1) Low income stable countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have made the most progress increasing access to water supply and sanitation between 1990 and 2008.
2) Connecting water sector planning and budgets to strengthened core government systems, like those used for national planning, budgeting, and civil service management, allows countries to expand access more effectively.
3) Ethiopia demonstrated strong service delivery pathways for both rural water and sanitation by linking sector plans and staff to decentralized local government financing and health sector promotion efforts.
2. Outcomes: Progress and remaining disparities Presentation overview $ Services Service delivery pathways The process by which finance is turned into services and how to improve it Finance: How much has been spent and where it is coming from
24. Senegal urban service delivery pathway Clear targets in national development policy + masterplan Defined roles with national asset holder (SONES) and single operator (SDE) overseen by Ministry PEPAM – WSS MDG planning and coordination unit Social connections policy for over 20 years Connected over 3.3 million people (112% of urban growth) with house connections (1990-2008) Tariffs at full cost recovery though accessing soft loans
25. Poor stable countries have the strongest service delivery pathways Strong CSO2 scorecard rating Enabling services Developing services Sustaining services Weak
26. More low income stable countries have had a PRSP process than countries in other groups... * Countries with that have received debt relief
Compared JMP and country dataJMP -> water: 54% to 63%, sanitation: 27% to 34%Country data -> water: 46% to 58%, sanitation: 24% to 36%.
Change to box chartsReducing open defecation in rural areas: LICNF 12%, LICF 7%, RR 3%Increasing urban sanitation coverage: LICNF > LICF and RR
Change to box chartsReducing open defecation in rural areas: LICNF 12%, LICF 7%, RR 3%Increasing urban sanitation coverage: LICNF > LICF and RR
Low income non-fragile countries received more aid per capita for each unserved person: 3x LICNF and 2x RRSouth Africa – aid very small % of overall spend <5% … 95% domesticNot possible to separate past ODA to sanitation from water supply
Regional scores. Benchmarking of service delivery pathways done in each subsector in each country Policy (Targets in PRSPs, subsector policies, defined institutional roles)Expansion and uptake; Budget (sufficient, comprehensive, identifiable); Equity (criteria for matching need with resources, participation in planning, monitoring of equity)Ingredients – that depend on each other
Benchmarking each subsector in each country
LICNF have the strongest sector governance
11% to 62% according to Government figuresBuilding Service Delivery pathwaysUrban water supply: National utility Rural water supply: Unitary versus Federal systemSanitation: Inter-ministerial coordination.
The service delivery pathways for sanitation are also notably weaker than those for water supply, Three factors warrant specific mention: First, despite wide acceptance that policy and program development in sanitation needs to be lead by a single designated government agency (e.g. eThekwini Declaration – Commitment 5) only a 1/3 of countries taking part in the CSO2 had achieved this initial step.Second, there remains considerable policy uncertainty about the countries’ position on sanitation subsidies. This leads to: Inconsistent practice in sanitation service delivery both across development agencies and between agencies and government. But, more importantly the lack of policy clarity undermines subsector investment planning. Misconception that no subsidy means no need for a public sector budget – no money for local government Third, monitoring the impact of public interventions to improve sanitation are all but absent. This monitoring is needed to understand and improve the relationship between public interventions and the quality and quantity of household uptake
Project investment with TA to:Prime fragile state capacity for government-led service delivery – so that the sector engages in the PRSP process and accesses domestic resources when they become availableProgrammatic investment with TA for implementation support to: consolidate subsector service delivery pathwaysBudget support to: back subsectors that have completed the transition to government-led service delivery pathways
Project investment with TA to:Prime fragile state capacity for government-led service delivery – so that the sector engages in the PRSP process and accesses domestic resources when they become availableProgrammatic investment with TA for implementation support to: consolidate subsector service delivery pathwaysBudget support to: back subsectors that have completed the transition to government-led service delivery pathways
Project investment with TA to:Prime fragile state capacity for government-led service delivery – so that the sector engages in the PRSP process and accesses domestic resources when they become availableProgrammatic investment with TA for implementation support to: consolidate subsector service delivery pathwaysBudget support to: back subsectors that have completed the transition to government-led service delivery pathways
WSP a different/new program -New Global Strategy: Scaling up services through knowledge, leveraging investments -Delivering results: RFs + Indicators and a performance monitoring system to track progress and results-Focused business areas