump and motor for its water supply project. In 1970, the first public faucet in Darangan was opened to the public. Water meters and household connections were later installed in 1971 with the help of the Presidential Arm on Community Development. In 1992, the increase in the population of Darangan prompted the cooperative to put up an additional pumping station and a water tank. Today, the DWSDC has diversifiedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;offering social security benefits and other services such as microfinancing to the poor. As such, it has continued to attract new recruits, most of whom

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Social Privatization Approach

DARANGAN

are women and the poor. Over the past years, the number of women members has increased because DWSDC provides women better opportunities to learn and increase their income. A foreseeable trend is the increase in membership from among the poorest of the poor in Darangan. The cooperative encourages them to join by offering easy, affordable, installment terms of payment, plus opportunities to earn income. This move benefits the poor since they can become owners and consumers of an efficient water service that allows them to participate in decision-making. The huge concessionaire, Manila Water, expressed its intention to extend its services to Binangonan town. DWSDC is confident that it can compete with Manila Water for these reasons: DWSDC provides good quality ground water even during El Niño; it promptly restores water service interruptions; and, it currently serves more than 70 percent of Darangan’s population, majority of whom are members of the cooperative. DWSDC even plans to further expand its services. There are two other water systems in Darangan, which DWSDC would like to merge with. There is also a plan to put up a new pumping station in a higher elevation area to replace the existing pump when it eventually breaks down. Other plans include continuous capital formation, replacement of old pipelines, and the implementation of new credit and livelihood project for women and children.

HIGHLIGHTS Key Features: Community participation in all phases of the project cycle Continued national and local government logistical support Cooperativized ownership of the water service, which enhances system operation and maintenance efficiency. DWSDC fund sources come mainly from the members’ share capital, membership fees, savings and patronage.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

DARANGAN

Social Privatization Approach

Â&#x20AC; Increased womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s participation/involvement that supports poverty alleviation efforts Â&#x20AC; Competitive pricing strategy that is linked to its membership recruitment drive. DWSDC members pay substantially lesser user rates than non-members, which is an incentive for non-members to eventually join the cooperative. DWSDC consumers likewise enjoy a lower tariff compared with residents of nearby Morong town, which is served by the Morong Water District. Delivery Although the water system was partly funded in the past through small grants from the government, the water system is a completely cooperative enterprise. The cooperative was involved in the construction of the water facility, its operation and maintenance, and its eventual expansion and improvement. To become a member of DWSDC, one has to be a resident of Darangan. Would-be members of DWSDC have to pay a membership fee of P100 and a share capital of P5,000 which is payable in equal installments for two years. Pre-membership seminar is a requirement, followed by a seminar on ownership. For the pre-membership seminar, the aspirant pays P50. Aside from getting a P10 discount from the regular water rate for the first 10 cubic meters and P1 less for every additional cubic meter thereafter, DWSDC members enjoy low interest loans, long-term repayment schemes, access to a mutual benefit fund, emergency loans, patronage refund, social services, and a typically uninterrupted water service at lower rates compared to non-members. DWSDC also provides banking services where the savings deposit of members earns from four to eight per cent interest. All water service applicants pay for the cost of service installation and the water meter unit. Billing is on a monthly cycle and collection is undertaken regularly on a house-to-house basis. Standards The quality and affordability of the water service provided by the DWSDC meets the required standards. Today, DWSDC has become the main water provider of Darangan, serving more than 1,100 households.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Social Privatization Approach

DARANGAN

Role of LGUs Local government units (barangay, municipal and province) took an active part in institution and capacity building. The success of DWSDC has even motivated the Binangonan municipal government to issue an ordinance encouraging the setting up of barangay-level water systems and the transfer of the management of their operations to a local cooperative. As a result, 15 water cooperatives have emerged in Binangonan.

FACTORS Required Capacities Among the responsibilities of DWSDC members is participating in the planning and annual general assemblies. They are consulted about major decisions relating to the water cooperative. Meanwhile, a committee headed by a board director is in charge of operation and maintenance of the water system. Two deep wells, each with a submersible 10-horsepower pump and a motor, provide water service to about 70 percent of the Darangan population. Darangan has two water reservoirsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;one with a capacity of 15,000 gallons and the other, 10,000 gallons. The quality of the water is good and potable. The two pumping stations of DWSDC work for a total of 20 hours a day. DWSDC owns the necessary equipment and repair tools. The pump and motor are usually replaced after five years of use. As a result, service interruptions caused by repair and maintenance have never lasted more than a day.

BENEFITS The social privatization model in water service delivery ensures the following: (a) water rates/tariff remain affordable to the majority; (b) viable community institutions and networks that are willing and

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

DARANGAN

Social Privatization Approach

responsible for managing the water facility continue to grow; (c) the expansion of water services includes even poor households, and; (d) use of local resources and skills is optimized. Moreover, since DWSDC diversified into a credit and a consumer cooperative, it has enabled nonmembers who are the poorest of the poor in Darangan to generate income and livelihood. The idea was to give non-members opportunities to engage in income generating activities, and thus allow them to join the cooperative and have access to water services by paying the share capital and other obligations in affordable installment rates. Furthermore, DWSDC has since taken a very active role in the community in advocating the protection of the environment, especially the Darangan River. It is protesting the operations of a piggery uphill that has been known to cause respiratory ailments in children and pollution in the river. DWSDC also helps the barangay council in its campaign against drug abuse. The success of DWSDC motivated the local government of Binangonan to issue a municipal ordinance encouraging barangay level water systems to set up and transfer the management of their operations to a local cooperative. As a result, 15 water cooperatives have emerged in Binangonan. The younger cooperatives are learning from DWSDC and are able to get technical assistance when required. The cooperative system has also allowed bigger cooperatives to provide financial assistance to the smaller ones, through the network of the different cooperative federations. A congressman represents DWSDC and other cooperatives in the House of Representatives through the party list COOP-NATCCO (National Confederation of Cooperatives). DWSDC, NATCCO, and the Cooperative Development Authority, are endorsing the creation of the Philippine Cooperative for Water and Sanitation, a tertiary-level organization of water cooperatives nationwide.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

GOOD PRACTICES IN WATSAN PROVISION 4

Privatization Approach Case MAGDALENA WATER SYSTEM PROJECT BRIEF DESCRIPTION Contact Information

Magdalena, a fifth class municipality in Laguna Province, is the first local government participant of the World Bank-financed Local Government Units Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Project. This project promotes publicprivate partnerships in the delivery of water and sanitation services. The Department of Interior and Local Government, the conduit of the World Bank, invited the Magdalena local government to avail of a P24-million loan package. This money was used for the construction of the new water and sanitation system facility. Bayan Water Services, Inc. (BWSI), a subsidiary of Benpres, won the bidding for the 15-year lease contract to operate the water and sanitation system.

Municipal Engineer Municipality of Magdalena, Laguna Tel: 049-2552013, 0492551011 Development Bank of the Philippines Makati City, Metro Manila Tel: 02-8189511, 02-8128088 local 2356 Fax: 02-8151517, 02-8188037

The transfer of the operations to BWSI, however, caught a snag. The supposed transfer was scheduled for 31 October 2001. But a week prior to the turnover, a political decision was made for the old Magdalena-managed water system to remain operational, so as not to disenfranchise 40 households that were going to be affected by the turnover. As a result, two water systems simultaneously functioned in Magdalena: the old water system and the new deep well water system. The old system provided cheap water at P8 for the first 15 cubic meters and P4.50 for every cubic meter thereafter. The new water system, which uses two pumps to convey water from a 130-foot deep well, charged a flat rate of P20.54 per cubic meter. This arrangement went against the provision of the lease agreement between Magdalena and BWSI. The condition set by BWSI was that prior to the turnover, the old Magdalena water system was to be cut off. Only when the

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

4 WATER AND SANITATION

MAGDALENA

Privatization Approach

turnover was effected would BWSI begin paying its P405,000 monthly rent to Magdalena, plus a fixed amount of P8,000 for contract administration. Another agreement was forged to close the old water system in the week of 15 February 2002 as demanded by BWSI for the scheduled turn over by the end of that month. Regulation is contained in the lease agreement between BWSI and Magdalena LGU. Privatization and the dynamics of local Philippine politics will eventually be felt by the consumers. A foreseeable problem can happen when loan repayment targets are not met, which means consumers are bound to shoulder future increases in the water tariff. The biggest threat, however, is that the LGU may not be able to pay its loan to the World Bank. When that happens, the LGU may have to resort to mortgaging. The current interest rate of the WB loan is 14 percent.

KEY FEATURES The project is part of the World Bank-financed Local Government Units Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Project, which essentially promotes public-private partnership. A private firm, Rodman Construction and Development Corporation (RCDC), was awarded the contract for constructing the water and sanitation facility. The firm constructed the new water supply system from September 1999 to June 1, 2001. The actual construction cost was pegged at P24 million. The Magdalena LGU provided a counterpart of P2.4M. BWSI was later awarded the 15-year lease contract to operate the water and sanitation system. For the first three years of operation, the Magdalena LGU is required to pay only the loan interest, after which it will begin to pay for the principal. However, as of February 2000, the Municipal Engineerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office released its findings that the tariff paid by consumers was enough to pay only for the O&M of the water system but not for the World Bank loan repayment. As a result, an increase in water tariff in the near future was to be expected.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

REFERENCES AND TOOLS

CHAPTER

❙ POTENTIAL SITES FOR STUDY TOURS MANILA WATER COMPANY, INC. Management Model Private sector participation under concession arrangement, the territory business management approach.

Contact Information Special Projects Manager, Corporate Communications

Brief Description In August 1997, Manila Water took over the privatized water Administration Bldg. system for the East concession of the Metropolitan Waterworks and 489 Katipunan Road, Sewerage System (MWSS). It is a consortium composed of the Balara, Diliman, Quezon City Ayala Corporation, United Utilities, Bechtel Corporation, Mitsubishi Trunk line: 02-4368000 Corporation, and BPI Capital Corporation. Everyday, Manila Water local: 3311 and 3378 delivers 1,600 million liters of potable water to over 4.7 million Fax: 02-9205288 residents and thousands of industries and businesses. Through its Tubig Para sa Barangay projects, depressed communities may get properly connected water service at affordable rates. With this, Manila Water has minimized leaks, illegal connections, and the incidence of water contamination. Highlights of the Model Example of water service delivery in urban areas (including urban poor) Shows potential of private sector involvement in water service delivery Alternative management option

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 5

MAYNILAD WATER SERVICES, INC. Management Model Private sector participation under concession arrangement Brief Description Maynilad Water Services is the private concessionaire that won the right to take over the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) operations in the West Zone of Metro Manila starting August 1997. Maynilad Water Services started a Bayan Tubig program in 1999 to provide squatter communities with cheap, potable, and continuous supply of water. Each household gets a water meter and access to water after paying a minimum fee. Applicants may pay on an installment basis over a period of six months to a year. Through this program, the customer base expanded and the problem of illegal connections was addressed.

Contact Information Manager, Business Development Department Central Business Area 176 A. Villegas St. Ermita, Manila Tel: 02-527-2275 Fax: 02-528-0654 Cell: 0917-9300385 Business Area Manager, Central Business Area Tel: 02-5281455 Fax: 02-5281460

Highlights of the Model Example of water service delivery in urban areas (including urban poor) Shows potential of private sector involvement in water service delivery Alternative management option

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

references and tools 5

DAVAO CITY WATER DISTRICT Location Davao City Management Model Government-Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC), semipublic

Contact Information Chairman Davao City Water District Bajada, Davao City 8000 Tel: 082-2219400 – 12 Fax: 082- 2264885

Brief Description The Davao City Water District is the biggest water district in the Philippines as far as service area is concerned. At the moment, the water district serves around 130,000 connections. Founded in 1973, the Davao City Water District also provides technical assistance (such as water testing, design, pipe laying) to rural areas and small towns within the Davao province. Highlights of the Model Showcase for LGUs that decide to set up (or take over) a water district Delivers the second best potable water quality in the world Opportunities to visit water laboratories and pump stations Shows how water districts can give technical assistance to LGUs

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 5

METRO CEBU WATER DISTRICT Location Cebu City Management Model Government-Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC), semipublic Project Description Founded in 1974, the Metro Cebu Water District has grown into the country’s second-largest water district. At present, it uses 100 ground well and one surface water resource to supply the water needs of over 80,000 connections located in four cities and four municipalities in Metro Cebu.

Contact Information General Manager M. C. Briones cor. P Burgos Street , Cebu City 6000 Tel: 032-2548434 to 39, 2560413 to 15 Fax: 032-2545391 Information officer Tel: 032-2560424

In 1990, the Metro Cebu Water District entered into a big project that involved the collection and treatment of river water so that it could be used for drinking. This project was intended to address the water scarcity problems in the area following the 1997 El Niño drought. Besides water service delivery, the water district is very active in raising community awareness on water conservation and environment protection. Highlights of the Model The water district established family parks that combine leisure with water conservation (tree planting, nurseries) and ground water refilling activities The water district produces promotion and awareness material (fact sheets, posters and stickers) on water use and conservation The water district and LGUs closely cooperate on water resources management

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

references and tools 5

❙ References Above Ground - A Training Manual on Water Supply and Sanitation. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF). (This manual serves as a training course and a facilitator’s guide in conducting a training program for present and potential leaders of existing and about-to-be-formed BWSAs. It was published with the support fund from United Nation Children’s Fund. ) Capistrano, L. (editor). Water & Sanitation FORUM Newsmagazine. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network (PCWS-ITN) Community Organizing Process Guidebook. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF), November 2001. (This Guidebook is an enhancement of previous community organizing handbooks also developed by the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). It was published for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Projects - Phase V (RWSSP-V) in November 2001 by the Philippine Center for Water & Sanitation-The International Training Network Foundation.) Esrey SA, Gough J. et al. Ecological Sanitation. SIDA, Stockholm, Sweden, 1998. Guide and Manual on Training for Trainers. Water and Sanitation Training Programme, Printed for the Fourth Country Programme for Children (CPCIV) in cooperation with the United Nations Children’s Fund, December 1998. Haden, A. “Gender Checklist for Planning Sanitation Programmes.” Sanitation Promotion Kit. M. Simpson-Hebert and S. Wood, editors. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO and Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WS’SCQ), 1997.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

1 WATER AND SANITATION 5

Magtibay, B., compiler. Policies and Guidelines on Water Supply Systems. Manila, Philippines: Biosphere Environment and Health Systems, 1998. Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation. Policies and Guidelines on Wastewater Disposal Systems. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF), 1999. Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWSITNF) and Special Zone of Peace and Development Social Fund. Gabay Barangay. Pangangasiwa ng Spring Water System. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Center for Water and SanitationInternational Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF) and Special Zone of Peace and Development Social Fund, 2001. The Code of Ethics on Hygiene, Sanitation and Water Supply Services (2000). (This Code Ethics was developed in 1997 by the Working Group on Community Management and Partnerships with Civil Society set up by the WSSCC. It underwent further revisions in 1999 in a broad consultation involving 300 people from Asia, Africa and Latin America during the Vision 2] process. The Code was finalized in August 2000. WSSCC, Geneva, Switzerland). The Ecological Sanitation Alternative. Proceedings of the First Orientation Workshop, Gardenville Hotel, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte, Philippines, January 31-February 4, 2000. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation-International Training Network Foundation (PCWS-ITNF), 2000. Training Guide - Simplified Accounting Systems and Procedures for BWSA. Water and Sanitation Training Programme, Printed for the fourth Country Programme for Children (CPCIV) in cooperation with the United Nations Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fund, December 1995.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

references and tools 5

Training Guide and Manual on Community Organizing and Organizational Development. Water and Sanitation Training Programme, Printed for the Fourth Country Programme for Children (CPCIV) in cooperation with the United Nations Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fund, December 1995.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ENDNOTES 1 NEDA Board Resolution No. 12, series of 1995. 2 Information on the performance of the water supply and sanitation sector obtained from the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) indicate that the database from the government is not accurate. 3 LGSP has a companion material, the Resource Finder, which provides information on institutions and programs from government agencies, government financing institutions, ODA sources both bilateral and multilateral, and civil society organizations that could be accessed by LGUs in support of water and sanitation initiatives. 4 Citation URL: http://www.icap.org/pdf/dp_english.pdf 5 More discussion on this in Annex B of this resource book. 6 Privatization of Public Social Services: A Background Paper, Author(s): Demetra Smith Nightingale, Nancy M. Pindus, Published: October 15, 1997 Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=407023 7 Community Water Supply Management: International Water and Sanitation Centre Citation URL: http://www.irc.nl/manage/whatisit/definitions.html 8 CARWASA is a member of the Cebu Federation of Waterworks Associations, Inc. (CEFEWA), which is under the guidance of the University of San Carlos Water Resource Center (USC-WRC). Some CEFEWA members started with funding support from the provincial government and then from PLAN International. Most CEFEWA members, however, have been funded initially by PLAN International with counterpart support from the local government. 9 In 1997 President Fidel Ramos signed Executive Order No. 445, which provided for the implementation of the SZOPAD Social Fund (SSF) to finance small-scale social and economic infrastructure projects in disadvantaged communities affected by the conflict between the government and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Water Supply Technology Options

ANNEXES

â?&#x2122; Water Supply Technology Options A convenient supply of safe water and the sanitary disposal of human wastes are essential, although not the only ingredients of a healthy, productive life. Unfortunately, it is the poor who suffer the most from the absence of safe water and sanitation, because they lack not only the means to provide for such facilities but also the information on how to minimize the ill effects of the unsanitary conditions in which they live. As a result, the debilitating effects of unsanitary living conditions lower the productive potential of the very people who can least afford it. A summary of the technology, institutional, and financing options are presented below for appropriate application by the LGUs for their Water Supply and Sanitation plans and programs.

â&#x2014;&#x2014; TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Source Options a. Groundwater - springs - wells b. Surface water - check gates - dam reservoirs c. Rainwater

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

WATER AND SANITATION

Transmission Options

hand pump wells (Level 2)

household connections (Level 3)

Treatment Options a. Use of settler and filter to remove turbidity A 12 cu. m settling tank which has a capacity of 8 liters/sec. costs P17,000.00 and can serve 8,000 people. A 1 sq. m. filter area which is good for 1 liter/sec has a direct cost of P 2,000.00 and can serve 1,000 people. b. Disinfection - use of chlorinators, ultraviolet (UV), slow sand filter c. Removal of dissolved, unwanted substances: - desalination (reverse osmosis, evapo-condensation) - charcoal and similar filters (if water has a different color) Modes of Intervention New system construction Rehabilitation of existing water system Upgrade or expansion Multiple sources and systems "Do-nothing" option

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Selecting the most appropriate technologies Economical Environment friendly Culturally acceptable and socially equitable A water system must be accessible even to residents from far flung areas Can provide for reasonable future needs When designing a water system, consider future demands by anticipating the maximum increase in the number of population in a given area Should be locally sustainable Materials/parts must be locally available Physically feasible Delivers within standard requirements The Benefit/Cost Approach - "The most appropriate technology is the one that delivers the most benefits at the least cost." Costs Interest on investment Depreciation Opportunity costs Environmental costs Benefits Savings in water-fetching labor Savings in water-using household labor Savings in cost of lost manpower avoided due to illness and cost of medicines Livelihood generated by construction and operation and maintenance of water system, and increased in economic activities caused by more water availability Environmental benefits

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

WATER AND SANITATION

Financing Options External

Loans vs IRA LWUA loan CDF Grants National government programs

Internal

LGU resources IRA and SDF component LGU manpower Material stocks Equipment Community resources

Sustainability factors "A water system should be forever." The following are key factors in assuring water system sustainability: Knowledge and use of appropriate technologies Appropriate technologies save on the average 30% of project cost. Community participation - The community helps in data gathering and technology selection. - The community is appraised of the implications of each technology option and the role they play. - The community acquires skills (not just in training, but from direct involvement) in the operation and maintenance. Conscientious and transparent project implementation - financial and procurement management must be in place - there must be accountable and transparent records - transactional (traditional) vs transformational political leadership; choice must be made whether to emphasize meeting individual needs or the general community's interest.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Sanitation Technology Options

ANNEXES

❙ Sanitation Technology Options ◗ PURPOSE OF SANITATION To contain and process human wastes until they or their end products are safe enough for release into the environment. A toilet should be able to a. Control odor and prevent the ingress or egress of disease vectors; and b. Prevent the release of feces and wastewater into the environment before it is safe to do so. Feces and wastewater May contain pathogens such as harmful bacteria, amoeba, viruses, other protists and worms; May be breeding sites for disease vectors such as flies and mosquitoes; May be sources of suspended solids and BOD that contribute to turbidity and oxygen depletion in natural bodies of water; and May contain substances such as nutrients and drugs that in certain forms can harm the environment or cause health problems when indiscriminately released). Sanitation facilities should Be affordable to build and maintain; Provide privacy to users; Provide convenience; Confer status to them; and In some cases, allow safe recovery of the resources such as soil ameliorants, animal feed, and energy contained in the waste. S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

WATER AND SANITATION

Sanitation facilities should also be culturally acceptable to users Defecating position Type of anal cleansing material used Practices and taboos on using and handling wastes Light and ventilation Location of the facility relative to the house and its orientation must be considered Sanitation options are either onsite or offsite (whether or not the end-products are released to the environment at the site of generation or conveyed to a central facility for further processing), and wet or dry (whether or not water is necessary for operation).

◗ ON-SITE SANITATION Unsanitary Options 1. Open defecation but restricted to a community-designated area 2. Unimproved pit (Antipolo) 3. Overhang over a watercourse, pigpen or fishpond Sanitary Options Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP) Description of operation Feces drops into pit through hole in latrine. Feces decompose in latrine. A new pit has to be dug when the one in use is full (although some pits are offset from the latrine slab and is more accessible for emptying). The pit may be unlined in stable formations; otherwise it is lined with hollow blocks, mortar or brick although the floor is bare and holes are usually built into the pit lining wall to allow excess water to leach out. Some designs have twin or two-compartment pits so that the moveable latrine hole can be shifted to one when the other is full.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Odor control is effected through placing a lid on the latrine and inducing an air flow from the superstructure through the latrine hole to the pit, then out into the outside air through a screened vent emptying above the toilet. The superstructure is often designed to scoop air from the wind also for this purpose. Fly control is effected through keeping the superstructure dark inside so that any flies in the pit see only the light from the top of the vent. They fly up the vent but the screen traps them until they die of exhaustion trying to crash through the screen. Maintenance Keeping the floor clean, the vent pipe free of cobwebs, and emptying the previously used compartment when the present one is full. The contents may be buried in the soil, preferably near a tree. Advantages Does not require water. Disadvantages Not optimally suitable for the use of water (water and urine keeps the feces wet and odorous); Odor and flies not always avoidable; Difficulty or expense of emptying full pit or necessity for digging a new one when the former is full. Construction cost PhP 5,000 or more including superstructure, (extrapolated contractor’s price) but about 50% less if user donates labor.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

WATER AND SANITATION

Wet Pit with Pour-Flush Bowl Description of operation After use, feces and water in the bowl are flushed with 1 (for toilets where the pit is directly under the bowl) to 8 (usually when the pit is offset from the bowl) liters of water. The flushing pours into the pit. Water drains out through the bare bottom of the pit and the holes built into its walls. The pit may be unlined in stable formations although it is always covered. Some designs have twin pits and a wye box so that the flushing is moveable latrine hole can be shifted to one when the other is full. Odor and fly control is effected with the water-sealed bowl. Maintenance Same as that of the VIP, except that the air vent, if any, does not need clearing of cobwebs. Advantages Good odor control Acceptable in many cultures Costs can be lowered if several nearby households share one pit Offset construction can solve the problem of endangering the foundations of nearby structures during excavation. Disadvantages Needs the indicated amounts of flushing water; Water leaching from the pit will contaminate the ground and any water table and wells within 8-160m from it (although in most cases, a well is safe if it is 25m from the pit);

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Â&#x20AC; Difficulty or expense of emptying a full pit or necessity for digging a new one when the former is full (research is underway in some countries for appropriate low-cost de-sludging methods). Construction cost PhP 5,000 or more including superstructure, (extrapolated contractorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s price) but about 50% less if user donates labor; less if adjacent households share a common pit. Composting Toilets Description of Operation There are many designs. A typical one has twin built-onthe-ground vaults that are alternately used. Feces fills up one vault (the volume is usually good for at least a year of use) after which, the bowl is moved over the other while the contents of the first vault ages. By the time the second vault is full, the contents of the first are emptied and used as compost. Water is usually not used. Instead, ashes and other organic matter are poured over the fresh feces after every use to discourage odor and fly breeding. Urine is usually collected and stored in a pail -- or any appropriate container -- separately from feces as it is free of pathogens and ready for use as liquid fertilizer. Maintenance Same as that of the VIP, except that the vaults are emptied more frequently as they fill up faster because of the use of ashes and bulking agents.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

WATER AND SANITATION

Advantages Production of humus if properly operated; Production of liquid fertilizer; Little chance of feces pile leaching and contaminating the ground and groundwater. Disadvantages Requires users to be well-trained in using and maintaining the facility and have the environmental values that will make the extra protocols and precautions of using it worthwhile; Culturally difficult to accept with some mainstream and ethnic groups. Construction Cost PhP 2,500 or more including superstructure (ferro-cement toilet built by PCWS in extrapolated contractor’s price) but about 50% less if user donates labor. Pour-flush Toilet with Septic Tank with On-site Disposal Conventional Septic Tank A septic tank may be necessary if the ground is too hard for a pit to be dug economically or if infiltration rates of the wastewater into the ground is too low such that some clarification is needed before it is leached into the ground. Septic tanks are sometimes divided into several compartments for more efficient settling of solids. Some designs are capacious to allow enough detention time so that water is much cleaner when it is released into the environment.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Description of Operation The wastewater enters and is detained in the septic tank where it undergoes some settling and decomposition of solids. The clearer effluent flows into a soakpit (similar to a wet pit but sometimes filled with rocks for wall stability) or infiltration trench (where it leaches into the ground), an evapo-transpiration mound (where some of the water is transpired by the mound vegetation or evaporates), or subsurface filters before it enters pipe draining into a watercourse. Maintenance Periodic de-sludging of the septic tank, and less frequently cleaning or allowing soakpits, trenches and subsurface filters to rest. Advantages Same as wet pit but a cleaner effluent is produced. Disadvantages Needs the indicated amounts of flushing water; Although to a lesser extent, water leaching from the tank will contaminate the ground and any water table and wells within 8-160m from it (although in most cases, a well is safe if it is 25m from the pit; Difficulty or expense of de-sludging (research is underway in some countries for appropriate low-cost de-sludging methods). Construction cost PhP 5,000 or more, including superstructure (PLAN figures) to PhP30,000 (DPWH figures) but less if user donates labor.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

WATER AND SANITATION

Bio-gas Toilets Bio-gas toilets are toilets with septic tanks configured to have a gas collector and displaced water chamber; and other accessories to produce, store and provide bio-gas for various uses. Description of operation Same as in a septic tank, but bio-gas is collected in a domed collector and there is a reservoir for displacement water. The human waste from three families is usually enough to cook one familyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s meals. In some designs, there are provisions for adding animal and biodegradable solid waste to increase gas production. In this respect this technology has potential as a solid waste management solution. Maintenance Same as septic tanks, but is more delicate in that drugs, cleansing chemicals and most metals kill off the methane-producing bacteria. Advantages Same as wet pit but biogas and a cleaner effluent is produced. Disadvantages Same as septic tanks; more frequent de-sludging if other materials are fed into the tank to produce more biogas; culturally difficult to accept with some mainstream and ethnic groups. Construction cost PhP 5,000 or more including superstructure (PCWS figures from prototype facilities) but less if user donates labor; less if adjacent households share common tank. 100

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

â&#x2014;&#x2014; OFF-SITE SANITATION When the consequences of contaminating local water tables and courses are too costly, or the groundâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s natural infiltration rates are too low, or the housing density is so high as to make common rather than household-level treatment of wastes economically attractive (usually in a plant situated off the community), then off-site sanitation becomes an option (or a last recourse). Cartage Feces and sometimes wastewater is deposited in a chamber pot or receptacle and is collected regularly by vehicles. This system is used in some areas in Japan, and many communities in China, where the waste is used as fertilizer and fish feed. Sewerage (to treatment facility) This means a network of pipes and sometimes pumps that convey water to a common sewage treatment plant. In some such technologies, the wastewater may be collected direct from pipes from the bathroom, sink and toilet without benefit of a septic tank for primary treatment. Conventional Sewerage This is found in many cities in the Western countries. Huge (enough for maintenance people to walk in) sewers are built deep underground (to allow basement and subway drainage). In the past even the flows of rivers were diverted to periodically flush out these sewers.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

101

WATER AND SANITATION

Shallow sewerage Recent reworking of the hydraulics of solids-laden channel flow have proven that much smaller sewer pipes buried more shallowly on carefully controlled slopes and with appropriate accessories such as clean-outs can do the job as well, resulting in this alternative design. Advantages Â&#x20AC; Savings of as much as 95% over conventional sewerage can be realized with this technology. Â&#x20AC; Some studies have also indicated that shallow sewerage with offsite treatment is competitive over on-site sanitation at population densities of 200 persons per hectare or higher. Disadvantage A disadvantage is the necessity of the community using at least 50lcpd of water (and feeding it into the pipes) to ensure that the waste solids are borne along with this flow and do not cause clogging. Septic tanks connected to small-bore sewerage In this technology, household septic tanks or wet pits are connected to the pipes that form the collection network. The effluent of these tanks is free from the large solids present in raw household sewage and permit smaller pipes and less controlled pipe slopes to be used. The amount of water the community uses also has little effect on system efficiency.

102

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Community-scale Sewage Treatment Processes Conventional Plant This technology consists of the following sequential processes: 1. Primary treatment -- trash, grit and partial solids removal through screening and sedimentation 2. Secondary treatment -- BOD reduction through aerobic treatment 3. Tertiary treatment -- e.g., gravel filter Advantage An advantage of this technology is that BOD reduction can be very high. Disadvantages Although prevalent in the West, the disadvantage of this technology is that it requires a lot of money to build. (A conventionally-constructed, foreign-funded STP facility in Baguio for about 90,000 people cost about PhP 400M to erect.) Requires heavy equipment, advanced skills and a lot of energy to operate; Unacceptable in terms of pathogen destruction (only in the order of 99%). Stabilization Ponds These are a series of ponds (the first functioning as a solids settling and anaerobic decomposition pond, the next as facultative ponds and the last as maturation ponds) that treat sewage through sedimentation, biological action and detention. In some facilities, fish and aquatic plants enhance these actions and provide a method for resource recovery. Although simple and effective (stabilization ponds can remove 99.99 to 99.999% of pathogens, BOD and suspended solids), it is a land- intensive technology and can also be expensive. A plan to treat the waste of 80,000 people in downtown Dumaguete City requires a budget of PhP 360 million.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

103

WATER AND SANITATION

Anaerobic Filters Anaerobic filters are filters submerged in water. This is not a stand-alone sewage treatment plant process but can be combined with other processes. Although poor in terms of BOD and pathogen removal, it is simple and requires less energy and space than aerobic facilities. Treating Sludge Sludge is composed of the remains of organic matter, the bacteria living in them, and inorganic matter. All sewage treatment plants produce sludge. In on-site sanitation, sludge is often buried in the soil (this may be spread later as soil conditioner) or taken away for further treatment in a central facility. In sewage and treatment plants, which produces huge quantities of sludge, sludge can either be aged before spreading on agricultural land, or dewatered before either: Deposited in a landfill; or Composted before being used as a soil conditioner. In the latter, the principle is to use the heat of the composting to kill all pathogens. One method of high-rate composting is to pile the dewatered sludge in wind-rows over perforated air-pipes. The sludge is mixed with dessicating substrate such as woodchips and covered with old compost. Air is then blown for a few weeks through the sludge using the perforated pipes. This supplies the pile with enough oxygen to sustain the composting process.

◗ KEY SUSTAINABILITY FACTORS IN SANITATION PROGRAMS Use of Appropriate Technologies This not only means evaluating sanitation options by the criteria enumerated in the first part of this chapter but developing more affordable technologies, especially for off-site sewage treatment.

104

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

For the 2/3 of Filipinos who live in rural and semi-rural areas, the on-site sanitation options available to them seem to be affordable enough. However, for the rest who live in urban areas and whose wastewater can only be treated off-site, a per capita construction cost of PhP 4,000 to 7,000 will translate into unacceptable sewage treatment charges alone of PhP 200 to 350 per household per month, if present West-originated technologies are adopted. We should therefore start developing our own treatment options that are less expensive. Community Participation Organizing for sanitation is more difficult than organizing for water supply. In a community in Indonesia, it took two decades to up sanitation coverage from 17% to 85%. Yet one cannot go around it. Aside from linking hygiene, water supply, and the environment with sanitation, a possible strategy would be to make sanitation more attractive by linking resource recovery with it. Transparent and Conscientious Implementation No program will succeed if corruption permeates the implementing agency. If the implementing agency is corrupt, the technologies it will select will only be appropriate to maximizing graft and it will never bother to bring in the community to its shady dealings by letting them participate meaningfully in the program.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

105

Sustainability of Community-Based Rural Water Supply Organizations

ANNEXES

❙ Sustainability of Community-Based Rural Water Supply Organizations ◗ WHAT WORKS: National Policies/ Strategies a. The use of community-based organizations has been proven effective as a vehicle for: Instilling the value of self-governance and self-reliance among the rural populace; from mere recipients of government projects to active community participation and management, and Sustained operation and maintenance of the water facilities. There are a lot of case studies of RWSAs (Rural Water Supply Associations) and to some extent of BWSAs (Barangay Water Supply Associations) which have demonstrated that with proper institutional development, these associations are capable of sustaining the system operation thereby reducing the load on government resources and instilling the value of self governance among the populace. b. Full recovery schemes (capital + O&M) are possible for Level III and partial recovery schemes (O&M) for Levels I and II. Level III RWSAs, especially in Bulacan and Batangas provinces, have demonstrated not only their capacity to sustain their operations from collections but also to repay loans incurred for the purpose. Some Levels I and II projects are still operational and managed by the associations demonstrating successful partial recovery. The rural populace is capable and does pay for WATSAN services.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

107

WATER AND SANITATION

c. Different service levels are needed. Level I represents the basic service level that government must provide its citizenry especially in the far flung areas. Level III service, being the ultimate service level, are necessary for urban and peri-urban areas and in areas where the populace is willing and able to support it. However, not all communities can afford a Level III system. In some areas, the provision of Level II facilities provides a temporary solution until the community, following the principle of self-governance, is able to muster enough initiative and resources to convert it to a Level III. In all cases, local associations are therefore necessary to institutionalize “ownership” and marshal resources. Sustainability of Community-Based Organizations Proper Technical Design/Construction of Facilities In all RWS projects, the number one criterion for sustainability is still proper design and construction of the facilities. Without any facility to operate and maintain, there is no basis for the existence of the water supply community organizations. Equal Emphasis to Institution Building at the Local Level Available data and experience tell us that local institutions formed with equal emphasis have survived longer than those institutions that emphasized only the infrastructure component of institution building. The process of inculcating “ownership” takes time but must be stressed even before the physical structures are set up. Effectiveness of BWSA/RWSA Leadership This factor stands out whenever a successful association is studied. A leader’s effectiveness becomes critical especially in the enforcement of tariff collections, marshalling resources, and information dissemination campaigns.

108

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Enforcement of Adequate And Monthly Tariff Collections The need for Associations to charge and collect tariffs is obviously important, not only to cover operation and maintenance requirements but also to create a reserve fund for replacements and expansion. Adequate O&M Skills and Tools Many foreign assisted projects have concluded that the failure of local associations stems from three items: the lack of funds, skills, and tools. Adequate and Continuous Institutional Development BWSAs and RWSAs are basically new organizational concepts in every community where it is introduced. And like new concepts, its sustainability is dependent on the nurturing given to it. By more experienced and matured organizations during its initial stages of operation. Even large water districts such as Davao and Tarlac took time to develop into the successful utilities they are now. Harmonious Relationship with the LGU Various RWS association experience in Bulacan and CVWSSP indicate a direct relationship between support of the LGU and sustainability. Reasons for the direct relationship are (a) LGU resources that can be accessed by the association, (b) facilitation of the required permits necessary and (c) the use of LGU official’s influence to convince association members to do certain activities, which can bring about sustainability. Compensation of Operating Staff Examples in foreign-assisted projects tend to show that certain compensation given to the associations’ operational staff improves the level of O&M for the following reasons:

Being paid implies responsibility; Compensation serves as remuneration for time spent away from main livelihood activities; Compensation paves the way to future awareness of the need to professionalize services; and Payment implies the right to choose qualified personnel to do the task.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

109

WATER AND SANITATION

User Groups Rather than Barangay-Wide This finding has relevance if a barangay has several point sources (Level 1). Project experiences indicate that individual facility user groups function better than a barangay-wide BWSA. The user groups have their own caretakers and they see little relevance in participating actively in BWSA affairs. Multi-Purpose Water Association Requiring a BWSA with a single point source to have regular tariff collections and meet regularly may seem too much for most members. Thus more than half of the BWSAs collect tariffs and meet only when needed. When the BWSA becomes inactive and O&M is passed on to a user group (market vendors, church groups, etc.), these user groups are able to sustain O&M because of their regular meeting and collection of dues. The water system merely becomes an additional agenda for them. Upgrading of Service Level All field implementers of RWS projects agree that when a service level is upgraded to a higher level, the existing association will, in most probability, rise to the challenges faced by new procedures, rules, and technology. Upgrading a service level, therefore, assures better sustainability not only of the facilities but the institution as well.

â&#x2014;&#x2014; WHAT DOES NOT WORK: National Policies/ Strategies Multi-Agency Responsibility for Project Implementation Although the intention of coordination is noble, the practice of having several agencies responsible for the project implies that no single agency is actually responsible.

110

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ANNEXES

Use of Ad Hoc Groups for Project Implementation Any ad hoc group—not attached to any agency and having a finite term of office—lacks real authority or the resources to pursue a project effectively. It can even benefit from project experiences since it is soon disbanded after a project is completed. Single Corporation Responsibility for RWS A public corporation is evaluated not on the same basis as line agencies. Aside from project accomplishments, a corporation has to contend itself with various parameters such as return on investment, internal cash generation, and securing of subsidies for RWS. A line agency that does not have any of the above financial criteria would therefore be in a better position to implement RWS projects. Inconsistent Cost-Recovery Schemes The national policy of not subsidizing Level II/III schemes is not consistently followed since there are politicians, and even ESA- supported projects, which provide grant funding for these services. Allowing inconsistencies can only convey either of these two ideas: (1) wait for grant funding for our projects, or (2) even if you don’t collect for O&M, don’t worry; government will bail you out. Inconsistencies tend to promote the culture of mendicancy. New BWSAs for Simple Level I Facilities The hasty formation of BWSAs to maintain a simple source, i.e., a hand pump, may not be to the best interest of the project. It would be more effective to use existing user groups within the barangay to maintain Level I facilities.

Reference: De Vera, Antonio R. “Sustainability of Community-Based Rural Water Supply Organizations.” A Final Report prepared by for the WPEP Project, November 2000.

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K s F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

111