37363 The Water and Sanitation Program May 2006 is an international partnership for improving water and sanitation sector policies, practices, and capacities to serve poor people Field Note Urban Water Sector in South Asia Benchmarking Performance Measuring and monitoring performance of utilities is critical to improving the quality of water supply and sanitation services. Benchmarking is emerging as an important tool that policymakers and service providers can use to improve performance, support institutional reform, enhance accountability to consumers, and ultimately, improve services. In most urban areas in South Asia piped water is available for only a few hours in a day and wastewater is disposed off without adequate treatment. Executive Summary The urban water sector in South Asia continues to be plagued with severe deficiencies with regard to The urban water sector in South Asia continues to perform availability, quality, and equity of poorly with regard to the availability, quality, and equity of services. Though access to services. Though official records show an increase in access infrastructure is increasing according to official records, to infrastructure, access to reliable, sustainable, and access to reliable, sustainable, and affordable water and sanitation services remains poor. The affordable water and sanitation poor quality of services could in large part be ascribed to services remains poor. In most inefficient and financially weak service providers whose urban areas piped water is performance on important parameters falls significantly short available for only a few hours in a of internationally accepted best practices. A significant and day and wastewater is disposed off sustained improvement in performance of urban water utilities without adequate treatment. Many cities do not even recover their is thus critical to improving services. However, limited operation and maintenance costs availability of reliable performance information across the from user charges and survive on region presents a significant challenge to any performance large amounts of government improvement and institutional reform. support. Consumers, even connected by a piped network, Measuring and monitoring performance and using that to build often spend large sums of money on expensive and unsafe capacity is critical to the development of the sector and alternatives to cope with the poor benchmarking of service providers is emerging as an important quality of services. Finally, the tool to achieve the same. To promote sustainable performance impact of poor services is the improvement in the urban water sector across South Asia, severest on the poor who are often Water and Sanitation Program-South Asia is supporting the not connected to the formal development of performance measurement and benchmarking network (and thus are not benefited by subsidies that the service programs in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. This note providers receive) and for whom summarizes the initial experience of one such benchmarking the coping costs are the most initiative in India. The findings, despite the many problems in significant as a proportion of getting reliable data, broadly confirm the perilous state of the household earnings. sector in India. The note also spells out some issues that could Performance Improvement is the Key be relevant for the design of similar programs elsewhere. Also examined are the key aspects of the sustainability of a Poor service delivery could largely benchmarking program and the emerging experience in a few be ascribed to inefficient and developing countries. financially weak service providers 2 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance Figure 1: Performance of South Asian cities on key parameters City City Kathmandu Seoul Karachi Kuala Lumpur Dhaka Osaka Delhi Hong Kong Ulaanbaatar Ho Chi Minh Vientiane Manila Colombo Jakarta Ho Chi Minh Phnom Penh Manila Tashkent Jakarta Shanghai Seoul Karachi Tashkent Colombo Shanghai Vientiane Phnom Penh Dhaka Osaka Kathmandu Kuala Lumpur Delhi Hong Kong Chengdu Chengdu Ulaanbaatar 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 PercentageofPopulationwith24-hourSupply Staffper1,000Connections No. of Cities City 8 Osaka Shanghai 7 Chengdu Seoul Hong Kong 6 Phnom Penh Tashkent 5 Vientaine Karachi 4 Ulaanbaatar Kathmandu Kathmandu 3 Ho Chi Minh Osaka Dhaka Chengdu Shanghai Colombo Vientiane Kuala Lumpur 2 Seoul Ho Chi Jakarta Jakarta Minh Phnom Ulaanbaatar Manila Delhi 1 Penh Dhaka Kuala Hong Kong Colombo Tashkent Karachi Lumpur Delhi Manila 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0.25-0.50 0.51-1.00 1.01-1.50 1.51-2.00 2.01-2.50 Non-Revenue Water (%) Working Ratio (Expenses/Revenues) Source: Asian Development Bank. 2004. `Water for Asian Cities'. that continue to operate without compared to other cities in Asia on performance of urban water utilities sufficient autonomy, the right important performance parameters is critical to improving services. incentives, and the necessary such as availability of water, non- To match international best accountability to consumers. As revenue water (NRW) and staff standards, the urban water sector Figure 1 clearly shows, major efficiency. A significant and in South Asia needs to better its South Asian cities fare poorly sustained improvement in performance across the 3 Limited availability of reliable performance information across the region presents a significant challenge to any performance improvement and institutional reform. spectrum--operations and practices, ultimately resulting in benchmarking in five water and maintenance, quality of better water and sanitation sanitation agencies of the province. service provision, financial services to the people. In Bangladesh, WSP-SA is health, management systems, assisting the Government of and governance. Benchmarking Urban Water Sector Bangladesh to establish and Performance in South Asia mainstream the benchmarking Lack of Reliable Information is a process as an effective Big Constraint Water and Sanitation Program- management tool for (a) monitoring South Asia (WSP-SA) has joined the sector and using the Limited availability of reliable hands with governments and local performance indicators as a performance information across the partners to promote sustainable rational basis for fiscal flows to the region presents a significant performance improvement in the municipalities; and (b) sector challenge to any performance urban water sector across South agencies to support the improvement and institutional Asia. As part of this, WSP-SA is municipalities to formulate reform. At present, only a few supporting the development of performance improvement plans. utilities are able to provide even a limited set of performance statistics and there is no comprehensive assessment of sector performance by which inter- utility comparisons can be made. Need for Measuring and Monitoring Performance Thus, measuring and monitoring performance and using that to build sector capacity is critical to the development of the sector in South Asia. Benchmarking of service providers is emerging as an important tool for performance monitoring and improvement that performance measurement and In India, WSP-SA has been can play a significant role in the benchmarking programs in India, promoting the practice of sector as a vehicle for institutional Pakistan and Bangladesh. performance monitoring and strengthening. As some benchmarking in partnership with international experiences suggest, In Pakistan, as part of the overall government and key stakeholders. benchmarking on a sustainable urban water and sanitation sector This note summarizes the initial basis can help utilities in reform, WSP-SA is assisting the experience of one such identifying performance gaps and Government of Punjab in benchmarking initiative in India. It effecting improvements through introducing and institutionalizing starts with an overview of the sharing of information and best performance monitoring and benchmarking concept, its 4 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance benchmarking lies a fundamental question: How can I learn from others to improve my performance? Thus, simply put, benchmarking involves regularly measuring one's own performance, comparing it to peers, competitors or industry leaders, identifying and prioritizing key areas for improvement, searching for best operating practices in these areas and suitably adapting such practices through measures that improve one's own performance. The important word to note here is `regular'--benchmarking is not a application in the water sector, and an overall performance one-time exercise, rather it's a tool some international experiences. It improvement framework; (b) for continuous performance then describes in detail Phase I of undertaken on a regular basis improvement that yields benefits the project in India--the process, through a sustainable institutional when done systematically over a methodology, and the initial arrangement; and (c) underpinned period of time. Benchmarking is findings. The findings, despite the by appropriate incentives that now widely used across the public many problems in getting reliable encourage utilities to collect and and private sectors for a variety of data, broadly confirm the perilous report reliable performance data on objectives including efficiency state of the sector in India. Based a regular basis. improvements in systems and on the experience of WSP-SA, the processes, optimizing costs, note also spells out some issues Benchmarking and organizational restructuring, among that could be relevant for the others, ultimately enhancing the design of similar programs its Application in the quality of services or outputs that elsewhere. Finally, the note Water Sector are delivered to the customer. examines the key aspects of the sustainability of a benchmarking Types of Benchmarking program and the emerging Benchmarking may be defined as a experience in a few developing systematic search for industry best Generally speaking, there are two countries in this regard. It practices and operating procedures approaches to benchmarking: concludes that for benchmarking to that lead to superior performance, metric and process. Metric translate into performance and then adapting these to improve benchmarking is a quantitative improvement on the ground, it the performance of one's own comparative assessment using needs to be (a) pursued as part of organization1. At the heart of standard performance indicators 1American Water Works Association (AWWA). 5 Performance indicators provide the key information needed to define the efficiency and effectiveness of the delivery of services by a utility. that enables utilities to track Performance Indicators service delivery. Thus, performance internal performance over time, indicators can be used (a) for compare this performance against Performance indicators provide the internal evaluation exclusively that of similar utilities, and key information needed to define within the utility; (b) in a metric establish target levels of the efficiency and effectiveness of benchmarking framework amongst performance. the delivery of services by a utility. a group of utilities where a A performance indicator is thus a common set of indicators and Process benchmarking involves quantitative (and in some cases definitions are adopted by the first identifying specific work qualitative) measure of a particular group members; (c) as part of a procedures to be improved through aspect of a utility's performance or regulatory framework for monitoring a step-by-step `process mapping', standard of service. Performance and reporting; (d) as part of and then locating external indicators may be used to compare contractual agreements between examples of excellence for performance historically or against utilities and the private sector; and standard setting and possible some pre-defined target. Standard (e) for providing public access to emulation. In metric benchmarking performance indicators may be general baseline statistics. Benchmarking in the Water Sector Inter-utility performance comparison is needed in the water sector because the sector offers limited scope for direct competition. Within the sector a number of utilities are more progressive and perform better than others but the absence of any systematic comparative mechanism may prevent the sharing of best practices across the industry. Also, the increasing all-round emphasis on the performance gaps and desired used by a wide range of transparency, accountability, and levels can be identified, whilst in stakeholders in evaluating the efficiency in the provision of these process benchmarking a roadmap performance of the utility, including monopolistic services necessitates for achieving the required the internal evaluation within the assessment systems that are improvement can be laid out by utility as well. Trends in these consistent, comparable, and looking at best practices in the indicators with time may show transparent. Benchmarking, in this sector. Thus, metric and process historically improving or case, can be a tool to understand benchmarking complement each deteriorating performance in time the relative performance of the other in an overall performance for remedial measures to be taken water utilities, to identify the improvement program. before major problems occur in potential for improvement, and to 6 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance help inform the debate with various stakeholders. It can be used as a vehicle for institutional strengthening and also as a tool to assist water regulators in performance of their tasks. In case of public utilities, benchmarking ultimately empowers a broad section of society to ask why one service provider has achieved demonstrably better performance than another. Whom Does it Help? A well-designed benchmarking program can assist a number of stakeholders in the delivery of water services including: Utility managers and employees, to identify areas for improvement and prepare action plans. Governments, to monitor and adjust sector policies and programs. Regulators, to ensure that customers get value, and Customers or consumers, to depends on the effective use of the that providers have incentives get better levels of service. results as part of the overall to perform. decisionmaking process. However, benchmarking is useful Civil society and NGOs, to only as one of the tools of an International Experience raise public opinion in an overall performance improvement informed way. strategy. The result of a Globally, the water sector benchmarking project is a better acknowledges the importance of Private investors and lenders, definition of the areas of benchmarking for performance to identify viable markets and improvement. Hence, the success improvement. Prominent initiatives opportunities for creating value. of any benchmarking system in this area on a regional or global 7 While the philosophy of benchmarking as a tool for monitoring the performance of utilities is well understood, effective implementation is vital to its success. Box 1: Some regional and international benchmarking initiatives The Asian Development Bank (ADB) Performance Indicators and between the organizations are has played a pioneering role in Benchmarking Network (SPBNET)' to investigated (http:// developing, compiling, and analyzing provide utilities with sustainable www.vaverket.goteborg.se). comparative performance statistics for arrangements for compiling and sharing water utilities across Asia. ADB Water performance data and to develop an SEAWUN (South East Asian Water Utilities Data Books (1993 and 1997) understanding of how the data can be Utilities Network) was established in and Water in Asian Cities 2004 published used for benchmarking. During the first 2002 with ADB support, with the objective as part of regional technical assistance year, 21 utilities from 15 countries of helping the member utilities improve projects, provide a broad perspective of provided their performance information their performance in the delivery of water water utility services to stakeholders and and the results were published by WUP. supply and sanitation services for all. for utilities to use as benchmarks to The project was then extended to cover SEAWUN is establishing a benchmarking measure their own performance. These the rest of the utilities in Africa. Specific program that aims to link water utilities in feature water utility and city profiles by activities include development of a South East Asia in a regional water supply data and indicators, regional software package for use in performance benchmarking network. SEAWUN has profiles for inter-utility comparison and data analysis, collection of performance recently implemented the Internet-based sector profiles containing summary of data from utilities, production of a data system for benchmarking with data from results (http://www.adb.org). bank on the performance of utilities in 47 water utilities from seven countries Africa, and training of utilities personnel (http://www.seawun.org/benchmarking). IBNET, the International Benchmarking on benchmarking and its application to Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities, the sector. Currently, there is a database International Water Association (IWA) was started to link performance of the performance of 110 utilities from 40 is an international association connecting information from utilities around the world countries in Africa (www.wupafrica.org). the broad community of water and to provide support to new and professionals around the globe. One of the existing benchmarking schemes. The Scandinavian Six-City Project: In 1995, focus activities of IWA is to promote initiative was started by the World Bank in the six cities' group in Scandinavian performance monitoring and the late 1990s when it developed a suite countries (Copenhagen, Gothenburg, benchmarking in the water sector. IWA set of software tools and guidance Helsinki, Malmo, Oslo, and Stockholm) up the `Task Force on Performance documents to help utilities compile and initiated the development of a coherent Indicators' and the `Task Force on share performance information. IBNET performance benchmarking system for Benchmarking' with the objective of facilitates the sharing of cost and water and wastewater services. The developing commonly understood and performance information between utilities group developed a set of performance generally accepted performance and between countries by creating a indicators that may be considered a indicators that provide decisionmakers network of linked websites, through global standardized reference language with an overall perception of the utility partnership efforts. The development of necessary for making consistent system performance as a sound basis for making IBNET is now supported by the DfID and comparisons. Annual benchmarking strategic choices. IWA has published two the World Bank (www.ib-net.org). exercises are carried out and the results manuals on `Best Practice Performance presented in two forms, as a summary to Indicators' for water and wastewater The Water Utility Partnership for the Managing Directors of the utilities and services. These publications provide Capacity Building in Africa (WUP) was in more detail to the operational staff. guidelines for the establishment of a launched in 1996 to help the water sector Comparative performance between the management tool for water supply utilities in Africa improve its performance and six utilities and trends looking back five based on the use of performance achieve economically and years are also highlighted. Metric indicators. IWA also supports utilities or environmentally sustainable service benchmarking processes have also been industry associations in setting up delivery. WUP has started a project supplemented by process benchmarking benchmarking systems called the `Service Providers' whereby differences in performance (http://www.iwahq.org.uk). 8 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance basis include the Asian Difficulties in agreeing on a set Benchmarking Urban Water Utilities Development Bank's Water Utilities of performance indicators and in partnership with the Ministry of Data Book, the International their definitions. Urban Development (MoUD), Benchmarking Network (IBNET) Government of India (GoI). The supported by the World Bank and Limitations in the availability project was conceptualized in DfID, the Water Utilities Partnership and reliability of data, response to the government's (WUP) in Africa, the South East or considerable variation request for better baseline data on Asian Water Utilities Network between utilities. the urban water sector in India. The (SEAWUN), the Scandinavian six- project aims to: city project, and so on. Initiatives at Comparisons between utilities the country level include the ones in being influenced by the different Create awareness about the the United Kingdom, South Africa, operating environment that each concept of benchmarking and Australia, Indonesia, Brazil, one faces. its benefits for the water sector. Vietnam, and the Philippines, amongst many others (see Box 1). Variations in the usefulness of Establish a set of relevant, Performance benchmarking has an indicator, and also the useful, and commonly become a standard practice in the likelihood of it being monitored, understood performance regulated water utilities of England across utilities. indicators for the water sector in and Wales and Australia with the regional context. considerable success. Lack of appropriate incentives and accountability for the Collect and analyze data from a Barriers to Benchmarking various utilities to collect and diverse sample of urban centers report reliable performance data to identify performance trends While the philosophy of on a regular basis. and key issues. benchmarking as a tool for monitoring the performance of Developing effective and Promote and embed the utilities is well understood, effective sustainable benchmarking practice of performance implementation is vital to its practices requires a common monitoring and benchmarking in success. A number of constraints commitment to overcome water utilities for improving can limit the development of these constraints. sector performance. effective benchmarking practices. Benchmarking is a data-intensive Benchmarking Urban Key local partners were identified exercise that aims to bring together as the participating utilities: MoUD a large number of different entities Water Utilities in (GoI), state governments, and the on a common platform. However, Indian Water Works Association these entities may be following India (IWWA). WSP-SA has adopted a varying operating practices and will demand-driven participatory undoubtedly be run in different As part of its urban work program, approach to benchmarking where financial and institutional the Water and Sanitation Program- the emphasis is on first making environments. Some of the common South Asia (WSP-SA) is utilities or governments appreciate constraints that could be faced are: undertaking a project on the concept and its benefits, 9 The project was received positively by most of the utilities and the discussions led to some important insights into utility operations, existing management information systems, and the relevance of the chosen performance indicators. Figure 2: Phase I methodology Circulation of Visits & Comments on Initial Final Data Concept Notes Presentations Information Data Response & Analysis & Formats to Utilities Submitted Six to seven months evolve a consensus on the India through targeted The underlying objectives behind approach to be followed, and then dissemination and advocacy, and this methodology were to encourage them to actively working with governments and effectively communicate the collaborate with other utilities in local partners in the sector to program objectives, promote building a sustainable prepare a roll-out plan for more ownership of the project by the benchmarking network. extensive and continuous utilities, and work collectively to benchmarking in future. achieve consensus on Project Structure performance indicators and data Phase I: Initial Development and formats. The project was received The project is being undertaken in Testing of Methodology positively by most of the utilities two Phases. Phase I, which was and the discussions led to some completed in early 2005, involved Overall Approach and important insights into utility creating awareness, developing the Methodology: As part of Phase I of operations, existing management methodology, as well as collecting the project, WSP-SA met key information systems, and the and analyzing data for an initial officials of 15 major water utilities relevance of the chosen sample of utilities in India. It has across India to create awareness performance indicators. enabled insights on the relevance about the concept and its benefits, of the concept and its interest discuss data definitions and Performance Indicators: For amongst utilities in India, suitable performance indicators, design a performance indicators and data methods to collect and analyze suitable data collection instrument collection, the World Bank data in the absence of readily- and collect relevant data. The initial Benchmarking Start Up Kit was used as the basic template, with available information, and the data submissions from the utilities were checked for quality and some modifications to suit the various institutional models that consistency, and detailed national and regional WSS context. could be explored for long-term comments were sent to them. After The toolkit measures a utility's benchmarking considering the revisions and clarifications, the performance on technical, service diversity in sector structure and modified data so received from the delivery, financial, commercial, and operating environment across utilities was used for the purpose organizational aspects. This has India. Building on Phase I, the work of analysis. It must be noted here been done through 10 core in Phase II aims at working with a that no independent auditing of indicators (shown in Figure 3) and selected set of utilities to collect data was carried out. It took around 28 individual indicators across the fresh data, scaling up the exercise six to seven months for the entire core categories. Two important to promote the concept amongst a process. The overall methodology indicators that could not be larger number of utilities across is shown in Figure 2. measured in Phase I relate to 10 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance quality of water and customer Figure 3: Core performance indicators satisfaction. These are proposed to be suitably included in Phase II of Coverage the project. Investment Prod./Cons. The Sample: As shown in Figures 4 and 5, at the end of Phase I, performance data had been Financial Core Indicators UFW collected from 13 utilities covering 23 cities and towns across India 10 Core Indicators with a total population of around 50 28 Individual Indicators million. It must be noted that a Billing & Metering larger number of utilities were Collection approached to ensure a representative mix out of which Quality Network some chose not to participate or did not respond in time. Though Costs & this did affect the sample Staffing somewhat, the final set still had utilities from all over the country representing a wide mix of institutional structures, population Figure 4:The sample sizes, and geographical spread. Another point to note here is that some of the state level agencies (Punjab Water Supply and Punjab Chandigarh Sewerage Board and PHED, Delhi Rajasthan) provided data for many towns served by them; the final Rajasthan sample thus has five towns each from these two states. As the Ahmedabad figures show, though this made the Kolkata final sample not comparable on some parameters, the intent in Phase I was to cover a fair spread Mumbai Hyderabad of cities in terms of size and Goa institutional structure so as to DataCollection appreciate the differences in · Punjab (Bathinda, Dera Bassi, Gurdaspur) Bangalore · Rajasthan (Jaipur, Udaipur, Jodhpur, Bikaner, operating procedures, Chennai Bharatpur, Ajmer, Kota) · Tamil Nadu (TWAD) · Chandigarh · Delhi · Ahmedabad · Kolkata organizational capacities, and the · Mumbai · Hyderabad · Goa · Bangalore · Chennai resulting difficulties in data TamilNadu ForGoa,averageofsevenschemestreatedasone collection. The final sample had a 11 A large number of utilities were approached to ensure a representative mix of institutional structures, population sizes, and geographical spread. Figure 5: Final sample--Key characteristics Water Works Association, World Bank, WSP, consumer Number of connections (in '000) organizations, and domestic and Goa international water sector experts Dera Bassi Patran on a common platform. Key Dasuya findings of Phase I were shared at Gurdaspur the workshop, the methodology Bathinda was discussed and reviewed, and Bharatpur the participants were encouraged Udaipur to think beyond quantitative Bikaner comparisons as to how such data Jodhpur could be used for process Ludhiana Chandigarh improvements and also about an Jaipur appropriate model for putting in Chennai place a sustainable benchmarking Ahmedabad program at the national level. Mumbai The workshop was successful and Bangalore drew enthusiastic participation Delhi from all stakeholders. 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 Analysis: On account of poor Mix by institutional structure quality of information and non- 12 11 conformity with formats from some 10 Goa of the utilities, the final data Jaipur 8 Udaipur analysis was carried out for only 18 Bikaner of the 23 cities and towns for which 6 Bharatpur Jodhpur 4 data was collected. The analysis Gurdaspur 4 3 Bathinda Ahmedabad was carried out along two lines: DeraBassi Mumbai 2 Bangalore Patran Delhi Chandigarh Dasuya Chennai Ludhiana Comparison of overall 0 City Board Municipal Corporation Statewide Agency sample average with international benchmarks2 on fair mix of five large cities `Benchmarking Urban Water selected indicators. (>250,000 connections), six Utilities' was organized in October medium cities (50,000-250,000 2004 by WSP-SA in partnership Detailed analysis within the connections) and seven small with the MoUD, GoI, in New Delhi sample for all the indicators. towns (<50,000 connections). to conclude Phase I of the project. The workshop brought together Some of the key preliminary Dissemination Workshop: A over 100 representatives from findings from the analysis are national workshop on more than 15 utilities, GoI, Indian described on the following pages. 2Tynan, Nicola, and Bill Kingdom. April 2002. `A Water Scorecard: Setting Performance Targets for Water Utilities'. Public Policy Journal, Issue 242. World Bank. 12 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance Phase I findings: Performance vis-à-vis international The first set of analysis was carried out by comparing the benchmarks average of the Phase I sample with respect to international benchmarks on some key indicators. As mentioned earlier, the international benchmarks used for this purpose were Figure 6.1: Availability (hours/day) taken from an analysis, done by the World Bank in 2002, of performance data of water utilities worldwide. This study 24.0 24.0 24.0 involved analysis of data from 246 water utilities in 51 20.0 developed and developing countries. Half of these utilities 16.0 (123) were in 44 developing countries. The best practice benchmarks were derived on the basis of mean of the 12.0 performance data of (a) all developed country utilities; and 8.0 5.6 (b) top 25 percent of developing country utilities. 4.0 0.0 The performance of the Phase I sample was compared to Overall International International Average Developing Developed these international benchmarks for the following indicators: UFW, Salary Costs, Staff Per Thousand Connections, Water Availability, Collection Efficiency, and Working Ratio. Figures 6.1­6.3 show the comparisons for three of these indicators: Figure 6.2: UFW (%) Availability: Average hours per day of water supply; simple measure of service quality. 30.00 27.34 Unaccounted for Water (UFW): Difference between the 25.00 23.00 volume of water produced and water consumed 20.00 16.00 expressed as a percentage of water produced; 15.00 indicative of the efficiency of the system and quality of 10.00 its management. 5.00 0.00 Working Ratio: Ratio of annual operating expenses Overall International International (excluding depreciation and debt service) to annual Average Developing Developed operating revenues; indicative of cost recovery and financial sustainability. As the figures show, in all three areas, the average performance of Indian utilities covered in the Phase I sample Figure 6.3: Working ratio is much poorer than those of developed country utilities as well as the top 25 percent of developing country utilities. 3.0 2.7 Comparisons on other indicators such as staff and collection 2.5 efficiency reveal a similar picture. Also, in case of UFW, 2.0 though the sample average of 23 percent may seem to be 1.5 reasonable when compared to international benchmarks, it must be noted that very low levels of functional metering-- 1.0 0.7 0.7 both bulk and consumer end--reduces these numbers to 0.5 estimates at best. 0.0 Overall International International Average Developing Developed 13 The sample analysis throws up a lot of issues regarding definitions, quality and reliability of information, problems in measurement, comparability, and interpretation of results. Phase I findings: Sample analysis The second set of analysis was carried out to identify the performance trends within the sample of 18 cities and Figure 7.1:Water coverage (%) towns. For this purpose, for each performance indicator, the individual performance of all the cities and towns were Chandigarh Jodhpur plotted and ranked vis-à-vis the sample average. Figures Bikaner 7.1­7.3 show these comparisons for some of the key Udaipur Chennai indicators: Water Coverage, Sewerage Coverage, UFW & Delhi NRW, Staff Per Thousand Connections, Water Availability, Mumbai Bangalore and Working Ratio. In these figures, indicator values for Ahmedabad different cities or towns are plotted around the sample Overall Average Bharatpur average, which is shown by a blue bar. Cities above the Dasuya Ludhiana blue bar are higher than average for the particular indicator Dera Bassi whereas those below are lower than average. Jaipur Goa Patran The sample analysis throws up a lot of interesting findings. Bathinda Gurdaspur It also throws up a lot of issues regarding definitions, quality 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 and reliability of information, problems in measurement, comparability, and interpretation of results. The results on water coverage indicate that most of the cities have more Figure 7.2: Sewerage coverage (%) than 80 percent coverage. However, a closer inspection of Chandigarh the results shows that the basis of arriving at these Chennai numbers in most cases is a supply or infrastructure-driven Patran Bangalore interpretation of coverage by utilities. In reality, there are Ahmedabad wide variances between reported coverage by utilities and Ludhiana Jaipur the percentage of population actually having access to Dera Bassi Gurdaspur reliable and good quality services. The results on sewerage Delhi coverage are worse as they indicate that even by this Overall Average Dasuya definition most of the cities (including metros such as Bathinda Mumbai and Delhi) report very poor sewerage coverage. Mumbai Udaipur Bikaner Figure 7.3 shows the estimates of UFW and NRW reported Jodhpur Bharatpur by cities. The overall bar indicates the NRW and the blue 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 portion indicates the UFW with the difference (in lighter brown) showing free supplies or unbilled authorized consumption. These numbers were a matter of significant Figure 7.3: UFW and NRW (%) debate at the Phase I workshop as for almost all the cities, Delhi there isn't sufficient functional metering--bulk or Gurdaspur Goa distribution--to calculate volumes, and hence losses, with Jodhpur any comfortable degree of accuracy. These have been Patran Jaipur arrived at using some assumptions (like pump ratings and Ahmedabad Bangalore number of hours of pumping, among others) and are at Chennai best rough estimates. These indicate that most utilities don't Overall Average Bikaner even have a realistic idea of what they are producing and Bathinda what is eventually reaching the consumer. It highlights the Bharatpur Chandigarh need for adequate metering and more reliable Mumbai measurement of flows since water lost is revenue lost and, Dasuya Ludhiana as Figures 7.4­7.6 show, most of these utilities are also in Udaipur Dera Bassi poor financial health. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 14 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance Phase I findings: Sample analysis The second set of indicators for the sample analysis (Figures 7.4­7.6) show how these utilities perform on three critical aspects: Staff efficiency, availability of water supply Figure 7.4: Staff per 1000 connections and financial health. Chennai Goa Figure 7.4 shows the comparison for staff ratio measured in Bharatpur terms of full time staff employed by the utility per thousand Delhi Ludhiana connections served. While the ratio is dependent on local Jodhpur operating conditions and staffing policies (thus giving rise to Udaipur Overall Average issues in comparison), it does give a broad indication of how Bikaner efficiently staffed a particular utility is. For most of the well- Bathinda Chandigarh performing utilities in developed countries, the best practice Gurdaspur benchmark for this ratio is <5. As the figure shows, most of Ahmedabad Dera Bassi the utilities covered in Phase I have very high staffing ratios Bangalore (with the average around 12), indicative of possible Jaipur Dasuya overstaffing or inefficient mix of staff. Metro cities such as Patran Delhi and Chennai report very poor ratios (more than 15 and 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 20, respectively). However, it is important to note that standalone comparisons on this ratio may sometimes be misleading and it is best to analyze this in conjunction with Figure 7.5: Availability (hours/day) staff costs to get a complete picture on staff efficiency. This is particularly the case where a single connection serves Dasuya Gurdaspur multiple consumers or households, for example, in high-rise Patran apartment blocks. Utilities with a large number of such Ludhiana Chandigarh connections could have an unusually high staff per Goa connection ratio, which does not give the true picture. For Bathinda Dera Bassi instance, this is the case in Mumbai, and that is why it has Overall Average not been included in the comparison in Figure 7.4. Mumbai Delhi Jaipur The second indicator on average daily water availability is a Jodhpur Udaipur very simple measure of quality of service delivery. Most Bangalore cities in the sample report very low hours of water supply Ahmedabad Bharatpur per day; consumers in Bangalore and Chennai receive water Bikaner every alternate or third day (Figure 7.5). As noted earlier, the Chennai overall sample average stands at a poor 5.6 hours a day 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 compared to the international best practice of 24-hour supply. Interestingly, many of these cities report very high Figure 7.6: Working ratio per capita water supply (>200 LPCD), which doesn't translate into more hours of supply, indicative of the fact that Udaipur the real issue lies in efficient management of available water Bharatpur Gurdaspur rather than more raw water availability. Bathinda Jodhpur Dera Bassi Figure 7.6 on working ratios points to the degree of cost Bikaner recovery by utilities. A ratio >1 indicates that the utility is not Jaipur Overall Average able to cover its operating costs through revenues and has Ludhiana to rely on government support or subsidies. In the Phase I Dasuya Delhi sample, only three cities report an operating surplus while all Chandigarh the others are not recovering their operating costs. The Patran Goa overall average of the sample stands at a poor 2.7, indicative Bangalore of the fact that the current state of operations in many cities Chennai Mumbai may not be financially sustainable. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 15 There are many issues that could be faced in the development of a benchmarking program; these need to be resolved through common commitment and understanding between participating utilities. Table 1: Key issues and possible solutions Key Issues Likely Difficulties Possible Solutions METHODOLOGY Choice of Indicators Difficulties in arriving on a Choose number and type of indicators carefully based on relevance and and Definitions universally accepted set usefulness to a broad majority of utilities, ease of understanding and of indicators measurability, their likelihood to be monitored, and so on Customize global indicators to suit the local context while, at the same time, retaining the flexibility to allow international comparisons Communicate indicators and their definitions to utilities clearly Data Collection Availability and reliability Communicate indicator definitions, interpretations and their calculation of data can be limited to utilities clearly Devise methods to arrive at broad indicators within the existing data constraints Include robust quality assurance mechanisms to grade the reliability and accuracy of data Improve accounting practices and put in place incentives for utilities to collect and report accurate data Analysis and Issues in disaggregation and ring Group utilities in comparable sub-sets based on some key parameters-- Comparability fencing can hinder analysis size, region, natural conditions, institutional structure, and so on Comparisons can be Define adequate qualifications or explanatory factors to reflect the true influenced by different picture of standard indicators operating environments Better accounting practices could help in disaggregation and ring fencing as well DEMAND AND SUSTAINABILITY Awareness and Creating awareness and Communicate concepts and benefits to all stakeholders clearly Demand critical mass Share international experiences Ensure targeted advocacy and training Institutionalization How can demand be Put in place an incentive or regulatory framework to encourage utilities sustained? to collect, monitor, and report reliable data as part of an overall Who are the right partners at the performance-linked funding plan national, state, and utility level? Ensure utility buy-in and involvement, which is critical Choice of institutional model Encourage capacity-building of utilities (especially training of staff) Financing How can long-term financial Organize initial funding support, which is necessary to launch the sustainability be ensured? program, create awareness, build capacity, and reach a critical mass; possible sources--central or state governments, donors, industry associations, among others Have utility contributions or subscriptions once the process takes off and is better appreciated Have financial commitment and ownership from utilities, which is essential for any program to be self-sustainable in the long run Use of Results How can the information Use benchmarking as only one of the tools of an overall be used? performance improvement strategy How does it translate Move from metric to process benchmarking once into performance datasets start getting generated regularly improvement? Recognize benchmarking as a means and not the end 16 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance Phase I: Key Design and benchmarking program. A lot of Box 2: Phase I--Summary of findings and emerging trends Implementation Issues these issues are interlinked. The international comparisons As mentioned earlier, there are Way Forward clearly indicate that the utilities many issues that could be faced need to make significant in the development of a Building on Phase I experience, improvements in operating benchmarking program; these WSP proposes to expand and efficiency, staff management, need to be resolved through improve the benchmarking program financial health, and service common commitment and in India in Phase II. The focus here delivery. While confirming this, the understanding between will be three-fold: detailed sample analysis brought to the fore other underlying issues: Reported coverage versus actual access to services. Very low bulk and functional consumer metering reducing the production, consumption, as well as UFW/NRW data to rough estimates. Problems of scale and staff capacity in small towns. Absence of wastewater treatment in many cities. Low hours of water supply a participating utilities. These Increasing awareness and day in most metro cities despite issues could relate to the reach through targeted high per capita volumes. process or methodology to be dissemination and advocacy. adopted for benchmarking and, Poor record-keeping and Improving the quality of data complaint management. more critically, on sustaining and institutionalizing such a program on and analysis working with selected utilities. Inappropriate and distorted a regular basis. Based on the tariff structures with high level limited experience in Phase I and Working with government(s) and of cross-subsidies. the feedback received from a range key stakeholders to look at of stakeholders at the workshop, concrete ways of Difficulties in ring fencing for Table 1 highlights some of the key institutionalizing the practice of state level agencies to give issues that emerged and their performance monitoring and accurate or comparable possible solutions, which could benchmarking in the WSS information. help inform the design of any future sector in India. 17 The two key things from the perspective of sustainability of a benchmarking program are the institutional model chosen for housing the network and long term financial sustainability. Beyond Numbers: Box 3:Water utility benchmarking in Indonesia Towards Sustainable Background: In Indonesia, the development of reporting. Data is verified after intensive Performance a benchmarking program for WSS utilities was consultation with the local team established in conceived as part of World Bank support to the each of the participating PDAMs. Improvement sector. The key local partner for developing this program was PERPAMSI, the professional Products and Outputs: At present, the key association of Water Utilities (called PDAMs) in products of the PDAM Benchmarking System Indonesia. This was based on the include a performance report of about 80 As mentioned earlier, one of the understanding that comparative performance PDAMs across Indonesia; PDAM peer group key objectives of this WSP-SA information will tremendously benefit the water reports based on water resources, number of initiative is to promote the practice utilities to function more effectively and connections, number of employees and efficiently. PERPAMSI focuses its vision and geography; a PDAM ranking, and so on. of performance monitoring and mission statement on supporting more efficient benchmarking amongst utilities on operation of PDAMs in order to improve Institutional Model: Since November 2003, services and, for the same reasons, has been PERPAMSI has taken over full responsibility of a sustainable basis, as developing the PDAM Benchmarking System the PDAM Benchmarking System, providing improvements can result only if as a management tool for the utilities and as a staff, office facilities, and consumables. There benchmarking is done regularly source of reliable information to other are benchmarking teams in each of the PDAMs, stakeholders for a variety of purposes. which collect data at the utility level. A Provincial over a period of time to identify Benchmarking Team works with all the utilities at performance gaps and address Development: PERPAMSI has been involved the province level to prepare this data. This is them. However, there could be with the development of the benchmarking then submitted to a Central Benchmarking Team system since 2001 with financial support from in Jakarta, which does the overall coordination, many difficulties in doing so, the World Bank. The first project was part of a analysis, preparation of reports, dissemination, primary amongst them being sector loan and executed through BAPPENAS, and monitoring. For ensuring sustainability of the lack of awareness, poor data the Ministry of National Planning. This program program, PERPAMSI has developed a vision, was known as PDAM Benchmarking System mission, goals and sustainability strategies for collection and measurement Part 1 (BMS1) and consisted of raw data the benchmarking program--the focus being on systems, and absence of any collection of 85 Water Utilities on 41 indicators. reliable information and performance incentives for the utilities to Due to problems with data collection, data improvement by PDAMs. verification, and analysis, a follow-up project-- improve performance. Some of PDAM Benchmarking System part 2 (BMS2)-- Financial Sustainability: In order to reach these issues that emerged in was developed, again with World Bank support financial sustainability the program included Phase I of the project have been (PPIAF) but this time as a grant directly for intensive marketing with water utilities and other PERPAMSI. The program started in September key stakeholders (owners, legislators, among highlighted earlier. 2002 with a team of consultants and supporting others). This resulted in a positive response staff from PERPAMSI. It was completed in from almost all participating utilities, who agreed November 2003 when PERPAMSI took over the to pay Rp 10 per month per connection as BMS The two key things from the complete responsibility of the PDAM joining fee (on average 0.05 percent of the perspective of sustainability of a Benchmarking System. monthly water bill). This corresponds to an benchmarking program are the annual cost of US $150 for a company with Methodology and Process: The number of key 10,000 connections. In addition to this, institutional model chosen for performance indicators has now been reduced PERPAMSI will charge a fee for other housing the network and long term to 29, divided into 10 primary and 19 stakeholders requesting the BMS information. financial sustainability. Even supporting indicators. Seventy-nine PDAMs PERPAMSI plans to expand the number of have now joined this program, all submitting participating PDAMs from 79 to 180 by the end though these could be very data for the past three years. Computer of 2006. This will not only improve the financial different depending on the local programs have been developed in Microsoft position of the program, but also provide context on national benchmarking Excel and Access to facilitate data entry, sufficient information to do reliable analyses extensive data validation, data analysis, and and peer group studies. programs in Indonesia (See Box 3) and Brazil (See Box 4 on page 20), it is possible to draw some broad Note: Adapted from www.perpamsi.org and presentations by Werner Brenner, Advisor, PERPAMSI, at World Bank Water Week 2005 and SEAWUN Convention, Hanoi (2005). conclusions. 18 If one looks at a few international industry- or government-owned or initially) are poor in most cases, a examples of existing benchmarking formalized regulatory programs. lot of efforts in the initial stage are programs (or under development), For example, the benchmarking on teething issues such as they could broadly be classified program in Brazil--though driven improving the quality of data as under the following categories: by the national government and utilities tend to move up the used for channeling funds to the learning curve and better quality Benchmarking driven by utilities or local bodies--started as assurance mechanisms can be `Regulatory Requirements' part of a World Bank loan. The designed with experience. Even in (United Kingdom, Australia, industry-run self-financed program cases where regulatory among others). in Indonesia (by PERPAMSI) compulsions or hard budget started as part of the World Bank- constraints drive such programs, issues with respect to availability Benchmarking driven by PPIAF support to the sector. Even `Performance-linked fiscal in cases where benchmarking or and quality of data remain of transfers' (Brazil). performance reporting is a particular concern in the initial stages and need to be regulatory requirement, the process comprehensively addressed over Benchmarking `Wrapped in tends to be coordinated and time to be effective. a Donor Program or Loan' managed by the industry itself, with performance-linked such as the Water Services These experiences suggest credit (Vietnam). Association of Australia (WSAA). some broad conclusions regarding the initial phase of such Industry association-led In many developing countries, benchmarking programs: programs that are `self- such exercises that started as part regulatory' in nature, again, of a donor program are relatively Need for initial support supported by donor agencies in new and are just beginning to show (funding and capacity) from many cases (Indonesia, results as well as associated government or donors. WUP-Africa, SEAWUN, challenges. The initial stage among others). (typically two or three years) has Use of this phase for consensus mostly been donor-supported on methodology, process, and Of the above, benchmarking as a focusing on issues of creating improvement of data. regulatory requirement is quite awareness amongst key limited and exists mostly in a few stakeholders about the potential Use of this phase to achieve a developed countries where there benefits of the concept, developing critical mass in terms of are well-developed regulatory and testing the methodology, awareness, data samples to frameworks in place. In most advocacy and capacity-building or show the underlying problems of developing countries, such training of utilities, and evolving a quality and monitoring, initial programs fall in the last three consensus on the appropriate results that demonstrate potential categories with overlaps in many institutional model and incentive benefits and trigger introspection cases as the start or initial push framework for sustaining such and interest. has been in the form of donor-led initiatives. Since the quality of or supported programs that have information systems (and as a Use of this phase for advocacy, subsequently graduated to result, of the data that comes out training, and capacity-building. 19 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance Box 4: SNIS--National information system on water and sanitation in Brazil Background: SNIS is a national have national coverage of only urban which has been issued annually since information system covering water supply areas, get data at the municipal level, 1995. Besides the information, the and sanitation services since 1995 and and ensure portability with other Diagnostics presents a brief description of solid waste management services since government databases. The underlying the methodology used to collect and treat 2002. It is managed by the federal principle was to have a gradual evolution data, as well as some preliminary analysis government and gathers operational, (continuity more important than quick about the provider's performance in order financial, managerial, accounting, and expansion) and every year reach a to illustrate how the information can be quality data of these services. The main higher level in technology, enlarging used. For easy reference, SNIS also objectives behind the development of service providers' sample and dataset. produces a CD with data collected for all SNIS as part of the sector modernization Prepared by a team of technicians and the years since 1995. project were to (a) contribute to planning consultants hired by PMSS, SNIS and development of public policy, build collects information through a software Institutional Model: SNIS is a federally allocation criteria for public resources, called Coleta. The utilities report run program housed in the National and support regulatory practices at the information through this software and Secretariat of Environmental Water and federal and state level; and (b) encourage send to PMSS. SNIS's team undertakes Sanitation, Ministry of Cities. The reform and efficiency improvement of two levels of consistency analyses. As participation by utilities is voluntary. services, carry out performance soon as utilities start to fill electronic However, since the federal government evaluation and benchmarking at the forms, the software starts the consistency utilizes the information in the evaluation of Municipal level. analysis according to past data and funding requests presented by service parameters for the sector. After SNIS providers (SNIS says that service providers Development: In 1994, the federal receives the information, a team of must supply data to the system as a government decided to build an consultants undertakes another condition to access credit and loans from information system about water and consistency analysis. Approximately, 77 the federal government), it could be sanitation services in Brazil by collecting indicators are calculated. Before the assumed that this acts as an incentive or data from all regional companies and a Diagnostics of Water and Sanitation condition for the utilities to collect and sample from municipal utilities. In Services is issued, SNIS sends a provide data. response, SNIS was conceived and preliminary version to utilities for developed by PMSS--Water Sector comments. In 2001, 260 providers Financial Sustainability: It is difficult to Modernization Program financed by the supplied data to SNIS: 26 regional draw inferences on financial sustainability World Bank. PMSS is affiliated to the providers, 4 microregional and 230 local. in this case on the basis of available National Secretariat of Environmental These providers serve 4,134 information. As mentioned earlier, the Water and Sanitation (SNSA) in the municipalities and cover 91.8 percent of program was supported by the World Bank Ministry of the Cities (MCIDADES). After the urban population. Since 1995, SNIS in its initial stages and subsequently an initial consolidation period supported by has been improving its data. Every year transferred to the federal government. The the World Bank, the operations were new providers are included in the sample; current financing mechanism is not clear transferred to a permanent government new information is collected and new though the SNIS site mentions that the unit supported by the government and indicators are calculated. program is supported by the federal water and sanitation providers. government and service providers (and it Products and Outputs: The Diagnostics of could be assumed that the government is Methodology and Process: The guiding Water and Sanitation Services is a product the major contributor as the program is priorities for the design of SNIS were to of SNIS containing all the above data, housed there). Note: Adapted from www.snis.gov.br and a presentation by Marcos Montenegro, Head of the Department for Development and Technical Cooperation, Government of Brazil, at the World Bank Water Week 2005. 20 Urban Water Sector in South Asia: Benchmarking Performance Conclusion initiatives are sustainable and carried out as part of an overall performance improvement A well-run water utility is essential framework. More specifically, for to people's lives. Only the most such initiatives to be a lasting efficient and financially viable success, they need to have: utilities are able to respond to the challenges of urban growth and Ownership and commitment by pressures on service delivery. An utilities (institutional and effective benchmarking exercise financial) underpinned by an can help understand the relative appropriate incentive framework. performance of water utilities, identify the potential for A robust organization to design, improvement, and help inform the coordinate, and implement the debate with various stakeholders. benchmarking program. Benchmarking, when used to its full potential, is likely to emerge as Technical support and a key tool for water utility capacity-building for utilities managers, policymakers, and to appreciate and implement citizens in the future. Given the the concept. state of services in South Asia and the existing challenges, benchmarking could play a key role in improving delivery of urban water services. Furthermore, a successful long- term benchmarking program could go a long way in addressing two critical issues in the urban water sector, those of (a) management and regulation of utility performance in the absence of well-established regulatory frameworks; and (b) generation of reliable information as a tool for improved accountability and institutional reform. To result in performance improvements and other benefits, however, it is imperative that benchmarking Photo credit: WSP-SA/Guy Stubbs 21 6. Proceedings of the Workshop on Water and Sanitation Program- Benchmarking Urban Water Utilities. South Asia ABOUT THE SERIES: October 2004. Water and Sanitation The World Bank Program-South Asia. New Delhi. 55 Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110 003 WSP Field Notes describe and 7. Benchmarking Urban Water Utilities: India Phase I--Preliminary Findings. analyze projects and activities in October 2004. Water and Sanitation Phone: (91-11) 24690488, 24690489 water and sanitation that provide Program-South Asia. Fax: (91-11) 24628250 lessons for sector leaders, 8. Performance Indicators for Water E-mail: wspsa@worldbank.org administrators, and individuals Supply Services. 2002. IWA Manual of Website: www.wsp.org tackling the water and sanitation Best Practice, International Water Association. challenges in urban and rural areas.The criteria for selection of 9. Performance Indicators for Wastewater Services. 2003. IWA Manual of Best stories included in this series are Practice, International Water large-scale impact, demonstrable Association. sustainability, good cost recovery, 10. Process Benchmarking in Water replicable conditions, and Industry. 2002. IWA Manual of Best leadership. Practice, International Water Association. May 2006 11. Yniguez, Cesar E. October 2004. `Benchmarking Experiences in Asia'. WSP MISSION: References Workshop on Benchmarking Urban To help the poor gain sustained access to Water Utilities in South Asia, Water improved water and sanitation services. and Sanitation Program-South Asia. 1. Kingdom, William, and Vijay New Delhi. WSP FUNDING PARTNERS: Jagannathan. March 2001. Utility 12. Performance Benchmarking--A Benchmarking, Viewpoint, The World The Governments of Australia, Belgium, Powerful Management Tool for Water Bank (www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/ and Wastewater Utilities; Peter Canada, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan, notes). Stahre, Malmo Water and Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United 2. Tynan, Nicola, and Bill Kingdom. April Wastewater and Jan Adamsson, 2002. `A Water Scorecard: Setting Aqua-Tech Consult, Juteskarsgatan, Kingdom, the United Nations Development Performance Targets for Water Sweden (http://www.vaverket. Programme, and The World Bank. Utilities'. Public Policy Journal, Issue goteborg.se/prod/va/dalis2.nsfvy 242. The World Bank. FilArkivPerformance%20benchmaking. AusAID provides WSP-SA programatic (www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/notes). pdf/$file/Performance%20 benchmaking.pdf). support. 3. World Bank's Benchmarking Water and Sanitation Utilities Project and the 13. Benchmarking the Urban Water Sector AUTHOR: Benchmarking Start-Up Toolkit (http:// in Vietnam, The World Bank (http:// Anupam Sharma www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/water/ www.worldbank.org.vn/publication/ topics/bench_network.html; http:// benchmarking03e.pdf) and ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: www.ib-net.org/wb/ (www.ausaid.gov.au/business/ bench_network.asp). publications/incentives/ The author would like to acknowledge the vietnam_water.pdf). valuable peer review provided by 4. Taito Delana. July 2002. Pacific Water William Kingdom, Catherine Revels, Association, Performance 14. www.perpamsi.org Deepak Sanan, and Anup Wadhawan. Benchmarking for Pacific Water 15. www.snis.gov.br Utilities. (http://www.sopac.org/ Secretariat/Programmes/H2O/ 16. www.ib-net.org 3rd_world_water_forum/downloads). 17. www.seawun.org 5. Asian Development Bank. 1997. 18. www.wupafrica.org Second Water Utilities Data Book, Asian and Pacific Region. 19. www.wsaa.asn.au The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to The World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its Board of Executive Directors or the companies they represent. Editor: Anjali Sen Gupta Pictures by: Indo-USAID (FIRE-D) Project, India; The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, WSP-SA/Guy Stubbs and other information shown in this work do not imply any judgement on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal Created by: Roots Advertising Services Pvt Ltd status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Printed at: Thomson Press (India) Ltd.