lable at ScienceDirect

Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e51

Contents lists avai

Utilities Policy

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ jup

Quality dimensions of public water services in Abuja, Nigeria

Ismaila Rimi AbubakarCollege of Architecture and Planning, University of Dammam, P.O. Box 2397, Dammam 31451, Saudi Arabia

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 30 December 2014Received in revised form21 December 2015Accepted 21 December 2015Available online xxx

Keywords:Abuja cityWater supplyQuality attributesServices deliveryGovernanceDeveloping countries

E-mail address: irabubakar@ud.edu.sa.1 Based on exchange rate of $1 USD to ₦200 Naira.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2015.12.0030957-1787/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

In developing countries, access to public water services does not ensure clean or reliable supply; nor doesit indicate equitable delivery. Further, concentrating on accessibility offers a biased picture of perfor-mance and exaggerates the level of accomplishment, while concealing the presence of major challengesto further progress. Through a qualitative study, this article explores the quality dimension of watersupply services in Abuja city, Nigeria. Data were obtained from in-depth interviews with residents andcity officials, supplemented by personal observations. Lack of reliability, low water pressure, inefficientbilling systems, inadequate facility maintenance, spatial inequality in service delivery, and lack of publicinvolvement were found to immensely undermine the delivery of water services in the city. The paperconcludes by suggesting ways of enhancing the quality of water services in Abuja and other developingareas.

© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Domestic water supply remains one of the top priorities of ur-ban planners, policy makers, and international developmentagencies, given that potable water is essential for life and in pro-tecting public health and raising citizens' living standards (Hewettand Montgomery, 2001; WHO/UNICEF, 2014). The importance ofdrinking water can also be seen in the large volume of capital in-vestments in water infrastructure by governments and interna-tional donor agencies. In Nigeria for instance, the FederalGovernment budgeted ₦5611.7 million1 (USD $28.06 million) in2013 for water supply in the Federal Capital Territory alone (BudgetOffice of the Federation, 2013, p. 851). Such investment commit-ments are based on the belief that more coverage will help achievenot only the socio-economic benefits of water supply, but also localand international purposes, including the Millennium Develop-ment Goals (MDGs). Similarly, during election campaigns, localpoliticians often cite the number of communities provided withdrinking water among their achievements.

There is indeed some progress in providing drinking water indeveloping countries. By 2012 about 89% of households have accessto safe drinking water (one percentage point above the MDGtarget), and by 2014 more than half the world's population, almost

4 billion people, enjoyed the highest level of water access, definedas a piped water connection at their homes (WHO/UNICEF, 2014).Notwithstanding this achievement, the presence of a public watersystem in an area does not guarantee access; nor does accessindicate that reliable and cleanwater will actually be provided (Lin,2005; Nganyanyuka et al., 2014; Z�erah, 1998). Furthermore,defining progress inwater supply based on coverage offers a biasedpicture of performance and exaggerates the level of accomplish-ment, while concealing the presence of major challenges to furtherprogress (Bell et al., 1993; Picazo-Tadeo et al., 2008).

Even the academic literature on water services concentratesmainly on coverage with little focus on service quality (Kumar andManagi, 2010; Lee and Schwab, 2005). One of the important rea-sons for studying water quality is to draw the attention of water-sector stakeholders to the significance of clean water in prevent-ing and controlling waterborne diseases (Rakodi, 2000; Zeraebruket al., 2014). In addition, utility agencies could benefit from rec-ommendations for designing and implementing effective policyand intervention initiatives towards improving the performance ofthe public water supply sector.

The importance of researching the quality dimension of waterdelivery was buttressed in ‘Water Quality and Health Strategy:2013e2020,’ aWHO document that sets out strategies for managingwater quality in order to protect and promote human health (WHO,2013). One of the objectives of the strategy is to obtain ‘relevantevidence,’ establish a research agenda on emerging issues, andaddress ‘major knowledge gaps’ on water quality in developing

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e5144

countries (WHO, 2013, p. 2). As such, studying the quality aspects ofwater services will contribute in achieving this objective.

Accordingly, this article investigates the quality dimensions ofpiped water supply in Abuja city, Nigeria, and suggests somemeansfor improvement. This paper is important since Abuja was estab-lished to avoid some of Lagos' problems, including inadequate anddilapidated water supply. Abuja is also the most rapidly growingcity in Africa (Myers, 2011) and water supply is among the hugechallenges currently facing the city (Abubakar, 2014).

Previous studies onwater supply in Abuja by Ojo (2011) and FCTMDG Office (2010) have surveyed citizens' satisfaction with waterservice regularity, pressure, and color features, without includingofficials involved in the city's water supply. Other crucial water-delivery issues not addressed in these studies include infrastruc-ture maintenance, customer services, and community engagement.Further, these studies have only scratched the surface of waterquality attributes by describing their incidence or prevalencewithout providing in-depth understanding of the context and na-ture of the water quality issues. The present study contributes inaddressing these limitations. The next section reviews concepts ofpublic-sector water delivery and the quantity and quality di-mensions of water services. The paper then describes the researchmethodology, which is followed by the findings and discussion, andconcludes with recommendations for the way forward.

2. Literature review

2.1. Delivery of public water services in developing countries

Werna (2000) defines the delivery of urban services as the act ofensuring service availability, including decisions about the quan-tities and qualities to be delivered to end users. Drinking water isconsidered and treated as an economic good that can be sold for anon-negative price (Garcia, 2005), a merit good or human right thateveryone should have access to regardless of ability to pay(UNDESA, 2010), and as simultaneously an economic good andhuman right (Gleick, 1998). Water provision consists of infra-structure financing and development, system operation, billing andtariff collection, and systemmanagement andmaintenance. Public-sector delivery is generally favored over private-sector delivery forreasons that include high infrastructure costs, the desire to avoidexclusive service and exploitative pricing, and the notion that un-regulated markets would under-supply basic services that confersocietal benefit (Thoenen, 2007). As such, water is produced anddistributed mainly through government monopolies, which ac-count for more than 90% of the world's water services (Hoedemanet al., 2005). Monopoly is also said to be more cost effective due tothe advantages of scale economies and duplication avoidance.

In developing countries, the public sector is overwhelmed byrapid urbanization, handicapped by limited resources and hinderedby inadequate management and technical capacity to effectivelymaintain and operate urban water systems. During the Interna-tional Decade for Clean Drinking Water (1981e1990), internationalfinancial institutions provided substantial loans and aid to devel-oping countries in order to improve water supply, especially in therapidly growing urban centers (Jaglin, 2002). Later, at the turn ofthe century, world leaders adopted the Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs), including Target 10 that aimed to cut in half theproportion of people without access to safe drinking water. By theend of 2010, the target was met and in the same year, the UNGeneral Assembly passed a resolution that formally acknowledgeswater as a human right. The United Nations Development Pro-gramme (UNDP) defines the right to water as “the right of everyoneto sufficient, safe, acceptable and physically accessible and afford-able water for personal and domestic uses” (UN, 2010, p.1). As such,

the current debate onwater supply in developing countries focusesnot only onwater coverage but also on the quality of water services.The next section comparatively analyzes these two dimensions.

2.2. Quantity and quality dimensions of water delivery system

Urbanwater services are jointly produced and delivered at largescale through networks that are geographically distributedwithin acommunity. Thus, we need to ascertain both the quantity andquality of service delivery. The quantity dimension of water de-livery refers to coverage, which is usually the proportion of thepopulation having access to drinkingwater. However, the definitionof accessibility varies from one country to another and from (inter)national to local levels. According to the WHO, access to safedrinking water means having an improved source of water within1 km of a home or within a walking distance of not exceeding30 min (WHO, 2011). The improved water sources include ahousehold piped connection, public standpipe, borehole, protectedwell or spring, and neatly collected rainwater (WHO/UNICEF, 2014).Though coverage allows local and international comparison ofcities, regions, and countries and is easy to measure using toolssuch as household surveys and spatial analyses, the concept in-dicates little about service quality beyond what is meant by “ac-cess” and “improved” source.

The quality dimension of water services has varying conceptu-alizations since quality can be an abstract and elusive construct.While quality is often considered an indicator of how well waterservices meet user expectations (Parasuraman et al., 1994), toothers, quality connotes the difference between customer expec-tations and perceptions of the services actually provided (Kendall,2006). Although methods for measuring water quality vary acrossdifferent organizations and settings, an increasing number ofstudies rely on customer satisfaction surveys that consider differentwater quality attributes.

Measures of water pressure and purity have also been used toassess water quality (Bell et al., 1993). Pressure, according to theauthors, is that which is adequate to deliver water to the householdthroughout the day. Purity encompasses safety from both acute andchronic health risks, along with general public confidence that thewater is safe for drinking, as well as observable measures ofaesthetic appeal (odor, taste, and appearance, including visible colorand/or solids). A shortcoming of this conceptualization of waterquality is the focus on the delivered commodity and not on thequality of the entire delivery system. It fails to capture issues such aswater facility maintenance, customer services, and billing practices.

Some studies have identified multiple dimensions of waterservice for use in evaluation. A measure developed by Lin (2005)consists of four variables: water purity (based on chlorine con-tent); service coverage; service continuity; and the difference be-tween water produced and sold (losses resulting from inefficientbilling, illegal connections, or leakage). A comprehensive measureof service quality developed by Parasuraman et al. (1994) includesfive attributes: Reliability, Assurance, Tangibles, Empathy, andResponsiveness. Reliability refers the ability to provide watercontinuously and with the quality and the quantity required;assurance denotes the knowledge and courtesy of water utilityemployees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence; tangi-bles are the physical characteristics of delivered water, includingpressure, odor, taste, and color; empathy is the care and individu-alized attention provided to users with respect to issues likemaintenance services; and responsiveness refers to the willingnessto provide prompt customer services and accurate billing(Humplick et al., 1992).

In the present study, the quality of water service is evaluatedusing measures of reliability (continuity of supply), purity (odor,

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e51 45

taste, and color), pressure, metering and billing, maintenance, eq-uity (variability of reliability, purity, and pressure in different partsof the city), and community engagement in service delivery. Theseselected attributes are in accordance with those specified in theUnited Nation's Water for Life Decade (UNDESA, 2010) and eachplays a role in the overall efficacy of water service delivery.

3. Methodology

3.1. Study area

Abuja officially replaced Lagos as Nigeria's capital in December1991 because of latter's several urban problems, including inade-quate and dilapidated infrastructure, urban blight and over-crowding, that had made it unsuitable as the Federal Capital City.Since then, Abuja has experienced an influx of people in search ofperceived economic opportunities and city life (Abubakar, 2014).The population of Abuja city has been estimated at more than 3million and its unprecedented population growth of 8.2% perannum makes it the fastest growing city in Africa (Myers, 2011).

The development of city is the product of the Abuja Master Plan,implemented in four spatially defined phases to ensure efficientgrowth management and service delivery (Fig. 1). Phase I is com-plete and encompasses the central area that is home to the federalgovernment establishments (presidential villa, house of assembly,judiciary, and ministries), the central business district, offices ofinternational agencies, foreign embassies, and headquarters ofseveral business corporations. This area also contains the residen-tial districts of Maitama, Asokoro, Wuse I & II, Garki I & II, andGuzape, which are located around the central area. The three otherphases radiate outward from the center in a crescent-shaped urbanform. Phases II and III are yet to be fully developed, while Phase IVhas been earmarked for a siting and services scheme via public-private partnership. The development and management of Abujacity is the responsibility of Federal Capital Territory Administration

Fig. 1. Four phases of Abuja's development an

(FCTA).The Master Plan proposed “adequate” piped water supply to all

parts of the city (IPA, 1979, p. 117). Though informal water vendorsoperate in Abuja's suburbs and satellite settlements, public mo-nopoly is the mode of delivering drinking water in the city. AbujaWater Board, a public agency under the FCTA, meets the costs ofwater infrastructure and maintenance and service delivery fromthe federal government's budgetary allocation, revenues from userfees and international aid. However, the agency has recently facedincreasing challenges to provide adequate and clean water to therapidly growing population of the city.

3.2. Data collection and analysis

This study employs qualitative in-depth interviews and directobservation to explore quality dimensions of public water servicesin Abuja. This research approach was adopted since water supply isa contemporary event, hence does not lend itself to experimentalmethods. Cross verification of data from multiple sources (trian-gulation) is a well-known technique for enhancing the reliabilityand validity of information (Yin, 2003). Between 2013 and 2015, theauthor interviewed 85 residents and 30 city officials working in theAbujaWater Board (18) and the FCTA engineering department (12),all of whom are directly involved in the city's water supply. Thisexceeds the number of interviews (30e45) considered adequate fora qualitative study (Marshall et al., 2013).

Residents were nonrandomly sampled from fourteen residentialdistricts that city officials rated as facing water supply problems(Table 1). A literature review and the author's long experience withthe city during the review of Abuja Master Plan further supportedthe selection process. Key informants and snowball techniqueswere used for sampling the interviewees after setting three eligi-bility criteria for participation in the study: the subjects must (a) beadults; (b) have a piped water connection at home; and (c) haveoccupied their current residence for at least three years. Since long-

d the inhabited districts (Source: Author).

Table 1Distribution of interviewed residents by districts, gender and tenure.

District Male (53) Female (32) Mean length of residency (years)

Phase I 16 9 12Asokoro 4 2 10Garki 5 4 14Wuse 6 2 12Maitama 1 1 15

Phase II 22 10 7Jabi 4 2 5Kado 3 4 9Gaduwa 3 1 5Utako 7 2 6Gudu 3 1 8Duboyi 2 0 7

Phase III 17 11 10Life Camp 6 4 12Gwarimpa 5 3 5Lokogoma 3 3 6Nbora 3 1 4

Table 2Water supply problems identified by respondents in Abuja city.

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e5146

term living experience provides rich and diverse perspectives onthe quality of water services, key informants who have lived in theselected districts for at least 10 years were actively recruited.Twenty-six informants originally agreed to participate but 18eventually participated because the rest could not be contacted ormissed their appointments. Through a snowball technique (Noy,2008), after each of the informants was interviewed, they wereasked to recommend potential subjects who were in turn inter-viewed and asked to recommend others until no new informationemanated from the interviews.

The interviews were semi-structured and lasted 20e58 min.Interview sessions begun by introducing the author and purpose ofthe research and then by a ‘grand tour’ question about participants'experience with water services: “Can you recall a situation in whichyou experienced a problem with the water supply to your home? Youcan think about it for a minute, and when you're ready, go ahead andtell me what happened.” The subsequent questions explored theirperceptions of the different attributes of the water delivery system,including reliability, purity (odor, taste, and color), billing, andmaintenance as well as their opinion on the causes and resolutionof any experienced problems. Follow-up questions were used toclarify points and collect more details on previous answers. Re-spondents' anonymity and confidentiality was guaranteed and allsigned informed consent for voluntary participation in the studyand for recording the interviews.

The second source of evidence entails field observation ofproblems related to water services and the condition of water fa-cilities and infrastructure. Observations were noted or photo-graphed. Lastly, for further documentation, secondary data fromvarious sources were collected and reviewed. The most importantuse of secondary resources is to triangulate the findings from theprimary data (Yin, 2003).

All interviews were fully transcribed into text files and analyzedusing grounded analyses. First the transcribed texts were codedinto themes and patterns related to thewater quality attributes. Thekey themes were summarized and synthesized with the findingsfrom observations and secondary sources, and conclusions weredrawn from the combined data (Corbin and Strauss, 2008).

Water supply problems Respondents (n ¼ 85) Percent

1 Water scarcity 74 87.12 Dirty water 28 32.93 Low water pressure 33 38.84 Inefficient metering and billing systems 56 65.95 Poor infrastructure maintenance 49 57.66 Spatial inequality in services delivery 57 67.17 Lack of community engagement 79 92.9

3.3. General characteristics of interview participants

Table 1 indicates that there were moremales (62%) than females(38%) among the interviewees and their length of residency rangedfrom 3 to 28 years with an average of about 10 years. The sampleconsists of 32 (45%) households living in Phase II (45%), 28 (33%)

living in Phase III, and 25 (29%) living in Phase I of the city.Based on the analysis of interview transcripts, there is no

apparent distinction between males and female respondents' per-ceptions about water supply quality. But length of stay, whichprovides for some inter-temporal comparison, reflects the richnessof respondents' experience and indicates their capacity to evaluateservice performance (Percy, 1986). Also, respondents' length ofresidency, as expected, corresponds generally with the age of theresidential districts in Abuja.

4. Quality dimensions of public water services in Abuja

This study uncovers seven quality problems with water servicesin Abuja: water scarcity, low water purity and pressure, inefficientmetering and billing systems, poor infrastructure maintenance,inequality in services delivery, and lack of community engagement.Table 2 shows how many residents reported facing each of theproblems at the time of the interviews. The following section dis-cusses the nature of these problems, possible causes, and effects onusers.

4.1. Water scarcity

Although reliability is an important feature of urban watersupply, Abuja experiences outages lasting several hours or days. Inthis study, 74 participants (87.1%) have faced this problem, which ishigher than the official figure indicating that 40% of the householdsin Abuja Municipal Area have “regular” water supply (FCT MDG,2010). The erratic nature of water supply in the city has also beenreported in a survey, where only 27% of households indicatedgetting water supply daily while the rest were supplied every otherday, twice a week, or even less frequently (Ojo, 2011, p. 114). Per-sonal observation also corroborates the severity of this problem.According to interviewed officials, the demand for water in Abuja,as in most Nigerian cities, cannot be met by the available supply, asituation exacerbated by rising demand associated with continuousmigration into the city. Since the outages seldom affect the wholecity, residents and vendors can fetch water from the more elitedistricts in Phase I that rarely lack water.

Water outages are largely caused by faulty pumps, periodic“engineering work” at the city's water treatment plant, and pipebursts during road construction in new districts, which signals lackof coordination between the utility agency and the transportsecretariat responsible for roads construction and maintenance.Other reasons are shortage of chemicals and fuel required for waterprovision, caused by low budgetary allocations and failure of usersto pay their bills, especially the political and economic elites. As aresult, the utility agency introduced a rationing system, which ismore stringent in the dry season:

“Mostly between the month of March and early June, we used toexperience acute water scarcity and authorities of Abuja WaterBoard usually explain in radio, television and newspapers that

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e51 47

due to low water level in the dam we are going to face waterscarcity”

Consequences of water scarcity are pervasive and consequential,as many respondents complained of the loss of labor productivityand household income due to the need to purchase water fromvendors or fetch water from other districts. Another cost is thepossible infiltration of pollutants into the supply system with direhealth outcomes (Howe et al., 1994). Since water supply is anindication of sanitary conditions, increased water access has beenidentified as a major contributing factor to the declining incidenceof water-borne diseases.

4.2. Dirty water

About one third of participants (28) reported experiencing theproblem of occasional dirty water. This problem results mainlyfrom corrosive pipes, prolonged outages, or infiltration of con-taminants as a result of pipe bursts. As such, most residents areunsure if the tap water is fit for drinking:

“Many times the color is not okay; clean water should actuallybe colorless and odorless but sometimes if you turn on the tapyou cannot even bath with it because the color of the water ismilky-brown so we just use it strictly for washing plates; we donot consume that one”

“When we first came here we used to boast that the water thatwe drink from the tap is better than the Swan [bottled] water.But right now things have changed: like introduction of colorand smell. Definitely something is wrong somewhere, may bebecause of sewer leakage or manhole somewhere. But definitelythere is a problem with the water quality”.

The interviewed city officials were unaware of any existing ef-forts to monitor the quality of drinking water in the city. This isdespite the importance of monitoring and assessing the chemicaland physical features of drinking water, since diseases resultingfrom unclean drinking water constitute a major burden on humanhealth (Alhassan and Ujoh, 2012; WHO, 2011). In an attempt tomitigate the problem of dirty water, residents filter or boil theirwater, or add alum or a chemical called ‘water guard’ to the waterbefore drinking because, “we don't want to contract typhoid”.

4.3. Low water pressure

Low water pressure is becoming an increasing problem in high-rise apartments, hilly areas of Maitama and Asokoro districts, andhigh-density areas such as Garki, Gudu and Gwarimpa districts.One of the 33 residents (39%) who reported this problem lamentsthat, “the pressure will be so low to the extent that you cannot fill abucket within 1 h” This problem buckles sanitation system whenwater could not be used for bathing or flushing toilets. Anotherresident from Garki District narrates that:

“I live in a high-rise and the pressure of thewater couldn't go up.So you find a situation where by you have water downstairs butthe first and second floors have no water and you have to waittill night to collect water in containers.”

Upper-floor residents affected by low pressure must fetch waterfrom neighbors on the ground floor, wait until a time when mostpeople are at work, or use booster machines to “push water” up-ward or into storage tanks. The low-pressure problem has also been

reported in a 2011 survey of Abuja residents, where 20% of re-spondents were “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied” with waterpressure (Ojo, 2011, p. 162). According to interviewed city officials,reasons for lowwater pressure include pipe bursts, lack of power atthe pumping stations, and the small size of the main distributionpipes (at 25 mm in diameter), caused by underestimating Abuja'sfuture population growthwhen designing thewater network. Thus,despite the elite vision of a modern capital city (Abubakar, 2014),low water pressure and water scarcity in Abuja make conditionsnot different from that of other cities in Asia and Africa (McIntosh,2003).

4.4. Inefficient Metering and billing systems

Efficient metering and billing allows customers to influencetheir water bills and provides utility agencies with improved rev-enue generation, which is required for better operation of watersystems. However, all the interviewed officials and about two-thirdof residents (56) indicated that lack of accurate customer database,metering and billing problems, and tedious method of bill paymentwere the major obstacles affecting the system in Abuja. One studyfound that only about one third (34.2%) of surveyed households inthe city were metered (Ojo, 2011, p.342). Lack of meters, causedchiefly by inadequate budgetary allocation, compels the agency tocharge a flat monthly rate of ₦4000 e ₦6000 (USD $20e30) perhousehold, depending on the estimated household size or numberof rooms.

For metered customers, the tariff for residential areas in the cityis ₦80 (USD $0.40) for 1000 L (Leadership Newspaper, 2014; March30), comparedwith the national average of ₦50 in 2006 (Hall, 2006,p. 6). Accordingly, based on the city's projected water consumptionrate of 265 L per person per day (IPA, 1979, p. 183), the monthly billfor a household of five persons (the average household size inNigeria) is ₦3180 or USD $16. Thus the average monthly tariff for ametered household is less than the lowest flat rate of ₦4000, andcould even lower if water consumption is less than the generouslyestimated consumption rate. Thus, some interviewees describe theflat-rate billing system as “unfair”:

“They decide on how much they want to charge. It is amonopolistic product; we don't have option than to patronizetheir water supply. So you don't have option but to paywhateverthey bring to you”.

Several residents who use the metered system (except in thecase of pre-paid meters that only supply the amount of water theconsumer has already paid for) allege that the agency just usesestimates instead of reading meters. Agency officials maintain thatestimated billing is used only when they cannot access customerpremises to take readings. Another issue is meter sharing by manyapartments, which can cause dispute among households during billpayment and repairs:

“Like in my compound, we have about 18 flats and we have onemeter. So everybody contributes and that is how we pay thebills”.

Another issue is billing discrepancies. One resident was billed₦5000 (USD $25) in one month and the bill soared to ₦20,000 (USD$100) in the subsequent month. In some instances, residences wereclassified as commercial buildings, resulting in higher bills, dis-putes, and eventual disconnections. In many cases, disconnectionsare reportedly undertaken without notifying residents and pipescan be taken away by utility officials. There are also reported

2 A household survey conducted in 2009 revealed that only about 34% ofhouseholds in the FCT have access to portable water (FCTA MDG Office, 2010).

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e5148

incidences of households who “buy drinks” for the utility officials tospare them from disconnection.

The cumbersome payment system entails “leaving places of workto queue and struggle” to make the payments at few designatedbanks, which often are not reflected in the agency's account forseveral months. Thus, the agency sometimes assumes that the billshave not been paid and the consequence is that: “when you are notlucky to be around the house when they [water board staff] come anddemand the evidence of payments they can just cut off the water andgo.”

In some incidents, disconnections are due to unpaid water billsaccumulated by previous renters. As a result, the new homeowneror tenant could not get water supply reconnected until the incurreddebt was paid, since the utility agency, “does not care, the bill is inthe name [address] of the house, not its occupant”. According to onesurvey, reasons for non-payment of water bills in Abuja were debtsinherited from previous tenants (61%), disputed amounts (17%),irregular water supply (9%), and other reasons (13%) (Ojo, 2011, p.149).

4.5. Poor infrastructure maintenance

According to interviewed officials and 49 residents (58%), watersupply infrastructure in Abuja is poorly maintained. Responsesindicated that even though majority of houses in Phases I and IIhave been built for more than 30 years, the original steel pipes arestill being used. There is also no strategy for identifying leakagesand controlling water and associated revenue losses. Pipe burstsdue to corrosion leads to problems of reliability, low pressure, andcontamination:

“Most of the pipes are rusted and I learnt that both the waterand sewer lines were laid at the same place and the sewer linewas above the water line that is what they [Water Board staff]explained. So when the pipes got rusted the water startedmixing together with sewage.Wewere even drinking it like thatwithout knowing until it [the smell] became so much.”

Lack of routine infrastructure maintenance, illegal water con-nections, breaking of pipes to steal water, users' mishandling of theinfrastructure, and failure to report problems in a timely mannerlargely contribute to water infrastructure breakdown in the studyarea. Respondents indicated that lack of required equipmentincluding work kits and gears, replacement parts, and operatingvehicles, poor staff welfare (lack of promotion and overtimeallowance), and inadequate technical capacity of the maintenancestaff were among the major impediments to water infrastructuremaintenance in Abuja.

4.6. Spatial inequality in water services delivery

There was consensus among most residents (67%) and city of-ficials that water supply is more reliable in the central city than inthe peri-urban districts of Abuja. While water supply is much moreregular in the elite Phase I area and the Life Camp district, wherethe FCT minister resides, the suburbs and satellite areas are sup-plied with water for about 2e3 days per week or less and only for afew hours. This spatial inequality is even more severe during waterrationing periods, and especially in the dry season. Similarly, unlikein the suburbs, there is prompt maintenance of water services bythe utility agency in the central parts of Abuja.

This finding corroborates a survey finding that 63% of re-spondents living in the outskirts of Abuja are satisfied with thequality of their water services, in contrast to 71% for those residingin Phase I, which is a low to medium density area (Ojo, 2011).

Similarly, spatial phasing was reported to be significantly associ-ated with user ratings of water service in Abuja (p � 0.01), where92% of surveyed respondents in Phase I (central city) rated theoverall provision of piped water as either “good” or “very good”compared with 49.7% in Phase II (Abubakar, 2011).

Distributional inequity of urban services in Abuja and othercities in developing countries results mainly from the discretionarypower of senior bureaucrats who decide how frequently each sec-tion of a city gets water, thereby favoring elite areas to the detri-ment of peri-urban and poor-dominated areas (Werna, 2000;WHO/UNICEF, 2014). In short, inequality in water supply contra-dicts the provision in the Abuja Master Plan that proposed equaldistribution of urban services to all residents of the “neutral” city(IPA, 1979, p. 117).

4.7. Lack of community engagement in water services delivery

Community engagement is considered vital for improving theperformance of the water sector and achieving the MDGs for water.Nonetheless, 79 interviewed residents (93%) indicated that theyhave not been engaged in any decision-making regarding infra-structure development, operating the water system, designing thebilling and tariffs system, or managing andmaintaining the system.They indicate that the city only informs them about proposedwaterinfrastructure projects or water rationing schedules via televisionand print media. They added that even the decision to raise thewater tariff was made without their input.

Lack of community engagement can affect service performancewhen citizens have limited understanding of functions and re-sponsibilities of the utility agency. Active community engagementis a key element of sustainable drinking water supply. Engagementcan help identify community needs, grievances and ways ofaddressing them, as well as the roles communities can play inimproving water supply. It can also enhance customer services,encourage citizens to report water supply faults, and can shapewater governance by fostering accountability and transparency.However, effective engagement needs institutional and communitycommitment, removal of communication barriers, and citizens tocollectively participate (as organizations, pressure groups andwomen societies), given the diversity of people and their interests.

5. Discussion and recommendations

Similar to many cities in developing countries, Abuja hasexperienced substantial population growth that is overwhelmingthe provision of adequate and safe drinking water to city residents.To meet this challenge, the city is heavily investing in water infra-structure, including an ongoing ₦18.09 billion (USD $90 million)project for water treatment plant expansion (FCTA News, 2014,April 15). These are laudable projects for not only reducing waterscarcity, but also for expanding coverage to unserved areas.2 Eventhough operating statistics from the agency are not available,household access to improved drinking water in the FCT hasincreased from 65.0% in 2008 to 73.3% in 2013, when the nationalaverage was 60.6% (NPC, 2014 p. 369). Although the vision of theAbujaWater Board is to be a “world class utility which is consistentin excellent service delivery and uncompromising in the quality ofits product - potable water” (FCTWB, n.d.), and a senior city officialclaims that water supply in Abuja is “one of the best in Africa”, thisstudy has shown that the quality of water supply is far from whatthe city administration portrays.

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e51 49

City officials need to pay more attention to the quality of waterservices because as Hall (2006) pointed out, water supply systemsin Nigeria's cities are unreliable and under-developed, which hascontributed substantially to lowering the quality of life and well-being of average Nigerians. Accordingly, the following recommen-dations could help improve the quality of water services in Abujaand similar cities in developing countries.

5.1. More emphasis on the quality of water services

Three areas are vital for improving the quality and safety ofdrinking water: performance monitoring and evaluation, infra-structure operation and maintenance, and billing and revenue-collection systems.

5.1.1. Performance monitoring and evaluationAn immediate recommendation to Abuja Water Board is to

conduct technical and financial assessments of the water utility,preferably by an independent expert evaluator. A comprehensiveaudit would shed light on how well the utility is performing andidentify areas for improvement. In addition, annual performancemonitoring based on key indicators is a highly recommendedpractice internationally as trends in various dimensions of perfor-mance will help the executive manage the utility agency moreeffectively (via informed policy and planning) as well as protectcustomer interests. Results of annual performance monitoringshould be published, and could be used for benchmarking andcomparison with similar cities. Some essential and feasible per-formance indicators for water systems monitoring include:

� Water supply e percentage of water chlorinated (to ascertainwhether water safety meets basic health standards); averagedaily number of hours of continuous water supply for eachdistrict; per-capita water production (as sufficient water iscritical for hydration, food preparation and hygiene); percentageof water pressure tests meeting acceptable standards.

� Operation e number of workers per 1000 connections; opera-tional costs per 1000 connections; total operating cost per cubicmeter of water produced and sold.

� Metering and billinge percentage of billed revenue collected pertotal number of bills rendered; percentage of connections withfunctioning meters; percentage of bills containing errors pertotal number of bills rendered; percentage reduction in non-revenue water over time.

� Customer services e total complaints received and responses toinquiries per 1000 customers; number of public outreach andawareness events executed; average customer satisfaction rat-ings (e.g. scale 1e5, ranging from very bad to very good) fordifferent attributes of water quality based on customer surveys.

� Maintenance e number and length of renovation projects andrepairs carried out; frequency of infrastructure inspection ortotal area surveyed for pipe bursts; average time taken to fixpipe bursts and leaks.

� Staff training and welfare e percentage of personnel receivingtraining; percentage of personnel without work kits and gears;percentage of personnel promoted; owed allowances for haz-ardous work and overtime.

5.1.2. Infrastructure operation and maintenanceAnother need is for a plan of action for incremental improve-

ment towards long-term water quality targets. This could includeadopting the WHO's guidelines for drinking-water quality (WHO,2011). Improvements to infrastructure operation and mainte-nance could include:

� A laboratory test of water samples (biological, chemical, andother components) is an essential and immediate recommen-dation for ensuring water safety.

� Routine infrastructure inspection and maintenance and promptrepairs of bursts are required to minimize water leakages andprevent contamination.

� A long term recommendation is to replace the steel pipes thateasily become rusty with PVC pipes (WHO/UNICEF, 2014) andinstall larger pipes to address the issue of unanticipated risingwater demand in the city.

5.1.3. Billing and revenue-collection systemsAlthough, the utility agency meets “most” of its operating costs

through internally generated revenue, while capital projects arefinanced by the federal government through loans, and interna-tional donors (FCTWB, n.d.), improved water billing and revenuecollection could enhance the utility's financial sustainability andcapacity to improve service quality. In Cote d'Ivoire, for instance,more than 3 million households have gained access to piped watersince 1990, entirely financed through tariff revenues and withoutany public funding (Marin, 2009).

Based on the author's experience, residents of Abuja are likethose of many cities in developing countries and would rather payhigher tariffs than have to access water from more expensivesources (like vendors and distant areas) or store water in tanks andcontainers. Indeed, one survey found that 21% of respondents inAbuja arewilling to paymore for improvedwater quality (Ojo, 2011,p. 239). However, an important caveat is that any tariff increasemust translate into better services as people resent paying for poorservices.

On the issue of tariffs, the agency should shift from flat rates tomore equitable water pricing. Installing meters is a way to improverevenue collection and provide households with incentives toconserve water. Pre-paid meters not only prevent the problem ofbill-payment default, but they also save the agency from meterreading and disconnection costs. Bill payment could also beimproved by using an electronic system.

5.2. Good water governance

Water governance is about political, administrative, and socio-economic decisions-making processes through which societiesmanage and govern their water resources and systems (Teismanand Herman, 2011) and at the core of the World Health Organiza-tion's agenda for the sector (WHO/UNICEF, 2014). For more effec-tive provision of water services in developing countries, thefollowing aspects of water governance should be strengthened.

5.2.1. Institutional efficiencyInstitutional efficiency in water governance could be greatly

improved by restructuring the agency from the traditional civilservice style to become more commercially oriented. This could beachieved through strategic planning that asks, ‘where are we now,where do we want to be, how might we get there and how do weensure success’ (Mugabi et al., 2007). Recommendations for pro-moting institutional efficiency include:

� Providing staff with requiredmaintenance equipment and parts,operational vehicles, and protective gears (uniforms, boots, andhelmets) would improve operational efficacy.

� Strengthening transparency and holding the staff and decision-makers accountable would lead to more efficient managementof public resources;

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e5150

� The agency should set and work toward achieving performancetargets, including revenue generation targets for agency staff.

� Incentives mechanisms for staff include promotions when due,allowances for hazardous work and overtime, and bonuses formeeting performance targets.

� Building the capacity of the utility staff through on-the-jobtraining would enable them to better maintain the waterinfrastructure and provide customer services. This is preferableand less costly than paying foreign engineers for maintenanceand repair works.

5.2.2. Privatization and partnershipsPrivatization has been advocated as an alternative to public-

sector provision of services. Although privatization could bringbetter efficiency and lessen the financial burden on the state, theprivate sector would not necessarily ensure that urban poor haveaccess to safe drinking water (Dore et al., 2004). Indeed, privati-zation has been associated with lack of infrastructure investment,corruption and lack of transparency, restricted competition, tariffhikes, poor service quality, disputes between the public and privatepartners, and difficulty in regulating multinational companies,leading several instances of ‘remunicipalisation’ of water supply(Lobina et al., 2014).

Despite these criticisms of privatization, properly designedpublic-private partnerships (PPPs) can be effective in improvinglabor productivity and bill collection as well as in reducing waterlosses and the need for rationing. Many PPPs have succeeded inestablishing, after a few years, a full 24/7 water supply, and somehave been able to reduce water losses to 15% or less (Marin, 2009).In Argentina, privatization of water services has been associatedwith increased access and decreased mortality, and these effectswere largest in the poorest areas (Galiani et al., 2005). Dore et al.(2004) conclude that a PPP is preferred only if it can produce wa-ter at lower unit cost, improve the quality of water services, andoperate with less negative externalities.

Since most of the problems undermining the quality of watersupply in Abuja are related to utility operation and management, aPPP where the private sector is contracted to operate and managethe system should be considered. A lease arrangement may bebetter than a concession in terms of introducing sound commercialmanagement principles related to financial viability, accountability,and customer services (Marin, 2009). In Abuja, a partnership insolid waste management has recorded substantial success(Abubakar, 2014). However, outright privatization carries signifi-cant risks, given the naturewater as a natural monopoly, andwouldrequire regulatory capacity.

5.3. Stakeholder engagement

Improving water-supply services cannot succeed without a corefocus on the community directly affected by the quality of waterdelivery, as part of the social and political dimensions of watergovernance. Engaging all stakeholders via the informal and insti-tutionalized engagementmechanisms underlined belowcould helpimprove the quality of service delivery.

5.3.1. Informal stakeholder engagementSome informal mechanisms for engaging city residents include

interactive media programs, town hall meetings with experts andcitizens, and customer satisfaction surveys. These are very impor-tant elements of water governance that should be given immediatepriority because they could: (1) foster citizen's participation; (2)help the agency address spatial inequity in service delivery; (3)improve the relationship between customers and the utility

agency; and (4) help the agency evaluate service performancethrough direct input from end users (Marin, 2009).

Some studies have shown that citizen involvement in decisionsabout budgeting priorities, technology options, and infrastructuremanagement can significantly improve public water services indeveloping countries. In Porto Alegre, Brazil for example, partici-patory budgeting is one of the democratic reforms that played a keyrole in ensuring that 99.5% of the city residents, including thoseliving in suburban poorer neighborhoods, would gain access toclean water (Hoedeman et al., 2005).

5.3.2. Institutionalized stakeholder engagementImmediate formal involvement of residents' associations, civil

societies, NGOs, and donors for collective inclusive and betterdecisions-making related towater services is highly recommended.Stakeholder representatives should sit on the agency's Board ofDirectors together with city officials, and have equal voting rights(Lobina et al., 2014). Formal engagement mechanisms allow a va-riety of stakeholders to guide decision-making and implementationwhile also ensuring institutional transparency and accountability(OECD, 2015). These stakeholder processes can provide a valuablenon-threatening forum for the interchange of ideas and are alsoknown to play an important role in developing countries byencouraging utilities to improve services to the urban poor.

Engaging the local community through both formal andinformal mechanisms would also encourage responsible behaviorson the part of water consumers, such as treating the water infra-structure with care, paying bills promptly, reporting faults andoutages, and regarding the water supply system as their own.

6. Conclusion

This paper has shown that the most basic purpose of the waterdelivery system in Abuja e providing safe and adequate drinkingwater e has been frustrated by water scarcity, poor infrastructuremaintenance, an inefficient billing system, low pressure, and peri-odic dirty water. Commendably, in the face of these problems, cityadministrators are focusing on expanding water network and thusreducing the number of marginalized communities. Nevertheless,adequate attention should also be paid to improving water quality,since being connected to the water network is no guarantee ofservice quality and access alone is not a panacea for drinking waterproblems.

This research is important because it deepens our understand-ing of the shortcomings of the public water-supply services inAbuja based on attributes that are in line with International Decadefor Action “Water for Life” 2005e2015, which emphasizes therights of people to: (a) sufficient and continuous water supply forpersonal and domestic use, including drinking, food preparation,and personal sanitation and hygiene; (b) safe water based on localor international standards, such as the WHO guidelines fordrinking-water quality; and (c) water of acceptable odor, taste, andcolor for each personal or domestic use (UNDESA, 2010). Given theimportance of drinking water to the welfare of the city residents,and the monopolistic nature of water service, this study also rec-ommends means of improving the quality of water services inAbuja and similar cities in developing countries.

Future research could explore what societal weights should beapplied with respect to improving service quality for current andnew customers given cost impacts. Another interesting study couldconsider the strategies households utilize to cope with problems ofwater supply in Abuja. Finally, because wastewater managementhas long-term sustainability implications for source-water qualityand ecosystem integrity, future studies should explore the envi-ronmental sustainability of Abuja's public sewerage system given

I.R. Abubakar / Utilities Policy 38 (2016) 43e51 51

the leakage of untreated sewage into local streams and rivers(Abubakar, 2014).

Acknowledgement

The author thanks the study participants and acknowledges thevaluable comments of Prof. Janice A. Beecher, the two anonymousreviewers and colleagues at the University of Dammam on the draftmanuscript.

References

Abubakar, I.R., 2011. Distributional Patterns of Urban Services in a Modernist City ofDeveloping Countries: a Case Study of Abuja, Nigeria. Association of the Col-legiate Schools of Planning 52nd Annual Conference, Salt Lake City Utah.October 12e16.

Abubakar, I.R., 2014. Abuja city profile. Cities 41, 81e91.Alhassan, M.M., Ujoh, F., 2012. Assessment of the chemical quality of potable water

sources in Abuja, Nigeria. Br. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2 (2), 146e172.Bell, M.E., Boland, J., Humplick, F., Kudat, A., Madanat, S., Mukherjee, N.I., 1993,

September 1. Reliability of Urban Water Supply in Developing Countries: theEmperor Has No Clothing. World Bank Research Observer.

Budget Office of the Federation, 2013. 2013 FGN Budget Proposal. http://www.budgetoffice.gov.ng/2013-budget_details/13.%20Summary_FCT.pdf (Accessed:May 08, 2014).

Corbin, J., Strauss, A., 2008, third ed.. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques andProcedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage Publications, Los Angeles.

Dore, M.H., Kushner, J., Zumer, K., 2004. Privatization of water in the UK andFrancedWhat can we learn? Util. Policy 12 (1), 41e50.

FCT MDG Office, 2010. FCT MDG Baseline: Water and Sanitation. http://www.mdgfctabuja.net/Baseline10/Water.aspx (Accessed: August 18, 2014).

FCTWB (n.d.). About US. http://fctwb.gov.ng/about-us/(Accessed: May 04, 2015).Galiani, S., Gertler, P., Schargrodsky, E., 2005. Water for life: the impact of the pri-

vatization of water services on child mortality. J. Political Econ. 113 (1), 83e120.Garcia, L.E., 2005. Water pricing: an outsider's perspective. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev.

21 (1), 9e17.Gleick, P.H., 1998. The human right to water. Water Policy 1 (5), 487e503.Hall, D., 2006. Water and Electricity in Nigeria (PSIRU Reports).Hewett, P.C., Montgomery, M.R., 2001. Poverty and Public Services in Developing-

country Cities. Policy Research Division Working Paper, 154. The PopulationCouncil, New York.

Hoedeman, O., Kishimoto, S., Terhorst, P., 2005. Public water Services: reversing thetide against public water utilities. Water & Wastewater Int. 20 (3) (May).

Howe, C.W., Smith, M.G., Bennett, L., Brendecke, C.M., Flack, J.E., Hamm, R.M.,Wunderlich, K., 1994. The value of water supply reliability in urban watersystems. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 26 (1), 19e30.

Humplick, F., Kudat, A., Madanat, S., 1992. Household Response to Reliability ofWater Supply: the Case of Istanbul, Turkey. Policy Planning and Research, WorldBank.

IPA (International Planning Associates), 1979. The Master Plan for Abuja, the NewFederal Capital of Nigeria (Technical report submitted to FCDA Abuja, Nigeria).

Jaglin, S., 2002. The right to water versus cost recovery: participation, urban watersupply and the poor in sub-Saharan Africa. Environ. Urban. 14 (1), 231e245.

Kendall, S.D., 2006 Feb 2. Customer Service from the Customer's Perspective.Customer Service Delivery: Research and Best Practices, pp. 3e21.

Kumar, S., Managi, S., 2010. Service quality and performance measurement: evi-dence from the Indian water sector. Water Resour. Dev. 26 (2), 173e191.

Leadership Newspaper, 2014, March 30. Population Explosion Affecting WaterSupply in FCT. http://leadership.ng/business/360937/population-explosion-affecting-water-supply-fct (Accessed: May 08, 2014).

Lee, E., Schwab, K., 2005. Deficiencies in drinking water distribution systems indeveloping countries. J. water health 3, 109e127.

Lin, C., 2005. Service quality and prospects for benchmarking: evidence from thePeru water sector. Util. Policy 13 (3), 230e239.

Lobina, E., Kishimoto, S., Petitjean, O., 2014. Here to Stay: Water Remunicipalisationas a Global Trend. Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU),

Transnational Institute (TNI) and Multinational Observatory, UK.Marin, P., 2009. Public-private Partnerships for Urban Water Utilities: a Review of

Experiences in Developing Countries, vol. 8. World Bank Publications.Marshall, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., Fontenot, R., 2013. Does sample size matter in

qualitative research: a review of qualitative interviews in IS research. J. Comput.Inf. Syst. 54 (1), 11e22.

McIntosh, A.C., 2003. Asian Water Supplies, Reaching the Urban Poor. AsianDevelopment Bank, IWA, London.

Mugabi, J., Kayaga, S., Njiru, C., 2007. Strategic planning for water utilities indeveloping countries. Util. Policy 15 (1), 1e8.

Myers, G.A., 2011. African Cities: Alternative Visions of Urban Theory and Practice.Zed Books, London.

News, F.C.T.A., 2014, April 15. GEJ Commissions Phases 3 & 4 Abuja Water TreatmentPlants. http://www.fct.gov.ng/index15_04_14n.html?option¼com_content&view¼article&id¼286:fct-ministers-wife-reaffirms-support-for-the-needy&catid¼:latest (Accessed: May 07, 2014).

Nganyanyuka, K., Martinez, J., Wesselink, A., Lungo, J.H., Georgiadou, Y., 2014.Accessing water services in Dares Salaam: are we counting what counts?Habitat Int. 44, 358e366.

Noy, C., 2008. Sampling knowledge: the hermeneutics of snowball sampling inqualitative research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 11 (4), 327e344.

NPC (National Population Commission), 2014. Nigeria Demographic and HealthSurvey 2013 (Abuja, Nigeria, and Rockville, Maryland, USA: NPC and ICFInternational).

OECD, 2015. Stakeholder Engagement for Inclusive Water Governance. OECDStudies on Water. OECD Publishing, Paris.

Ojo, V.O., 2011. Customer Satisfaction: a Framework for Assessing the ServiceQuality of Urban Water Service Providers in Abuja. Doctoral thesis. School ofCivil and Building Engineering, Loughborough University.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., 1994. Reassessment of expectations as acomparison standard in measuring service quality: Implications for furtherresearch. J. Mark. 58, 111e124.

Percy, S.L., 1986. In defense of citizen evaluations as performance measures. UrbanAff. Rev. 22, 66e83.

Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., S�aez-Fern�andez, F.J., Gonz�alez-G�omez, F., 2008. Does servicequality matter in measuring the performance of water utilities? Util. Policy 16(1), 30e38.

Rakodi, C., 2000. “Getting the pipe laid is one matter and getting the water flowingthrough the pipe is another”: user views on public-sector urbanwater provisionin Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Ghana and India. Int. Plan. Stud. 5 (3), 365e391.

Teisman, G., Hermans, L., 2011, March. Perspectives on water governance. In: Vander Valk, M.R., Keenan, P. (Eds.), Principles of Good Governance at DifferentWater Governance Levels. Workshop, vol. 22 (Delft, the Netherlands).

Thoenen, R., 2007. Private Sector Participation in the Provision of Basic Infrastruc-ture. Working paper 66, African Trade Policy Centre, United Nations EconomicCommission for Africa.

UN, 2010. The Right to Water. Fact Sheet No. 35. UN, UN-HABITAT and WHO. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet35en.pdf (Accessed: May 04,2014).

UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs), 2010. Inter-national Decade for Action “WATER for LIFE” 2005-2015. UNDESA. http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/human_right_to_water.shtml (Accessed: 03/Oct./2015).

Werna, E., 2000. Combating Urban Inequalities: Challenges for Managing Cities inthe Developing World. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

WHO, 2011, fourth ed.. Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality. WHO LibraryCataloguing-in-Publication Data.

WHO, 2013. Water Quality and Health Strategy 2013-2020. WHO LibraryCataloguing-in-Publication Data.

WHO/UNICEF, 2014. Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: 2014 Update.WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation.

Yin, R.K., 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, third ed. Sage Publica-tions, Los Angeles.

Zeraebruk, K.N., Mayabi, A.O., Gathenya, J.M., Tsige, Z., 2014. Assessment of waterSupply services and operational performance of Asmara water Supply depart-ment (AWSD) for development of decision support tools. Environ. Nat. Resour.Res. 4 (4), 208e222.

Z�erah, M.H., 1998. How to assess the quality dimension of urban infrastructure: thecase of water supply in Delhi. Cities 15 (4), 285e290.