Addressing the rural water supply crisis in the Punjab

In theory, rural water supply services in Pakistan should be managed by communities but in practice this is often ineffective. Operators commonly collect fees and act as informal contractors. Neither direct government management nor community management has succeeded in providing sustainable services to the rural population. Could the private sector provide the answer?

Apaper from Cardiff University in the UK assesses the potential for improvingwater supply services through more formal forms of private sector involvement.

InPakistan in 1990, the assumption that the government should manage watersystems gave way to the idea of community management. Village water users’committees were set up to manage systems, collect fees and pay workers andelectricity bills. This focus on local management was further strengthened in2001 by decentralisation reforms which devolved responsibilities for a widerange of services to ‘tehsils’ and union councils,the two lowest levels of government.

Thehigh number of non-operational schemes suggests that community management isnot working. A survey in one ‘tehsil’ found that only40 percent of the 25 existing schemes were operational. Even in villages with aworking system, water is rarely supplied to all households, as few systems areexpanded after initial construction in response to population growth.

Instill-functioning systems, interviews suggest that workers informally assumeresponsibility for scheme operation while formal community managementinstitutions play little or no role. Operators pay themselves from the surplusremaining after bills have been paid – a form of private sector participation(PSP).

Local firmswith suitable technical, management and financial skills do not exist in ruralPakistan as expertise in water supply has been confined to the public sector.Informal involvement of private individuals is unlikely to provide adequatelevels of service. More formal PSP arrangements are needed to bring in a widerrange of skills.

Theauthor argues that:

• Centralisedregulation (something often called for by the World Bank) may not be relevantto the needs of small-scale decentralised watersupply operations. These can be better regulated through clear and enforceablecontracts.
• There is no obvious legislative barrierto private sector participation.
• Village-level water user committees areunlikely to be effective, particularly when contractors are inexperienced andthe nearest source of potable water – in a region with a major salinity problem– may be far away.

Localised forms of privatesector involvement may be worth developing but will be dependent on action todevelop private sector capacity, implement oversight arrangements and providesupport to oversight bodies and private sector operators. The current crisis inprovision will not be ended without strong commitment from the PunjabGovernment and international partners to explore innovative models.

Thereare a number of possible PSP rural water supply options:

• Private sector operators could be supervised by village water supplycommittees with higher-level oversight provided by a rural water boardconstituted as a public authority.
• Non-governmental organisations could be encouraged to provide operational(such as planning, financing and administration management) and technical (trainingprogrammes, on-site assistance) support.
• Sub-district administrations could setup corporate bodies to provide water services.
• Pakistancould learn from recent experience in Uganda, where a donor hasenabled a scheme to support private water system operators.