Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Water Supply in Low Income Urban Settlements- Presentation

No description

Simon Ingall

on 28 April 2011

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Water Supply in Low Income Urban Settlements- Presentation

Water Supply in Low Income Urban Settlements in Developing Countries Piped household limited free volume Standpost volume limited free Piped Household cluster connection Individual connection – volume limited flat rate
Piped Household Metered Piped Household enhanced information education, communication materials Standpost staffed Standpost prepaid Piped local area grouped - household managed Piped wider area franchises -
Standposts community managed Standpost pay on use - nominated seller
Standpost pay on use - private operators
Standpost with tankers - community operators
Standpost + storage pay on use - private operators
Standpost with private tankers and vendors
How to effectively deliver water
equitably, sustainably and efficiently
to the urban poor? The goal and responsibility of Water Utilites should be to provide water to all urban populations. All urban dwellers, including those in low-income settlements, should be provided with access to safe clean drinking water, with the ultimate goal being a metered connection for every household, irrespective of security of tenure. Where it is technically possible for utilites to provide water to LISs, they should be forced to do so, and this may take the form of different supply options. This should be based on a full cost recovery model and take advantage of economies of scale. Studies have shown that consumers in LISs will pay for improved service and water quality. Overall costs to consumers are reduced through utility provision. This may vary from individual household connections to standposts? This should be possible, and indeed has occurred, in the more formal of LISs, absorbed villages, peri-urban areas and high rise tenements. Where it is not immediately technically feasible for a utility to provide water to LIS dwellers, a mini-utility (MU) is the next step down from full utility provision. This may take the form of water being supplied from the primary utility to a sub-utility or a community management scheme, or alternatively a separate locale specific utility. These should be respectively government regulated or self-regulated by the community managers and residents. This is a step on the road to the ultimate goal of utility piped water to all households. MU are possibilities in the formal to semi-formal settlements with a strong sense community, typically ones where there is some form of secure tenure, have grown over a period of time and may not have any additional space for expansion, urban slums, peri-urbans and absorbed villages. However, mini-utilities add an additional 'layer' of management and cost which is passed on to consumers. A benefit of supply from a utility to a MU is a guarantee of water quality. Schemes run with the assistance of other bodies, such as NGO's and CBO's, could be classified as mini-utilites. In many areas, particularly the more socially and economically deprived areas, such as 'squatter communities', the utility may simply not have the capacity or ability to develop the required infrastructure for populations that have no direct access to formal water services. Also, these areas may not have social structures in place that enable a 'mini utility' based approach to water supply. This is where alternative service providers (ASPs) come in. These will generally take the form of tankers, carts,door to door sellers or privately operated standposts and piped networks. Typically, costs of water are substantially more expensive and can range from 5 to 20 times than those associated with direct utility supply, and as such should ASP's should be viewed as a temporary solution prior to the establishment of utility and mini-utility services in LISs. It is important to note that, given the predicted huge increase in urban populations in the first half of this century, and the current inability of urban and national governments to adequately plan and cater for this expansion, those (self)employed as ASPs will be vital in supplying water for future LISs, and will not lose their livelihoods. ASPs should also be adequately regulated (admittedly difficult in some areas where no tax is paid) to guard against profiteering and to ensure good water quality. Originally, Kibera was a settlement in the forest outside of Nairobi which was first settled by Nubian soldiers. They were allowed to build houses in this area as they served the British crown during the First World War. Now an integral part of the city, the slum can be categorized as a squatter community.

The high skylines of the centre of Nairobi contrast with the brown and plain roofs formed by the Kibera slums. Underneath a confined atmosphere exists. Houses built from flimsy and waste materials are constructed close together; sewage and waste lie in abundant quantities on the ground and open spaces are very scarce. The majority of the population (95%) lives under the poverty line and most of them work in the industrial area of the city or as casual labourers. With an average income of 0,55US$ per person per day, food and water in sufficient quantity are unaffordable.

Walking and carrying water long distances, queuing several hours and paying for water at an inflated rate are part of daily life for people living in Kibera. The majority of the water is collected from water kiosks (64%), managed by private organisations or communities, for 0,001US$ per litre. Water quality is not ensured due to the infiltration of contaminated water into burst pipes, which significantly increases the risk of contracting waterborne diseases.

Houses in Kibera are deemed illegal settlements and thus the government cannot invest or develop facilities such as water supply in this area. Water service provision is consequently provided by private groups or communities and the role of local NGOs is important in the development of water access in this area. Dakar, the capital of Senegal is located on the Cape-Verde Peninsula. A maritime town on the African Atlantic, the climate of this region is warm and dry. Similarly to the rest of the country, Dakar has undergone a rapid period of urbanization due to natural population growth and an influx from rural areas. Consequently, informal settlements around the city have proliferated and formed peri-urban slums.

In 1995, Dakar experienced a severe water shortage due to limited rainfall and the lack of capacity of the public utilities to produce and distribute water to the capital’s population. Responding to the situation and the important investment required to ensure water access for all, the country decided to create a public-private partnership between the “Société Nationale des Eaux du Sénégal (SONES)” (public) and the “Société des Eaux du Sénégal” (SDE) (private). The aim of this collaboration was to increase the capacity of water production but also to manage water demand with tariffs.

Since the number of private connections and public fountains increased, currently 69% of the population has private piped connection. This is despite the fact that 45% of Dakar’s houses are considered slums. The quality of water distributed exceeds the required quality standards and water services are more customer oriented. In order to increase the number of private connections in poor areas, the connections are provided free of charge and water social tariffs are applied.

In this particular case, the private/public association manages to avoid water shortages and significantly improve the water supply in poor areas. Prepaid household meter Alys Bishop
Cyril Chaigneau
Joe Dalton
Simon Ingall
Jack O'Regan
Marion Vichier-Guerre Transitional
Utility Individual Water Retailer Squatter Communities or Shanty Towns Urban Slums High Rise
Tenements Absorbed towns & villages Peri-urban Areas The haphazard and unregularised nature of large squatter communities, and in some cases the vulnerable nature of the land area, may make it difficult for a utility to construct the necessary infrastructure for individual connections and, in these cases, utility run standposts and kiosks may be the best/only utility options. Utility Utility Utility Utility Utility Transitional
Utility Transitional
Utility Transitional
Utility Transitional
Utility Transitional
Utility The formation of a TU will depend on the ability of the community/management to access a regular supply from either a utility or alternate source. This may range from piped networks to standposts, depending on layout and costs. TUs may also take the form of group housing schemes supplied by an individual, sometimes metered, connection. Individual Retailer Individual Retailer Individual Retailer Individual Retailer It may be possible for residents of a building to engage in a community managed scheme whereby residents distribute water supply following delivery to ground floor tanks, which then may be pumped or carried to upper floors. Water may also be supplied to buildings via tankers and carts, but this will generally necessitate carrying of water to upper floors. In the worst cases, water would need to be purchased from standposts and carried to upper floors. Conventional piped networks may already exist in or at the edge of urban slums, serving more affluent or industrial areas. However, extension of these networks within the settlement, supply of individual connections and burying of pipework may be difficult due to confined layout and close proximity of buildings. Existing utility provision may exist through standposts or kiosks. TU provision may take the form of piped networks & group schemes, possibly metered, or community managed standposts. Karts and door to door suppliers may be used where access is possible. Alternatively carrying from standposts or tankers supplied by private vendors is required. The provision of formal water utility water supplies may not be present due to towns or villages originally being located outside the scope of the utility network. However, take-over of any existing network and construction and expansion of new networks may be easier due to semi-formal nature of settlement with greater space and wider access roads.

Supply may already be community managed, though generally through standposts. Storage tanks may also be used. Private entities may supply through tankers and standpipes with delivered water. These expanding areas require the extension of the existing utility networ. The semi-formal nature of these areas should allow easier provision of individual connections tohouseholds. Utilities may provide through a combination of storage tanks, tankers and standpipes prior to extending its network. Community managed supply may be through a combination of storage tanks, tankers and standpipes. Where possible individual group or privately managed networks are options. In some cases water in supplied through privately owned and operated storage and tankers which are options as utilities expand their networks. Sufficient infrastructure should be available for a utility to deliver water to the vicinity of the building. Sufficient pressure is required to supply to rooftop tanks or to dwellings should the internal pipework be available and adequate. Carrying is required if pressure and plumbing is inadequate.
Individual Retailer Largely unregulated private onsellers are the predominant suppliers in squatter communities. They can take the form of tankers, carts, door to door sellers, private standposts or a combination of these. In smaller communities (ie pavement dwellers, small groups of temporary dwellings), private onsellers may be the only options as the establishment of a utility network is not financially viable. Generally supply is inadequate which may result in long waiting and collection times. Finance Service Providers Settlement Types Focusing The utilities on serving all consumers, particularly the poor, and highlighting the difficulties they face. Segmenting Low income settlements in terms of the physical and technical challenges in supplying water services, and the variation in poverty. Analysing Financial data of approaches to water provison available to service providers Alternative Service Providers Conventional water provider
Water Production and Distribution
Water Scarcity/Intermittant Supply
Revenue Collection as Coverage Increases
Non Revenue Water
'Universal Service Obligation'
Economies of Scale
Urban Poor are a Potential Market
Metered Connection the Ultimate Goal
Provide a range of individual connections and standposts Courtesy of Richard Franceys Utility Group or community managed schemes purchasing utility water and onselling
Sold through piped networks or standposts Individual entities supplying water obtained from the utility or alternative sources
Sold through different combinations of tankers, storage and standposts We have considered 17 different approaches to supply water in urban low income settlements
Two main categories:
- Individual connections
- Standpipes (standposts)
Financial data provided by Dr Richard Franceys based on his study developed specifically in the context of low-income consumers in Ghana Comment Cost recovery of water supply is essential for the financial sustainablity of the utility and to maintain an effective service.

The main challenge for the utility is to reduce NRW this can be acheived in most low income areas through Individual Connections with:
Weekly Bill Collections
Information Education and Communication customer awarness programs help reduce NRW though enhanced bill collection, reporting of leakages and illegal connections
This improves net benefit to the utility with at no extra cost to the consumer Tenure and Legality Management Challenges to Utility Provision http://www.globalenvision.org/files/india%20slums%20use%20flickr,%20Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs%20License.jpg Utilities may not be legally obliged to serve the poor
Utilities may not be permitted to serve illegal settlements
Authorities may be unwilling to permit construction of buried pipework as this may convey a sense of permenance http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2010/20100907_cambodiawater.jpg Serving the poor is not prioritised
Cost recovery is percieved as unachievable
Low levels of motivation and lack of managerial skills Connection costs are unaffordable for many

Infrequent bill payment does not suit those on a varying income

Tariffs need to be structured with due consideration for the wide range of poverty levels Low Income Consumers Technical & Physical Topography

Origin, Location Expansion

Layout Density & Access

Building Type Copyright Joe Dalton Cost to the consumer increases as the number of intermediaries increases For most of the methods the utilities can:
Provide water at low cost for consumers
Generate a net benefit

When the number of intermediaries increases it becomes harder for the utility to achieve these results

The utility delivers water through the same methods used by alternative service providers so it could deliver water to the entire urban area Implement a sustainable and viable water supply alternative
Summary Large squatters are the exception
Alternative service providers are intermediate solutions
Utility managed individual connections are the aim Piped household meters
Piped household enhanced Piped household prepaid meter Piped household meter clusters Piped household limited flat rate Piped household limited free Standpipe staffed Standpipe prepaid Standpost limited free water With a special thanks to Dr Richard Franceys
for use of his photographs Conventional Individual Connection with Enhanced IEC Materials Haphazard and informal layout
Built on vacant and marginal land
Non-robust and poorly built housing
Difficult to supply pipework and individual connections Public or industry built housing
Main infrastructure can be supplied to buildings
Problems with internal plumbing and pressure means carrying water to upper floors Expanding, sometimes unauthorised
Semi-formal layout
Possible to supply individual connections but future planning required Swallowed up by expanding cities
No formal planning but less dense
May have boreholes and piped networks
Utility can take over existing networks As the larger urban area expands, surrounding satellite towns and villages may become swallowed up by urban sprawl. Though they may be irregular in nature due to a lack of controlled or formal planning, this has also contributed to layouts containing wider roads and streets (villages may be situated along primary access routes) and greater dispersal of housing. Construction materials used in housing can vary greatly between permanent for more established areas to ramshackle and insubstantial for lower income or newer villages.

Existing sources of water supply in villages may come from community managed boreholes or tanker supplied and tored water, from which consumers access water through standposts. Indeed, some towns and villages may already have a piped network and possibly individual connections. As satellite towns and villages are absorbed, utilities can choose to take over the running of these mini-networks or alternatively decommission and extend their own networks.

These absorbed settlements will eventually become, in effect, peri-urban areas, with the prospect of providing for future expansion; an additional challenge for utilities. The generally more spread out nature of absorbed villages should allow for easier access for the laying of pipes, from bulk mains to individual household connections.

Omdurman Sudan there existed a number of boreholes operated by the utility, Khartoum State Water Corporation (KSWC), serving a number of suburbs of the city including Ombada, Dar Es Salaam and Al Thoura. KSWC operated and maintained a network serving these areas from these boreholes. They also sold water to Alternative Service Providers (ASPs) which in Omdurman was mainly donkeys and carts. This ASP has been a major source of water in Greater Khartoum to those communities outside the network coverage of the boreholes for several decades. The Omdurman Water Supply and Optimisation Project executed by Biwater (Pty) Ltd constructed a new treatment plant on the banks of the Nile and connected to the existing borehole network. Certain pipes deemed not fit for purpose were replaced. The boreholes were isolated and shut down. A new network was also laid in Al Fatih, where many internally displaced people from the civil war in Southern Sudan were living. Previously the government had resisted serving this area as it regarded its inhabitants as temporary squatter communities. In previous years private water vendors had lobbied against KSWC extending their network as it would affect their business.

Absorbed villages or towns may be supplied by Standpipes supplied by tankers or Standpipes for example, prior to utility taking over existing water supply systems or extending networks Squatter communities may exist on the edge of urban areas and could be considered to be ‘peri-urban’. However, we have sought to distinguish between the unauthorized, illegal or more haphazard settlements on the periphery of cities (squatters) and those low income settlements that have some form of legality or authorization or are semi-formal, to again emphasise the former is not the ‘rule’. This can be seen in the case of Lusaka, Zambia where a distinction is made between ‘self help’ and ‘unauthorized housing’ .

These forms of settlements are of a more semi-formal and less chaotic nature than squatter communities, and are at the forefront of urban expansion, experiencing significant population growth. Conversely, they may have originated as squatter camps but over time have become more formal in their layout and appearance. Though buildings may be constructed in an ad-hoc or improvised fashion, and without any formal planning or regulation, these areas are less dense and expand through extension of existing structures or new plots being subdivided on the edge of these settlements, and can be seen as developing in to their own suburbs or municipalities.

The semi-formal and semi-planned nature of peri-urban areas and wider access routes should allow for easier utility-led construction of infrastructure for formal water supplies, and allow the possibility for individual connections. A greater challenge for utilities is planning for future expansion where growth and expansion is illegal or unplanned in formal terms. Networks may need to be extended as settlements grow. Peri-urban areas are often built on land that may have originally been deemed unsuitable for further urban development, such as flood plains or hillsides, and they may also present topographical obstacles.

May be supplied by standpipes supplied with tankers or Standpipes for example, prior to utility extending networks. Semi-formal layouts should make the provision of Individual connections easier. Sometimes referred to as ‘vertical slums’, these settlements may have been originally constructed as the solution to the clearance of urban slums and have now ironically joined the ‘stock of slums’ (UN-Habitat, 2003). Alternatively, housing blocks have been constructed by industries seeking to house workers and have since been neglected and fallen in to disrepair. Though the buildings are obviously legal, internal divisions and subletting may not be. High rises are typically inner city, but industry constructed buildings may also be built on the periphery, or what was formerly the periphery, of the urban area. Some form of internal plumbing system serving internal dwellings was originally constructed, but through a lack of maintenance this may have failed or have been disconnected. In some cases however, no internal plumbing may exist.

Delivering bulk water mains to the foot of these buildings should not represent any significant challenge to a utility, and this infrastructure often already exists. Difficulties ensue in delivering water to individual dwellings when there is insufficient pressure or there is inadequate internal plumbing. In these cases, providing individual connections becomes more problematical, and investment is required from residents and/or local authorities to provide the necessary pipework. Alternatives include filling roof-top tanks, using pumps where pressure is insufficient, or delivering supply to ground floor tanks. However the drudgery of hauling water upstairs will still be required where there is insufficient pressure or pumping; indeed some people make a living hauling water to upper floors.

Individual connections are possible where sufficient pressure (or pumps) and adequate plumbing is available. Alternatively Standpipes may be required. These, often illegal areas are the epitome of ‘informal and unplanned’, and represent the great challenge in delivering utility water services. Typically constituting single storey non-robust or temporary dwellings constructed by residents in makeshift fashion from discarded or natural materials, they are built on unoccupied land in vacant areas in or at the edge of town and cities, offering little or no security of tenure for occupants. These high density communities are normally haphazard in layout with no formal planning or service infrastructure. Often, though not necessarily, constructed on land that may be at risk to natural forces such as flooding or land slippage, or beside natural or manmade waterways, they expand typically through migration from rural and other urban areas. Squatter communities range in size from the large sprawling settlements, such as Kibera in Nairobi, to smaller communities built on vacant plots, and to individual pavement dwellers as experienced in Mumbai. The smaller communities may be more recent in origin but larger settlements have existed for some time and are effectively boroughs at this stage of development. Vehicular access is minimal and where possible is along unpaved or dirt roads.

The laying of buried bulk pipework is extremely difficult in communities with unregularised and unplanned layouts, which do not display the wide access routes conventionally used. The difficulty in fixing easily damaged taps and pipes to flimsy building materials to enable individual connections is compounded by the close proximity of buildings preventing the laying of pipework. Further difficulties ensue where settlements are constructed on marginal land with challenging topography, such as favellas on hillsides in South America. Individual household connections in these settlements are almost non-existent, and residents will generally rely on standposts, tankers, individual onsellers and private vendors, supplemented by untreated water sourced from lakes and rivers. Alternative above-ground flexible pipes may be an option but are less attractive to utilities due to the problems of damage and illegal connections.

However, squatter communities are the exception rather than the rule in the challenge of extending water service coverage to all and there are additional settlement types where the urban poor reside. More synonymous with the original use of the term ‘slum’, areas are often historic in nature or have been occupied by poorer residents as the rich moved out, resulting in large population growth and higher densities. However, further expansion is limited due to surrounding commercial and residential areas. Much of the existing buildings are legal, however infill buildings may have been constructed between original structures creating terraces, sometimes resulting in narrow and confined streets and consequent limited vehicular access. Buildings are generally constructed in a robust fashion.

The inner-urban nature of these areas would suggest a closer proximity to existing conventional utility networks serving more affluent or industrial areas, and in cases limited existing utility coverage within these settlements may already exist. However, the existing infrastructure may have become overloaded due to population growth and irregular or confined layouts make it difficult for networks to be overhauled or extended within these communities, and particularly to an individual connection extent. Above ground pipework may be more feasible than the buried alternative, and a grid layout facilitates the laying of metal pipes as opposed to the flexible alternative.

Standpipes may be required where access difficulties or buildings make the provision of Individual connections more difficult. It is the goal and responsibility of national water utilities to serve the urban population, in particular the urban poor. Responsible for installing and maintaining service infrastructure, and guaranteeing a reliable, potable, efficient and affordable water supply, this is the purpose of utilities existence. Utilities encounter technical, financial, legislative and regulatory challenges in their mission to supply residents with potable water. Inadequate infrastructure, rapid population growth, the rise in illegal settlements and lack of sufficient investment are further challenges water utilities face in expanding their service.

Whether it is due to a lack of political will, poor management, insufficient financing or the perception of the issue as too big a challenge, the needs of the poor have not been met. Public utilities have a monopoly in the provision of water, and the urban poor are a large potential market that represents significant economies of scale that could benefit the consumer and enable utilities to fully expand networks. Studies have shown that the poor pay more for water and are willing to pay for a reliable service. It is up to utilities to develop strategies that enable the poor to access water supplies through affordable costs of connection and tariffs, and to maintain sufficient levels of bill collection to ensure full cost recovery of the service, and thus ensures sustainability of the service. Sufficient bill collection reduces non-revenue water (NRW), which also includes that lost to illegal connections and leakages. Transitional Utilities may take water purchased from the formal utility via bulk meters or supply water obtained from alternative sources (for the financial results on this website it is the former). Transitional utilities are responsible for the capital expenditure, maintenance and operational costs of their own systems. They may take the form of community managed schemes or a ‘franchise’ run by an individual or group of individuals. Water can be supplied via standpipes or privately owned piped networks delivered through household connections. Collecting revenues is assumed to be more straightforward for transitional utilities due to the more personalised nature of community based approach or in areas displaying greater social cohesion, and a greater capacity for developing and maintaining relationships with consumers. We have used the term ‘transitional utility’ recognizing the capacity for the formal utility to ‘take over’ the running of such a delivery technique.

Below is a Service Provision Boundary diagram from Franceys and Gerlach (2008), which shows cost per connection versus customer’s willingness to pay. The black area is the existing utility service coverage and the grey area where the utilities have failed to extend their coverage, for whatever reason. Recognising that there is an efficiency frontier beyond which it may not be technically feasible or financially viable for a utility to extend its services, Alternative Service Providers (ASP) fill the service gap. We have used this diagram to plot the various approaches to water supply in terms of costs to consumer and their willingness to pay, recognizing that an individual connection, as the most convenient, displays a higher willingness to pay. Links to the delivery techniques, with a description and financial implications, can be found at the bottom of the page. Where utilities have been unwilling to or incapable of extending their services to low income areas, or are unable to meet demand due to rapidly expanding population growth, their place has been taken by largely unregulated Alternative Service Providers (ASP). ASPs can take a wide range of forms supplying unserved areas including door to door sellers, karts, privately or community managed standposts and piped networks. Water may be sourced from utilities (in which case they may be seen as an extension of the utility) or alternative sources. Generally water prices for consumers are higher when paid for through ASPs, though they are more successful at generating revenues as bill collection efficiencies are higher. For the purposes of this website we have segmented the ASPs in to Transitional Utilities and Individual Water Retailers. ASPs fill the service gap where utilities have failed to extend their services. Individual Water Retailers (IWR) may take water purchased from the formal utility via bulk meters or supply water obtained from alternative sources such as boreholes. They are private entities selling water for profit. For the financial results on this website we have limited the range of IWRs to standpipes that are connected to the utility network and are managed by nominated utility sellers or by private operators, and to standpipes connected to storage tanks supplied by the utility through tankers and run either communally or by private operators. Collecting revenues is assumed to be more straightforward for IWRs due to the ‘profit making’ motive, and a greater capacity for developing and maintaining relationships with consumers. IWRs normally benefit the most when the settlement is least developed or has more dilapidated infrastructure, because they are flexible and are normally the first type of service provider in these areas. There are a number of different pipe materials used for distribution and customer connections in low income settlements. Depending on the pressure in the network, as well as on the topography and environment of the settlements, some materials may be more suitable than others. Expanding informal settlements very often occupy land prone to natural disasters such as flooding or land slippage, or land that was considered unsuitable for further development or undesirable during previous urban expansion. Recent land slippages in Teresópolis, Brazil during heavy rains highlight the dangers in constructing inappropriate and substandard dwellings on steep hillsides, where many of the town’s favelas are situated (Phillips, 2011) . Settlements situated on flood plains or dried up river beds and lakes, such as those outside Mexico City, are at risk of inundation from monsoon rains, and are often raised on stilts. Stilted settlements hang precariously over the edges of grimly polluted rivers and canals, or beside lakes and the coast. As noted above, many settlements originate around existing infrastructure or indeed garbage dumps.

Constructing piped networks and delivering water supplies is more challenging and more expensive on marginal land, and in the case of hillsides, may require substantial pumping and associated costs. Building distribution systems to serve stilted dwellings is made more difficult as there is nowhere to bury pipework, and requires above ground flexible pipes. The importance in using the correct materials for the prevailing ground conditions and topography is also vital. For example, galvanized iron pipes used in Jakarta were unsuitable for the prevailing ground conditions and quickly decayed (UNDP, 2006).

However, topographical barriers are less of a challenge for inner city LISs than those towards the edge of urban areas. Generally having some form of planning or being a few decades old, they sit on similar land to that occupied by the surrounding residences and business, already served with water. Inner city LISs, such as urban slums and high rises, may be several decades old and constructed subject to the prevailing planning and building regulations at that time (UN-Habitat, 2003). They will have the benefit of being closer to the conventional utility network that already serves commercial, more affluent residential and industrial consumers. Limited but overloaded infrastructure often already exists. Thus, the provision of an underground piped network to the edge or vicinity of these settlements should be more straightforward, even for those squatter communities that are unplanned or have been built on inner city, vacant land. Future expansion and population growth is limited due to space restrictions (with the possible exception of future high rise buildings).

However, informal settlements may also develop beside existing infrastructure such as railways or under bridges. Supplying these generally small communities with a piped connection may not be financially viable for a utility and requires alternative approaches.

Utility networks will need to be extended and their capacity expanded to cater for expanding periphery areas and to reach absorbed villages. In their own right, some of these larger informal areas have become suburbs. In reality, some of these areas may have been lived on for some time and have become more formalized with buildings being constructed in a more durable and permanent nature.

A further complication to the provision of water to the urban poor is the rate of expansion of existing settlements and the global trend in rising urban populations. Those on the periphery (peri-urban and some squatter communities) can be viewed as the ‘front line’ of low income urban sprawl. In order to adequately provide potable water for these expanding areas (and incorporated settlements), utilities must plan for future growth, a difficult challenge for utilities given the lack of formalised planning in some areas, and the consequent lack of official data on future population growth. The more haphazard, unplanned, high density and often spontaneous the area, the more difficult and expensive it will be to supply water through individual connections to households. Without wide access roads or non-existent transport infrastructure it becomes increasingly difficult to supply buried trunk mains to the inner reaches of settlements. The burying of conventional utility networks and subsequent connections to households and standposts becomes less practical where buildings are constructed in close proximity with no space between buildings. Though some areas may have a semblance of original planning with buildings constructed in a grid type layout, their closeness may necessitate the use of above ground or rooftop flexible pipes in order to navigate inner settlement areas, which are more susceptible to damage and illegal connections.

The absence of sufficient transport infrastructure may also hinder the use of water tankers in gaining access to large parts of settlements. The closeness of buildings can restrict the potential positions for storage tanks and communal areas for standposts, thus increasing walking and waiting times for those obliged to carry water. In the more formalized of areas, there are greater options for the provision of different systems of water supply. However, many of the peri-urban and absorbed settlements, though informal to semi-formal, present greater opportunities for the laying of conventional networks, and some settlements, particularly high rises, should not pose any great problem in delivering trunk mains. Where the provision of individual household connections is feasible, taking in to account the issues highlighted above, the responsibility for maintenance passes to the consumer. The taps, pipes and meters required for individual connections is more problematical when fixing to ramshackle or unstable structures. Structures can be made from a range of waste or natural materials, where the potential for damage and neglect is higher. More robust buildings constructed in masonry or concrete such as high rise tenements and those in urban slums are more suitable for the provision of the necessary plumbing. Delivery systems need to be adapted for the different types of dwelling. Non Revenue Water (NRW)

As the utility expands its network into LIS it has to have an effective strategy for dealing with Non Revenue Water (NRW) in order to provide a sustainable service to its customers. Unless the utility can effectively measure NRW it cannot effectively control it. A utility can carry out regular water balance calculations to help quantify and break down NRW. Bulk metering and individual customer metering is an effective tool to enable the utility to account for its water. To achieve this, bulk and customer meters should be read regularly..

Bulk Metering

Bulk metering of all supply points to an LIS enables the utility to quantify all water supplied to the area. Any cross connections from adjacent areas would need to be isolated to ensure that all water supplied to the area flows through a bulk meter and is therefore quantified.

Customer Meters

Where possible the utility should aim to have universal customer metering. This will assist both analysis and operation of the network and revenue collection. Customer meters are required to be cost effective and robust and be able to record accurately.. In LIS, due to a lack of space, it can often be difficult to install every meter in this fashion. A key challenge in developing countries is the presence of fine suspended particles or grit in the network and the prevalence of intermittent supply regimes. The cost to connect to the water supply network for many of the urban poor is the biggest barrier to an individual connection in the home because the upfront capital payment required is often well outside what could be deemed a ‘reasonable’ percentage of income. As Kayaga and Franceys (2007) note in the case of the National Sewerage and Water Company, Uganda, the mean and median cost of connection of USD$197 and USD$500 respectively, is well out of reach for ‘two-dollar-a-day households.

As the role of any utility is principally to serve the population, it is also their duty to develop a structured payment system which facilitates the poor to have access to the water supply, not hinder it. Pro-poor connection fee strategies have been attempted by many utilities to varying degrees of success, for example the Manila Water Company Incorporated, allowed people to pay fees over one to three years, rather than the burden of one lump sum, increasing coverage to 98% of the population by 2005 (Wateraid, 2009) . The poor should expect to pay and be expected to pay for an effective service. In many squatter communities residents live hand to mouth and are only good at managing finances over the short term. Their day to day existence should be recognised by the utilities and donors from the very beginning of any water supply project, and therefore a system of weekly bill collection by the utility will enable the poor to pay and utility to recover costs effectively. Long term bill payments are simply not feasible for the poor because they are not good at managing finances over longer time periods (WUP, 2003). The type of payment for method used by each customer is inextricably linked to the level of poverty they experience as noted above. Tariff increases are often necessary to enable the formal utility to become an independent, effective and financially sustainable institution. In order to achieve this, the tariff structure should meet operational and capital maintenance expenditure and preferably generate enough revenue to facilitate capital investments and debt servicing (Franceys and Gerlach, 2008). Where increases are required these should be amortized over a number of years to alleviate any sudden burden on the poor. The Water & Sanitation Program (WSP) advises that if the utility has to increase tariffs more suddenly, then a thorough information and educational public awareness campaign should take place beforehand, to communicate to customers the reasons behind any tariff rise (WSP, 2009) . Tariffs are politically a very sensitive area which can often cause conflict between the role of the utility and municipal or national governments (McIntosh, 2003). The long-term objective of water service providers, public or private, is to ensure a high quality of service at relatively low cost for the consumer. The target of each utility should be to supply the whole population, including urban poor areas, with a metered individual connection. But in order to deliver a reliable and sustainable service the cost of the service provision must be recovered and in order to achieve it the utility needs to reduce levels of non-revenue water (NRW). For utilities, the challenge in installing conventional individual connections in low income areas is recovering the costs of the investment and operational maintenance in order to provide a sustainable and reliable service. It has been shown that one of the most efficient ways to increase a utility’s revenue is the reduction of Non Revenue Water (NRW). The enhanced metered connection approach is technically the same as the conventional connection, but with the added implementation of weekly bill collections and of information, education and communication (IEC) programs to educate people. This reduces NRW, and makes it easier for low income households to pay their bills. Higher bill collection efficiency is one of the strengths of private operators. Moreover, where water production cannot respond to the demand or during period of water scarcity, the utility can decide to provide water at regular intervals during a limited time to ensure a minimum level of service for each household. Mission Statement of AVRL in Ghana Below is a Service Provision Boundary diagram from Franceys and Gerlach (2008), which shows cost per connection versus customer’s willingness to pay. The black area is the existing utility service coverage and the grey area where the utilities have failed to extend their coverage, for whatever reason. Recognising that there is an efficiency frontier beyond which it may not be technically feasible or financially viable for a utility to extend its services, Alternative Service Providers (ASP) fill the service gap. We have used this diagram to plot the various approaches to water supply in terms of costs to consumer and their willingness to pay, recognizing that an individual connection, as the most convenient, displays a higher willingness to pay. This alternative supplies water with an individual connection, but the meters are clustered at the entrance of low-income areas. Households are in charge of the maintenance of their own ‘informal’ network within the area and the utility is responsible for the network outside the area. Household connections can be surface laid or potentially rooftop run. For the service provider it is easier and safer to have access to the meters, and leakages and illegal connections are more often declared when households are in charge of their own network. To reduce non revenue water (NRW), the utility implements programs to increase bill collection efficiency. This alternative provides water by an individual connection and controls water demand with a prepaid meter. Using this pre-paid system helps the utility to reduce the possibility of un-paid bills and helps low income consumers to limit water overuse. Water is delivered to the consumer after they have paid for it. Customers can pay as little and often as they wish, which is useful to those on irregular incomes. Reducing the total cost for the consumer by using pre-paid cards and a mobile phone payment system is also an option.
This method delivers water directly to the house in the same manner as the conventional connection but the number of hours of supply is limited. Households still have convenient access as well as the guaranteed water quality of an individual connection. Nevertheless, hours of supply are limited and consumers may install water storage devices, such as tanks, in order to be able to access water outside of delivery hours. As the amount of water delivered per day is determined by the utility, this alternative does not require the use of a water meter and the charge paid by the consumer is fixed. This method delivers water directly to the house in the same manner as the conventional connection but the number of hours of supply is limited. Households still have convenient access and the guaranteed water quality of an individual connection. Nevertheless, hours of supply are limited and consumers may install water storage devices, such as tanks, in order to be able to access water outside of delivery hours. Water delivered is free which considerably reduces the cost for the consumer to have access to the water supply (any costs are for storage). Even if the number of hours is limited, the utility provides a minimum level of service in low income areas and increases its number of consumers. As water is delivered for free no revenues are generated so the utility must find a solution to finance the implementation of this delivery approach.
Standposts (also known as standpipes), provide water to a group of households at a fixed point. Traditionally this alternative provided free water, but in order to reduce wastages and ensure the maintenance of the infrastructure, one person can be employed to manage the standpipe operation (perhaps recruited directly from the service area). The employee is consequently responsible for selling water and collecting revenues. Water is sold at an agreed price and non mechanical systems, for example tokens, can be used for its operation. In order to control revenue collection the water is metered. This method is widespread in low income settlements but is rarely managed by an employee of the utility. The prepaid standpost (also known as standpipe), provides water to a group of households at a fixed point. Water is sold by pre-paid meters to ensure the universal access to water for low income areas without involving staffing issues. Using the pre-paid system helps the utility to reduce the possibility of un-paid bills and helps low income consumers to limit water overuse. Water is delivered to the consumer after they have paid for it. Customers can pay as little and often as they wish, helping those on irregular incomes. Reducing the total cost for the consumer by using pre-paid cards and using a mobile phone payment system is also an option.
Standpipes (standposts), provide water to a group of households at a fixed point. In this case, standpipes with storage are designed to provide a limited amount of free water to ensure that even the poorest and those unable to pay will have access to a potable source of water. Storage tanks are periodically filled and allow water to be accessed by the poor between deliveries. A group of households may collectively purchase water through a bulk meter (utility retains ownership) and supply through individual pipes and connections to each household. This has the benefit of reducing connection costs for each household. This approach to water supply involves the subcontracting of water services by the utility to a private operator. The utility retains ownership of the assets (pipes, household meters etc), but responsibility for maintenance may lie with the utility or the private operator depending on the contract. The private operator is thus responsible for collecting revenues, setting their own profit margin. Standposts (standpipes), provide water to a group of households in a fixed point. The Community Water Board (CWB) purchases water from a utility via bulk meters or obtains water from alternative sources. Community water boards have a greater understanding of the needs and ability to pay of their limited customer base and can adapt their services to suit, along with a greater ease of bill collection. Tariffs can also be set at a level that allows investment in further community based schemes. Standpipes (standposts) provide water to a group of households at a fixed point. In this case, the utility constructs and maintains the required storage tank and standpipe, and periodically fills the tank from water tankers. Management of the standpipe is delegated to community based or private operators, and they are responsible for collecting revenues and for setting prices. This option can be used where there are no natural sources of water and utilities have failed to extend their networks. Standpipes (standposts), provide water to a group of households at a fixed point. The standpipe operated by a private operator is a utility constructed and supplied standpipe with an individual contracted by the utility to operate the standpipe. The private operator is thus responsible for collecting revenues, setting their own profit margin. Where a storage tank is used, this is filled periodically by the utility through their network. Standpipes (standposts), provide water to a group of households at a fixed point The standpipe pay on use is a utility constructed and supplied standpipe with an individual from the local community nominated by the utility to operate the standpipe. The individual takes a percentage of the revenue as an income. The price of water is set by the utility. Water delivered by the utility is the cheapest and the most convenient for the consumer Comment ‘Lower middle-income’

Low wage earners residing in conventional housing who are able to afford water and sanitation tariffs under normal circumstances. Their preferred payment option would be to use an individual metered connection for which they are willing to pay.

‘Developing poor’

Are those households with a reasonably regular income, who are able to invest in semi-permanent or permanent materials for their own home. They obtain water through a combination of an intermittent household connection or more reliable standposts. They prefer regular billing to make finances more manageable

‘Coping poor’

Tend to be on an intermittent income from an unskilled member of the household, residing in a poorly constructed shelter. Payment for water would be likely to be on a pay on use basis, either through a kiosk or standpost.

‘Very Poor’

Often living in shared dwellings with multiple families due to a very limited and infrequent income. Payment for water would usually be on a pay-on-use basis from a standpost but they may occasionally have to find alternative free sources.


The homeless and street kids with no fixed abode or any income who rely solely on sources of free water, potentially from unimproved sources.

As characterised by Franceys and Gerlach (2008) with views on water payment added Service Frontier Diagram with Water Supply Approaches The installation of valves is essential for the maintenance of the network. Different types of valve include: isolation valves, check valves, air valves and pressure reducing valves, all of which play a different role in operation and maintenance.

Valves should ideally be within properly constructed chambers as they can easily be tampered with Pipes Valves Meters Maintenance Need to be selection depending on the nature and type of low income settlement according to the physical challenges they present. http://www.globalenvision.org/files/2550699761_680e98e5c0.jpg
Full transcript