Global Review of PSPMultistakeholder review of

private sector participation in water and sanitation

Moving forward with the Global Review of PSP

World Water Week, Stockholm, 23rd August 2005.

Presentation by members of the International Working Group, Global Review of PSP

Polarisation and conflict

“The interests of the poor are not well served by the debate. Potentially good options are blocked and bad ones are followed.” Developing country water ministry official

The PSP Review Working Group

• ASSEMAE (Brazilian association of municipal water and sanitation public operators)

• Association of Private Water Operators of Uganda (domestic private sector association)

• Consumers International (International federation of consumer advocacy NGOs)

• Environmental Monitoring Group (South African NGO)

• Public Services International (International labour federation)

• RWE Thames Water (Multinational water services corporation)

• WaterAid (International development NGO)

Global Water Scoping Process: Participants by

Type of Organisation

05

10152025303540

Pu

blic

Uti

lity

Pri

va

te C

o.

SS

IP

Su

bc

on

tra

ct

Go

v't

ag

en

cy

Go

v't

re

g

Do

no

r

Pro

f'l A

ss

'n

UN

ag

en

cy

De

live

ry

NG

O

La

bo

ur

Re

se

arc

h

Co

mm

un

ity

Oth

er

EmailSurvey (82)

Individualsinterviewed(234)

137 organisations participated; 316 individuals total

Participants by Region

• AFRICA: Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, Uganda

• ASIA: India, Indonesia, and the Philippines

• EUROPE/NORTH AMERICA: England, France, United States

• SOUTH AMERICA: Bolivia, Brazil, Chile

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

N A

m/E

uro

pe

S. A

me

ric

a

As

ia

Afr

ica

Mid

-Ea

st

Int'

l

EmailSurvey (82)

IndividualsInterviewed(234)

Demand for a global review

• Large majority thought global multistakeholder review is useful and/or necessary

• Less than 10% cautious about review, or preferred to use or strengthen existing institutions for review

• Less than 2% thought review not useful or necessary

What do we want to achieve?

• The primary focus of the Review is on whether and how the private sector, from SSIPs through to large private companies, can contribute to affordable and sustainable access to WSS, including the MDGs.

Major Review Themes

• Financing water & sanitation services

• Meeting the MDGs

• Achieving good governance & accountability

• Managing efficiently & effectively

• Safeguarding public interests

How do we do it?

• Locate review activities at national and sub-national levels

• Provide neutral space to explore controversial issues

• Provide framework questions to guide discussion

• Promote a genuine inclusive multistakeholder process

• Build implementation mechanisms into review process

Brazil country process

Background• Huge privatization/concession program

(1995-2002)• Failure on WSS: no ownership transfer (for

“bulk” concessions) – top-down decision• Public vs private conflict paralysed new

investments (including for public sector improvement!)

Brazil country process

• Pioneering country multistakeholder group established 2003

• 13 national Multistakeholder meetings held

• Detailed framework for national PSP review developed

• In-country funds will be used

Brazil country process

Methodology of the review:• Bring together all of the major

stakeholders• Leave pre-conceived ideas outside the

meeting room• Establish a regular work schedule• Develop ToR, taking into account the

questions identified in phase I

Brazil country process

Methodology of the review (cont.):• Raise funds • Establish the structure to run the

Review • Contribute to the National Policy on

WSS (currently in the National Congress) regarding the role of the private sector

Brazil country process

Brazilian Working Group on PSP Review:

ABCON (Braz. Assn. of Private Operators); ABDIB (Braz. Assn. of Infrastructure Industries); ABES (Braz. Assn. of WSS and Environmental Engineering); AESBE (Braz. Assn. of State-owned WSS Public Operators); AGUA E VIDA (WSS Research NGO); AIDIS (Interamerican Assn. of WSS and Environmental Engineering); ASFAMAS (Braz. Assn. of WSS Manufacturers); ASSEMAE (Braz. Assn. of Municipal WSS Public Operators); FNU (Natl. Trade Union, Utilities’ Workers); SNSA (Dept. of WSS, Ministry of the Cities)Coordinator: ABESSecretary: ABCON

South Africa country process

• Range of stakeholders participating in interim multistakeholder Working Group (importance of including all players)

• Initial steps: agreeing focus, developing budget, agreeing code of conduct, approach, basic definitions and problem statement

• Mix between process/dialogue & evidence-based assessment

• Focus on public & private sector delivery

South Africa country process (2)

• Problem statement: address challenges faced by municipalities in meeting constitutional requirements (right of access to water)

• Align with existing policy and institutional reform processes

• Develop questions from phase I to guide the review

Value of review for South Africa

• Increases meaningful participation in policy reform & development

• Greater access to information• Greater transparency in decision making, e.g.

on choice of water service provider• Learning from experiences to improve WSS

delivery• Stronger regulation and governance• Action oriented: Findings feed directly into

policy and implementation

Other countries

• Uganda: First Multistakeholder meeting this week

• Indonesia: First Multistakeholder Meeting in July

• The Philippines: Initial discussions and first Multistakeholder meeting in November

Reasons to support this review

• Provides unique process for participation, debate and… agreement

• Enables conflict resolution based on common understanding

• Identifies practical local solutions for better service delivery

• Provides better information to policy makers• Contributes to ongoing local, national and

global water reform processes

Moving Forward through the Global Review

“There has been a lot of conflicting information and policy makers, decision makers, consumers, and all others in the water sector are at a loss – they don’t know who is telling the truth, or what to learn from.”

- Consumer organisation, Africa

Positive examples Negative examples Malindi, Kenya Nairobi (Seureca) Senegal Senegal Cote d’Ivoire Gambia Ghana Morocco Mozambique Mozambique (Maputo) South Africa: Nelspruit, Dolphin Coast

South Africa: Nelspruit, Fort Beaufort, Stutterheim, Dolphin Coast

Argentina Argentina Chile Chile Manila Manila Brazil: Manaus, Niteroi, Limeira, Cachoeira

Brazil: Manaus, Niteroi, Paranagua, Ribeiro Preto

Bolivia: La Paz/El Alto Bolivia: La Paz/El Alto, Cochabamba

France France UK UK US US

Divergent Experiences:

PSP examples raised by Stakeholders – NOT assessed by Working Group