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.

Andy Robinson, UNICEF EAPRO Consultant

Content: WASH NSPs
WASH in the East Asia and Pacific region Key features of NSP services Key issues around NSP services Challenges to improving NSP services Success factors

Water Supply in the EAP region
Improved water supply coverage (JMP 2008 data)
Regional averages: 50% Oceania 86% South-eastern Asia 89% Eastern Asia High rural population High range across region: 0%-60% unimproved WS 6%-100% piped WS
Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Cambodia Kiribati Timor-Leste Solomon Islands Myanmar Mongolia Indonesia China Philippines Vietnam Tuvalu Thailand Republic of Korea Japan Malaysia Singapore Water supply Piped 54% 93% 98% 97% 100% Water supply Other improved Water supply Unimproved 22% 97% 44% 5% 48% 72% 6% 19% 23% 83% 43% 16% 13% 0% 10% 10% 20% 16% 33% 57% 65% 57% 57% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 60% 37% 45% 29% 53% 43% 39% 38% 31% 31% 29% 24% 20% 6% 11% 9% 6% 80% 90% 100% 30%

Sanitation in the EAP region
Improved sanitation coverage (JMP 2008 data)
Regional averages: 56% Eastern Asia 69% South-eastern Asia
Cambodia Kiribati Timor-Leste Lao PDR Indonesia Papua New Guinea Mongolia 0% 10% 20% 30% 5% 2% 5% 50% 53% 52% 45% 50% 76% 75% 84% 55% 81% 31% 100% 96% 100% 100% 96% 69% 17% 4% 13% 3% 4% 3% 6% 10% 12% 39% 28% 9% 15% 15% 11% 24% 11% 40% 50% 60% 70% 64% 49% 43% 38% 26% 16% 13% 8% 6% 5% 4% 7% 80% 90% 100% 29% 33%

High rural population

Philippines Vietnam Tuvalu China

High range across region: 0%-64% open defecation 29%-100% improved san.

Myanmar Solomon Islands Japan Malaysia Republic of Korea Singapore Thailand

Limited data




Open defecation

Equity in WASH services
Water supply
Lower access by poor Much lower service quality (time to collect, contamination, reliability, consumption)
Richest 4th 3rd 2nd Poorest 0% 20% 89% 80% 77% 68% 56% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Much lower access by poor Higher disease and economic burdens from unsafe disposal
Source: UNICEF (2009) Status and trends in drinking water and sanitation in East Asia and the Pacific
Richest 4th 3rd 2nd Poorest 0% 29% 20%

Improved water supply
97% 76% 60% 47% 57% 40% 60% 80% 100% 19% 32% 40%



Open defecation

WASH: Non-State Providers

Water Supply NSPs
Piped network operators
(utility supply, independent source)

Point source operators
(kiosks, standposts, boreholes, handpumps, tanks, bottled water producers)

Mobile distributors
(tankers, trucks, carts, carriers)

Support services
(drillers, well diggers, pipelayers, plumbers, mechanics electricians)

(pipes, pipe fittings, water meters, pumps, generators, water tanks, precast concrete goods)

Sanitation NSPs
(latrines, sewer connections, septic tanks, soakaways, drains, toilet blocks)

Mobile waste collectors
(hand emptiers, mechanized systems, vacuum trucks, garbage trucks)

System operators
(sewer networks, treatment works, dumps, sanitary landfills, incinerators)

Support services
(marketing, hygiene promotion, community development)

(latrine pans, pedestal toilets, washbasins, plastic tanks, pipes, potties, diapers, soap, detergents, precast concrete goods)

Who are the Non-State Providers?
URBAN Network water and sewerage operators Non-network water providers

International Corporate

Formal Private

Informal Private

International NGOs

Local NGOs

Community Groups

Toilet providers RURAL

Waste management services

WS: Volume of NSP services
Small-scale water providers (World Bank, 2005)
> 10% in Cambodia & Philippines > 30% in Vietnam > 50% in Indonesia

Cambodia Small Towns Survey (BURGEAP, 2006)
17% paid for delivery by water vendors 3% connected to mini piped networks

Metro Manila water supply (ADB, 2004)
30% using small-scale water providers (for some or all water) 50% urban poor households using small-scale providers

Rural water supply in the Pacific (Willets et al, 2007)
NGOs & FBOs providing primary water services in many areas (due to limited public and private capacity in remote island states)

SAN: Volume of NSP services
Higher proportion of NSP services than water supply Septic tank coverage in urban areas (AECOM, 2010)
40% in the Philippines 63% in Indonesia 77% in Vietnam

40%-80% septic tank coverage in SE Asia

Private provision of new rural latrines (various, 2007-09)
65% in Timor-Leste (lower due to small market and large UN & NGO presence) 87% in Cambodia 88% in Lao PDR

Sanitation entrepreneurs (BPD, 2008)
10% sanitation treatment and disposal by private providers 70% sanitation transport by private providers 90% household facility provision by private providers

Key NSP issues

Lack of recognition or inclusion
NSPs often excluded from sector activities: Little recognition of the volume of NSP services Few alternatives to NSP services in many low-income communities (i.e. critical services; quality affects health) Significant capacity and resources in NSPs High household investment in NSP services (both non-poor and poor households) Failure to include NSPs in sector activities affects scale, costeffectiveness and sustainability of interventions.

Low quality + high prices = high profit?

Serving the poor

Flexible and convenient services

Studies suggest that informal provider prices are often similar to public service prices (despite subsidies) … where competition exists.

Service quality
Assumption that NSP service quality is low? Independent network WS comparable to utility WS satisfaction surveys (e.g. Manila) find few differences between NSP and other services Competition important to service quality? Water quality issues among all providers? (evidenced by complementary use of bottled water) Sanitation: service quality problems Badly designed septic tanks and latrines Limited knowledge of key hygiene principles?

Public finance
Bulk of WASH public finance to non-poor?
Utility water and sanitation subsidies (non-poor urban) Household latrine subsidies (non-poor rural) Septage management finance (non-poor urban, commercial) Ideology that expanding utility and CBO supply will (eventually) reach the poor … but a slow process in practice? Inadequate targeting (reliance on processes influenced by local political economy) Little public finance to support NSP services

Policy alignment
NGOs, FBOs, CSOs, CBOs: Independent objectives, policies and constituencies Limited coordination and co-implementation (risk of undermining other provider interventions) Little sharing of resources and capacity Sustainability issues (linked to finance & objectives) Private sector (formal and informal): Prohibition ineffective (enforcement limited) Few incentives or support mechanisms

Challenges to improved NSP services
High uncertainty and risk (asset seizure, corruption, rent seeking, lack of protection) Vested interests (public providers, politicians, profiteers) Administrative, legal and financial barriers (tenure, paperwork, fees, registration) Ineffective regulation (limited capacity, resources or authority for enforcement)

Success factors (1)
Information (service mapping, evidence of costs of inaction, identification of high-risk areas) Pro-poor units and funds (explicit objectives, specialist skills, performance incentives) Asset protection and investment guarantees (for competent providers) Political support (high-level advocacy, evidence of investment benefits, outcome-based incentives) Phased approach (recognize capacity & resource constraints; willingness to pay; scale requirements) And ….

Success factors (2)
Appropriate finance (demand-side, performancebased, objective targeting, and enabling environment) Effective regulation (encourage registration and selfregulation through incentives & social accountability) Professional support services (business development, capacity building, access to credit) Partnerships (local government facilitation + NGO skills + private sector efficiency)

In Summary
Non-State Providers = diverse + complex group Important services (with potential for more) Enabling environments inadequate (for NSPs) NSPs hard to monitor and regulate Need a more incentive and performance-based framework (rather than regulations and penalties)

Thank You!
Recent sanitation campaign in the Philippines: “Check your septic tank or swallow the consequences”

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful