UNICEF – ADB Regional Workshop on the Role of

Non-State Providers in Basic Service Delivery

ADB HQ, Manila, Philippines
19-20 April 2010

Non-State Delivery of
Non-
Water and Sanitation Services
SUMMARY

The views expressed in this presentation are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian
Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the source, originality,
accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented, nor
does it make any representation concerning the same.
 Engaging NSPs
NSPs have specialist capacity and flexibility to operate in
different conditions and offer services.
NSPs can help stimulate demand, and respond to
changes in demand.
Government cannot do it alone: Gov’t can enhance its
roles as enabler while NSPs can fill the gap in financing
and/or service delivery.
Innovation is often driven by NSPs.
Cost sharing options can stimulate household demand
and financing, and leverage funding from government
and other sources.
 Key Issues

Lack of recognition or Administrative and

inclusion legal barriers
Affordability Technical and
Service quality physical barriers
Pro-poor services Vested interests
(opposition to change,
Financing
political intervention,
Policy corruption)
Regulation Uncertainty and risk
Small-scale Water Providers:
Philippines
 Issues and Solutions
Issue Solutions
Need for Establishment of National Water and
recognition Sanitation Association in the Philippines
New policy for non-Water District service
providers

Regulation Permits and annual fees

Government: light-handed regulation

Political Partnership with the communities, providing

intervention not only water by employment as well

Financing Financing Institutions – provisions of

alternative models and financing windows
 Issues and Solutions
Issue Solutions
Institutional Partnership with local governments and
concessionaires
Management contract
Consumer feedback mechanism

Pricing/ Higher rates than utilities/concessionaires, but

Affordability lower than water delivered by tankers
Flexible payment terms: work with communities
to determine rates and billing system
No connection fees
Communities get share in the gross income of
the project
Why Small Piped Network Deliver

Quick
Affordable
Convenient
Reliable
Adequate technical standards
Expanded coverage
Ownership
Sanitation for the Poor:
India
 Actions Taken
Issues addressed
Low priority given by
governments to rural water
supply and sanitation
No strategy to address the
poorest of the poor;
lack of participation of the
poor in planning, designing
and implementing projects
Solutions
Use of village and donor fund to
leverage additional resources from
government’s water and sanitation
program
Strong awareness building and
motivation for whole community to
collectively address the need for
100% coverage.
Numerous village consultations.
Community strategy developed for
present and future needs.
 Actions Taken
Issues addressed Solutions
Financing: Village or corpus funds created and
Low access to resources; utilized to enable all 100% coverage;
Cashless societies
Village or corpus fund used as
collateral for bank loans for
community business.

Poor Operation and A common fund, managed by

Maintenance women, from the income generated
by fish culture and horticulture – is
used for O&M and repairs.
Training on masonry, construction
and maintenance of facilities - also
creates job opportunities.
Gram Vikas:
Vikas: Key factors for success
Strong awareness building and shared goal to achieve
100% sanitation and piped water coverage.
Village ‘corpus’ fund
Comprehensive hygiene and health education program
Integrated approach to development
Sanitation and water as entry point for other developments
Mechanisms for continued operation and maintenance
and repairs are in place
Capacity development for self-reliant and self-governing
village institutions
Piped Rural Water Supply:
Cambodia (GRET)
 GRET: NSP costs and benefits
Benefits
Capital cost per connection low = USD 32 (due to
locally appropriate technical standards)
Network expansion after project close
(162 hhds/system to 425 hhds/system)
Costs
Despite subsidy, only 49 poor hhds connected (0.8%
connections)
 GRET: Lessons learned
Intensive TA difficult to replicate at scale
(USD 114 per hhd; experienced design engineers)
Most poor remain unconnected & outside network
(insufficient incentives for connecting poor)
Low response to assisted credit
(bank loan conditions stringent: collateral valuation)
No replication of treatment works or public-private contract
in spontaneous projects
Small-scale intervention with little national impact
Sanitation Marketing:
Viet Nam (IDE)
 IDE: NSP costs and benefits
Leverage ratio 2:1 (USD 65 hhd vs USD 33 project)
Business growth among informal providers
Flexible payments
Accreditation of competent masons (health posts)
Problems:
Demand for relatively expensive latrine models
(few models suitable for poorest)
Equitable outcomes but not progressive
Strong demand for fertilizer risks parasitic infections
 IDE: Lessons learned
Market-based approach generated sustainable supply
chains (demand creation weaker)

Involvement of marketing expert critical to user-centered

approach (promotion, products, prices)

Significant replication and scaling up of approach outside

Vietnam (Indonesia, Cambodia, Timor-Leste, etc)

Reduced benefits due to failure to achieve community-wide

sanitation improvement (not targeting poorest)
Group discussion:
Issues to be resolved

Enabling environment (policy, laws, regulations,
institutional)

Quality

Accountability

Capacity development

Financing

Knowledge sharing: technology, financing and
management options, economic costs and benefits

Public awareness and participation
UNICEF – ADB Regional Workshop on the Role of
Non-State Providers in Basic Service Delivery
ADB HQ, Manila, Philippines
19-20 April 2010

THANK YOU

www.adb.org