The Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf(CBTL), Business strategy case study
WATER OPERATORS’ PARTNERSHIPS WORK FOR WATER UTILITY DEVELOPMENT
1. Water Operators’
Partnerships work for
Water Utility development
Smart water utilities Europe conference Amsterdam
13 September 2022
Adriaan Mels, PhD
Regional Director
2. 1. What are Water Operators’
Partnerships?
2. Activities and approach of VEI
3. Example of a WOP in Nakuru, Kenya
4. NRW approach of VEI and some results
/ business cases
Presentation outline
3. What are WOPs?
Water Operators’ Partnerships
(WOPs) are peer-support
partnerships between water and
sanitation service providers
They focus on building
capacity of resident operator
staff, rather than “doing it for
them”. This way, the benefits
last.
They are peer partnerships,
meaning that the support
comes from professional
counterparts with hands-on
experience.
WOPs are carried out on a
not-for-profit basis.
5. CSR company (ltd.) of Vitens and Evides
(public) water utilities established in 2005 with
two goals:
1. to contribute to achieving Sustainable
Development Goal 6 of the United Nations
(“water and sanitation for all, forever”)
2. to engage staff of the Dutch water utilities
internationally, as an instrument for capacity
development
Introduction VEi
6. 26%
6%
68%
VEI partners Water for Life Foundation International financiers
• At present 6 out of 10 NL water utilities are
partner
• Staff: 21 employees in NL, 27 project
managers on site, 100 local staff, 250 short
term experts
• Turnover €21M per year
Introduction VEi
7. Approach
Long term engagements (5-10 years) with strong
local presence (Dutch project manager on site)
Objective: improved access to water services, with a
focus on financial sustainability of the water utility
Through:
• Improving working processes in water utilities
• Pro poor investments
• Operational investments
• Attracting external investments
• Influencing the enabling environment
9. Example: 10 years of collaboration with NAWASSCO
• Nakuru: 4th city and one of Kenya’s economic
centres with a rapidly growing population of
currently 530,000 people.
• Approximately 40-50% of the population lives
in low income areas.
• Water company: Nakuru Water and Sanitation
Services corporation (NAWASSCO)
10. Partnership history
2009 2012 2015 2020 2021
2. Quick wins in NRW reduction,
pro poor services and wastewater
treatment (EU WF)
3. Scaling at County level: NRW,
customer services asset mgmt,
digitalization, IWRM, (WaterWorX)
1. First engagement and visit to
WOP in Mozambique (WB)
€ 0.6 million ca € 1.4 million
11. Performance results NAWASSCO
Source: Impact report of Water Services Regulatory
Board (WASREB)
2010/20112016/20172021/2022
Population served 325.300 442.703 512,420
NRW 47% 43% 31%
Turnover / billing
(KES million) 562 831 955
Total water produced
(1000 m3) 11.139 11.107 12.081
No. Of staff 241 228 188
Ranking in national
benchmark 7 4 2
Annual additional annual revenues 393
KES million compared to 2010/2011 = €
3.2 million / year
12. Part 4: Global Non-Revenue Water Estimates
• 126 billion m3/year
• 346 million m3/day
• 77 liters per capita per day
• USD 39 billion per year
Source - R. Liemberger & A. Wyatt
Pipe burst in Bemmel, The Netherlands, source:
De Gelderlander
14. NRW Basics - NRW Roadmap VEI’s validated ‘approach to NRW’
(10+ years of experience)
1. Raise awareness
2a: Top-down
quantitative m3
(company level)
2b: Top-down
organization
(company-level)
3: Bottom-up
quantitative m3
(DMA-level)
Management
Commercial Losses
NRW
organization
(soft aspects)
Management
Physical Losses
A. Assessment NRW-components (m3, organisation & causes)
Short- & mid-term investment requirements
B. NRW Strategy/Plan consisting of Interventions for: Resourcing/Capacity building:
Capacity of staff
• Training to enhance skills
& knowledge
• Recruitment of new staff
• HR arrangement
Systems
• DMAs/PRVs/AMR
• GIS/SCADA
• Customer/billing
software
• Hand-held/mobile
Institutional aspects
• Appropriate organizational
structure
• Responsibilities & tasks
• Procedures & processes
NRW
Reduction/
Management
• Unauthorized
consumption
• Meter inaccuracy
• Data transfer errors
• Pressure management
• Speed & quality of repair
• Active leak control
• Asset Management
Plan for monitoring implementation &
impact
- KPIs (SMART)
- Reporting framework (P-D-C-A)
- Risk assessment and mitigation
&
Plan for Top 3,5 & 7 Actions
&
Required O&M budget
C. Implementation of prioritized Actions
Leadership
in
the
(behavioral)
change
process!
NRW master class - Module 1, 2, 3
NRW master class - Module 4
15. Example ‘Top-down’ assessment - Harare Zimbabwe
y = 0.6453x - 8.9307
R² = 0.95426
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220
NRW
Mm3/year
--->
System input Mm3/year --->
NRW under intermittent supply conditions
Harare: 2009 - 2015
NRW in Harare (Mm3/year) - Intermittent supply
0
20,000,000
40,000,000
60,000,000
80,000,000
100,000,000
120,000,000
1 2 3 4
m3/year
--->
Scenarios --->
What-if scenarios for
Estimates of Real and Apparent Losses (2015)
RealLosses
Meter reading inacc/estimates
ill/unreg consumption
Unb. Authorized
Bulk supply inacc
60%
16. In: Local solutions in non-revenue water management through North–South water operator
partnerships: The case of Nakuru (Water Policy, 2013)
By Nancy Ndirangu, James Ng'ang'a, Anthony Chege, Reint-Jan de Blois, Adriaan Mels
Example NRW pilot – Nakuru, Kenya
20. Financial analyses of our NRW programmes
Payback period ranges from a 1-2 months (e.g. replacement of a single under-registering meter for one large consumer)
....to 1 year (loss reduction at DMA level i.e. at EUR 30-50 per connection)
....to 10+ years for network rehabilitation (at utility level)
21. Short term intervention Imbedding in organization
Meter management
Billing & Collection
Unauthorized consumption
Leak detection & repair
Long term network management
Overall pressure management Pressure management in dedicated areas
0 2 3 4 6
Time in Years
NRW
Which main challenges emerged? How have been addressed?
How much time would you say it took for partners to work in partnership? And hence, really take advantage of the added value of working together as oppose to working separately with different assigned tasks
Folder: VEI MWANZA SEPT\ArcGIS Items
File: NaturalBreakRiskOfFailurePipesMAP-103