85591 An AMCOW Country Status Overview Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond The first round of Country Status Overviews (CSO1) published in 2006 benchmarked the preparedness of sectors of 16 countries in Africa to meet the WSS MDGs based on their medium-term spending plans and a set of ‘success factors’ selected from regional experience. Combined with a process of national stakeholder consultation, this prompted countries to ask whether they had those ‘success factors’ in place and, if not, whether they should put them in place. The second round of Country Status Overviews (CSO2) has built on both the method and the process developed in CSO1. The ‘success factors’ have been supplemented with additional factors drawn from country and regional analysis to develop the CSO2 scorecard. Together these reflect the essential steps, functions and results in translating finance into services through government systems – in line with Paris Principles for aid effectiveness. The data and summary assessments have been drawn from local data sources and compared with internationally reported data, and, wherever possible, the assessments have been subject to broad-based consultations with lead government agencies and country sector stakeholders, including donor institutions. This second set of 32 Country Status Overviews (CSO2) on water supply and sanitation was commissioned by the African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW). Development of the CSO2 was led by the World Bank administered Water and Sanitation Program (WSP) in collaboration with the African Development Bank (AfDB), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO). This report was produced in collaboration with the Government of Liberia and other stakeholders during 2009/10. Some sources cited may be informal documents that are not readily available. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of the collaborating institutions, their Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The collaborating institutions do not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the collaborating institutions concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Requests for permission to reproduce portions of it should be sent to wsp@worldbank.org. The collaborating institutions encourage the dissemination of this work and will normally grant permission promptly. For more information, please visit www.amcow.net or www.wsp.org. Photograph credits: Getty Images/Chantal Richey/The World Bank © 2011 Water and Sanitation Program Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond An AMCOW Country Status Overview Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond 1 An AMCOW Country Status Overview Strategic Overview A 14-year civil conflict (1990–2003) undermined Liberia’s sets targets at 77 percent for water supply and 56 percent development prospects. However, in 2006, Liberia ushered for improved sanitation.­1 in Africa’s first female president through a democratic process and has since been relatively stable. Momentous If UNICEF/WHO Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) data changes and reforms continue to accompany the post- are used (68 percent for water), then Liberia could very conflict era. A poverty reduction strategy (PRS 2008–11) easily achieve its Millennium Development Goal (MDG) which includes water and sanitation, was developed and water target but the sector consensus is that coverage is being implemented, an Integrated Water Resource rates are well below those reported by the JMP. In relation Management Policy as well as a Water Supply and to improved sanitation (17 percent) both the MDG and PRS Sanitation Policy (WSSP) were approved by the Liberian targets will require significant progress to meet the targets. Cabinet in 2008 and 2009, respectively. Post-conflict reconstruction of service delivery and sustainability of Financing to the sector remains weak. Current estimates existing infrastructure remain as the main challenges. A of government financing are below 1 percent of the total PRS2 (2012–17) is currently being developed and will be annual domestic budget and these are mainly indicated as grants to the urban focused Liberia Water and Sewer concluded by the end of 2011. Corporation (LWSC). Financing for rural areas was improved in 2009–10 through a major allocation to the Government capacity to lead, coordinate, and deliver Bureau responsible for rural water supply and sanitation. services was severely compromised by the conflict but is The bulk of the investment in rural sanitation is expected beginning to re-emerge with aspirations to make a full to be borne by households, with the current emphasis transition to a country-led process in service delivery, data on the Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach. management, regulation, and sector oversight. Recognizing There is no urban sanitation strategy to address Liberia’s that the policies were not being fully operationalized, rapidly growing urban population. the Government of Liberia and development partners negotiated the Liberia WASH Compact. This Compact, A well-articulated Sector Investment Plan will greatly agreed in early 2011 as part of the Sanitation and Water enhance resource mobilization and utilization for the for All (SWA) initiative, sets out four joint commitments on sector. A sector strategic plan, which includes a basic institutional capacity, equity, monitoring, and finance (see investment plan, is due to be launched in 2011. The Section 4). investment plan should be developed further to detail subsector requirements and anticipated sources of funds, Under its first PRS, Liberia aims at increasing coverage to 50 including how complementary funding from revenues percent of the population by 2011, from a reference point from users could be used to sustain services. of 25 percent water coverage in 2008. For sanitation, the PRS initially targeted 40 percent of the population but this This AMCOW Country Status Overview has been produced has been revised to 33 percent in 2008 owing to a sector in collaboration with the Government of Liberia and other assessment that pointed to slow progress. The second PRS stakeholders. 2 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Agreed priority actions to tackle these challenges, and ensure finance is effectively turned into services, are: Sectorwide • Operationalize the WSSP and its proposed institutions in consultation with stakeholders. • Undertake a sector capacity needs assessment, and resource institutions to play assigned roles. • Prioritize WASH and increase the level of sector funding by linking PRS II and MDG targets to the domestic budget process. • Work towards a Sector-Wide Approach to: o Capture and coordinate development partner budget and expenditure on WASH; o Build a national information management system for the sector that consolidates reporting on schemes being built and monitors functionality; and o Institute an annual multistakeholder review to evaluate progress and set priority actions for the sector. Rural water supply • At community level, enforce cost recovery and local management of water points by Community Water and Sanitation Committees where they are not already established. • At county level, build capacity to manage spare-part supply-chains and train pump mechanics. • At national level, improve the registration, vetting, and quality control of pump installers and roll out technical guidelines on handpumps and water quality. Urban water supply • Develop an urban water sector investment plan aligned to the sector strategic plan. • Develop a financing strategy that puts the LWSC in a position to carry out basic efficiency improvements in its operations. Rural sanitation and hygiene • Clarify the institutional lead for sanitation and scale up CLTS. • Adapt and adopt a nationwide hygiene promotion toolkit to scale up current levels of progress. Urban sanitation and hygiene • Develop appropriate sanitation technologies for densely populated urban slums. • Clarify strategy for the promotion of sanitation in low income and peri-urban communities. • Identify low cost sanitation/sewerage options including small-bore sewerage and decentralized, neighborhood- based treatment plants. 3 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 4 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................................................................ 6 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................... 7 2. Sector Overview: Coverage and Finance Trends................................................................................................ 8 3. Reform Context: Introducing the CSO2 Scorecard.......................................................................................... 11 4. Institutional Framework................................................................................................................................. 13 5. Financing and Its Implementation................................................................................................................... 16 6. Sector Monitoring and Evaluation.................................................................................................................. 18 7. Subsector: Rural Water Supply....................................................................................................................... 19 8. Subsector: Urban Water Supply...................................................................................................................... 22 9. Subsector: Rural Sanitation and Hygiene........................................................................................................ 24 10. Subsector: Urban Sanitation and Hygiene....................................................................................................... 26 Notes and References.................................................................................................................................... 28 5 An AMCOW Country Status Overview Acronyms and Abbreviations AfDB African Development Bank MoPW Ministry of Public Works AMCOW African Ministers’ Council on Water MTEF Medium-Term Expenditure Framework CAPEX Capital expenditure NGO Nongovernmental organization CLTS Community-Led Total Sanitation NWRSB National Water Resources and CSO2 Country Status Overviews (second round) Sanitation Board CWSC Community Water and Sanitation NWSHPC National Water Sanitation and Hygiene Committees Promotion Committee NWSSC National Water Supply and DCMHyP Directorate for Community Mobilization and Sanitation Commission Hygiene Promotion OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and DEOH Division of Environmental and Development Occupational Health OPEX Operations expenditure GDP Gross domestic product PRS Poverty Reduction Strategy GNI Gross national income PRS1 First Poverty Reduction Strategy GoL Government of Liberia PRS2 Second Poverty Reduction Strategy HH Household PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper HIPC Highly Indebted Poor Countries RSH Rural sanitation and hygiene IWRMP Integrated Water Resource RWS Rural water supply Management Policy RWSSB Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Bureau JMP Joint Monitoring Programme (UNICEF/WHO) SIP Sector Investment Plan LIC Low Income Country SSA Sub-Saharan Africa LWSC Liberia Water and Sewer Corporation SWA Sanitation and Water for All M&E Monitoring and evaluation SWAp Sector-Wide Approach MCC Monrovia City Corporation USH Urban sanitation and hygiene MDG Millennium Development Goal UWS Urban water supply MICS Multiple-Indicator Cluster Survey (UNICEF) WASH Water, sanitation and hygiene MoE Ministry of Education WatSan Water and Sanitation MoF Ministry of Finance WHO World Health Organization MoHSW Ministry of Health and Social Welfare WSP Water and Sanitation Program MoLME Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy WSSP Water Supply and Sanitation Policy 6 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond 1. Introduction The African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW) commissioned the production of a second round of Country Status Overviews (CSOs)2 to better understand what underpins progress in water supply and sanitation and what its member governments can do to accelerate that progress across countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). AMCOW delegated this task to the World Bank’s Water and Sanitation Program and the African Development Bank who are implementing it in close partnership with UNICEF and WHO in over 30 countries across SSA. This CSO2 report has been produced in collaboration with the Government of Liberia and other stakeholders during 2009/10. The analysis aims to help countries assess their own service delivery pathways for turning finance into water supply and sanitation services in each of four subsectors: rural and urban water supply, and rural and urban sanitation and hygiene. The CSO2 analysis has three main components: a review of past coverage; a costing model to assess the adequacy of future investments; and a scorecard which allows diagnosis of particular bottlenecks along the service delivery pathway. The CSO2’s contribution is to answer not only whether past trends and future finance are sufficient to meet sector targets, but what specific issues need to be addressed to ensure finance is effectively turned into accelerated coverage in water supply and sanitation. In this spirit, specific priority actions have been identified through consultation. A synthesis report, available separately, presents best practice and shared learning to help realize these priority actions. 7 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 2. Sector Overview: Coverage and Finance Trends Coverage: Assessing Past Progress Based on JMP data, Liberia’s access to improved water supply as of 1990 was 58 percent, which had risen to 68 The civil war significantly undermined the delivery of water percent by 2008. Access to improved sanitation was 11 and sanitation services. Liberia’s first Poverty Reduction percent in 1990, rising to 17 percent in 2008. Strategy (PRS1) indicates that safe drinking water A third source of data is Liberia’s 2008 Housing and coverage fell from 37 percent in 1990, to 17 percent at Population Census which reports improved water supply the end of the war in 2003, rising to 25 percent in 2008. and sanitation access as 60 percent and 35 percent, Access to sanitation fell from 17 percent in 1990 to about respectively. These data are used by the JMP to build up 7 percent in 2003 and has increased to 15 percent in 2008 a trend line from nationally representative household (Figure 1).3 surveys. In its current plan, the PRS1 aims at increasing improved In preparing its second Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS2, water supply coverage to 50 percent of the population by 2012–17), Liberia has adopted targets of 77 percent for 2011, from 25 percent in 2008. For sanitation, the PRS1 water supply and 56 percent for improved sanitation as its initially targeted 40 percent of the population, but this has national sector targets. been revised to 33 percent owing to a sector assessment that pointed to the slow progress. The PRS1 estimates, derived Whether the water supply target can be achieved depends greatly on which water supply data are used as the by a joint committee of government and nongovernmental starting point. Based on the conservative PRS1 estimates, organizations (NGOs), are generally accepted as modest reaching the target would require building water supplies estimates of access to safe water and sanitation.4 for around 342,000 people a year, compared with around 190,000 people a year based on the JMP estimates. The CSO2 also compares countries’ own estimates of coverage with data from the UNICEF/WHO Joint Monitoring For sanitation, where both the JMP and PRS1 numbers Programme (JMP).5 The impact of these different coverage are similar, achieving the target will require multiples of estimates on investment requirements is also assessed. past effort. Figure 1 Progress in water supply and sanitation coverage Water supply Sanitation 100% 100% 80% 80% Coverage Coverage 60% 60% 40% 40% 20% 20% 0% 0% 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Government estimates Government target Government estimates Government target JMP estimates MDG target JMP estimates MDG target Source: PRS1 and JMP 2010 report. 8 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Investment Requirements: Testing the Based on these PRS1 coverage figures, a total annual Sufficiency of Finance capital investment requirement of US$56 million has been established for water supply. This would extend access to An estimate of the investment required to meet the an additional 342,000 people each year as well as replace national 2015 targets was developed using the CSO2 services that have reached the end of their lifespan. costing model, using data on coverage, technology mix and lifespan, unit costs, and user contribution policy. The Of this US$12 million per year is expected to be contributed CSO2 costing model allows estimated capital investment by households (10 percent contribution in rural areas; 50 (CAPEX) requirements to be compared with anticipated percent contribution in urban areas), leveraged by the public investment, and the assumed contribution from US$22 million per year anticipated in public investment households.6 Investment requirements for operations and (domestic and donor). This leaves a funding gap of US$22 maintenance (OPEX) are assessed separately. million per year, even assuming that funds can be allocated optimally between rural and urban subsectors (the current The financing requirements to meet the PRS2/Millennium projections suggest the deficit is larger for urban water Development Goal (MDG) targets for water and sanitation, supply). presented below, are based on the PRS1 coverage estimates of 25 percent for water supply and 15 percent Achieving improved sanitation access for a quarter of a for sanitation in 2008. million people a year to meet the national target is assessed Figure 2 Required vs. planned and assumed expenditure for water supply and sanitation Water supply Sanitation Required CAPEX Required Required CAPEX Required OPEX OPEX 0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 US$ million/year US$ million/year Public CAPEX (anticipated) Household CAPEX (assumed) Public CAPEX (anticipated) Household CAPEX (assumed) CAPEX deficit CAPEX deficit Source: CSO2 costing. Table 1 Coverage and investment figures—CSO2 data7 Coverage Target Population CAPEX Anticipated Assumed Total requiring requirements public CAPEX HH deficit access CAPEX 1990 2008 2015 Total Public Domestic External Total % % % ‘000/year US$ million/year Rural WS 34% 20% 67% 126 20 18 0 11 11 1 8 Urban WS 86% 30% 93% 216 36 18 1 10 11 11 15 WS total 58% 25% 77% 342 56 36 1 21 22 12 22 Rural S&H 3% 4% 52% 127 24 5 0 3 3 12 9 Urban S&H 21% 28% 61% 120 44 22 0 6 6 6 32 S&H total 11% 15% 56% 248 68 27 0 9 9 18 41 Source: For coverage, PRS1; for targets PRS2; for investment data CSO2 costing. 9 An AMCOW Country Status Overview at US$68 million annually, out of which public investment Table 2 requirements are US$27 million annually. The bulk of the Annual O&M requirements investment in rural sanitation is expected to be borne by Subsector O&M households, with the current emphasis on Community- US$ million/year Led Total Sanitation (CLTS). In urban sanitation, the Rural water supply 3 rehabilitation of Monrovia’s sewerage system is assessed Urban water supply 8 at US$18.3 million and is to be executed over three years. Water supply total 11 The total estimated annual financing gap for sanitation is Rural sanitation 2 US$41 million. Urban sanitation 11 Sanitation total 13 The figures in Table 1 are based on the PRS1 coverage Source: CSO2 estimates. data and the PRS2/MDG targets for 2015. If the costing is repeated using JMP coverage estimated for 2008, the investment requirement would be around 20 percent lower for water supply but similar for sanitation. These considerations are only part of the picture. Bottlenecks can, in fact, occur throughout the service There are a number of reasons why this depiction of delivery pathway—all the institutions, processes and actors investments may be overoptimistic. The first is operation that translate sector funding into sustainable services. and maintenance (O&M) requirements (Table 2). As in many Where the pathway is well developed, sector funding countries, in Liberia there is an implicit assumption that O&M should turn into services at the estimated unit costs. costs (OPEX) will be recovered from users, though in practice Where it is not, the above investment requirements may this is not always achieved. If any of the annual OPEX has to be gross underestimates. The rest of this report evaluates be subsidized from the public purse, for example to utilities the service delivery pathway in its entirety, locating the that do not achieve operational cost recovery, it reduces the bottlenecks and presenting the agreed priority actions to amount available for capital investment. help address them. 10 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond 3. Reform Context: Introducing the CSO2 Scorecard The conflict period, 1990–2003, saw severe damage Supply and Sanitation Policy (WSSP). These documents, to the water and sanitation infrastructure, leaving the among others, define Liberia’s water and sanitation facilities in a severe state of disrepair. For example, the policy objectives and the institutional arrangements to Monrovia Water Supply System was damaged on three achieve them. occasions between 1990 and 1992. It was put out of operation again in 1996, and during the hostilities of The IWRMP promotes a new integrated approach to 2003. This recent history puts the service delivery pathway manage the water resources in ways that are sustainable in context, which can then be explored in detail using the and most beneficial to the people. This new approach is CSO2 scorecard, an assessment tool providing a snapshot based on the continued recognition of the social value of of reform progress along the service delivery pathway.8 water, while at the same time giving due attention to its economic value. All water-using sectors are required to Before the conflict, various actors and factors influenced develop their own policies in line with the IWRMP, and sector reform. For example, the water and sanitation the WSSP is the one that addresses drinking water supply decade, 1980–90, helped to induce efforts at sector and sanitation. Its main objective is to “provide guidance coordination, leading to the creation of the National and direction in institutional, economic, and legal reforms Water Resources Board to oversee sector developments. that will lead to improved water governance at national, In the 1980s, the US Peace Corps assisted in the local, and community levels, and improved access to safe development of a National Rural Water Programme. water supply and adequate sanitation, in an affordable, These and other efforts were thwarted by the onset sustainable, and equitable manner, to all the peoples of the war. The postconflict era has since seen the of Liberia”. This is based on the principle of ‘some for development and approval (by Cabinet) of the Integrated all’ as opposed to ‘all for some’ and seeks to provide Water Resources Policy (IWRMP) and the National Water impetus for better distribution mechanisms. Figure 3 Average scorecard results for enabling, sustaining, and developing stages of the service delivery pathway, and peer-group comparison Enabling Sustaining Developing Liberia average scores The hydro plant at Mt Coffee was completely looted during the war. The round holes are where the pumps used to be. Averages, LICs, GNI p.p.<=$500 Source: CSO2 scorecard. 11 An AMCOW Country Status Overview The WSSP spells out the institutional set up and roles services remains critical. County administrations and (see figure 5 in the next Section) as well as the subsector community water and sanitation committees are expected approaches. A new Water Law is contemplated and is to be in the driving seat to support service delivery but expected to give legal backing to the intentions spelt lack adequate capacity. This is further compounded by out in the policy documents. A sector strategic plan is a lack of a nationally spare parts network, little or no- currently under development, and due to be launched in backstopping, either from the public or private sectors, 2011, which sets the stage for the initiation of a Sector- or NGOs. There is also a need to improve the functionality Wide Approach (SWAp). of systems by ensuring cost recovery and to improve the efficiency of service providers as well as the need for In the postconflict era, reform effort has concentrated behavior change at the community level. For sanitation, there is a need to establish the efficacy of CLTS, which is ‘upstream’ in the service delivery pathway—on the enabling the approach of choice as it requires minimum financial environment for service delivery. At the county level this investment and promotes behavior change and ownership, is being done through the creation of strong county and to complement it with testing innovative sanitation health teams which have led the planning, coordination, marketing approaches including micro-finance schemes to and monitoring of services. The Ministry of Public Works’ increase uptake. representation at the country level, however, is still thin. Sections 4 to 6 highlight progress and challenges across Figure 3 indicates that Liberia scores below its peers in three thematic areas—the institutional framework, finance the three building blocks of the service delivery pathway, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E)—benchmarking reflecting weak performance in planning and budgeting, Liberia against its peer countries based on a grouping by and absence of coherent sector/subsector investment gross national income. The related indicators are extracted plans, among others. The service delivery pathway also from the CSO2 scorecard and presented in charts at faces significant challenges characterized by poor resource the beginning of each section. The scorecards for each allocation (including inadequate human resources), which subsector are presented in their entirety in Sections 7 limit the amount of services that can be provided. This to 10. signals the need for criteria to match resource allocation at national level with need at local level; and for systems to Table 3 provides a chronology of significant sector reforms monitor output more effectively. Expanding and sustaining events. Table 3 Key dates in the reform of the sector in Liberia Year Event 1956 Public Health Law enacted. 1975 Act Establishing the New Public Health Law of Liberia Chapter 24 had key objective of protecting Liberia’s water resources. 1980 National Water Resources Board formed, with Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy served as Chair and Hydrological Services as Secretariat. 1986 National Public Health Committee established to coordinate water and sanitation affairs in the absence of the National Water Resources and Sanitation Board. 1989 Beginning of civil war. 1992 Water and Sanitation (WatSan) Coordinating Committee established and tasked with coordination of the activities of the water sector institutions. 2002 Environment Protection and Management Law approved, with the key objective of ensuring the sound management of environmental and natural resources. 2008 Liberia PRS (2008–11) includes water and sanitation as part of Pillar IV, infrastructure and service delivery and sets targets for water and sanitation. 2008 Approval of Integrated Water Resources Management Policy. 2009 Approval of National Water and Sanitation Policy. 12 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond 4. Institutional Framework Priority actions for institutional framework • Operationalize the Water Supply and Sanitation Policy and its proposed institutions in consultation with stakeholders. • Undertake a sector capacity needs assessment and resource institutions to play assigned roles. • Clarify the institutional home for sanitation. The WSSP proposes changes to the current institutional Figure 4 arrangements to ensure sector leadership and effective Scorecard indicator scores relating to institutional coordination and to remove “fragmented mandates’’. framework compared to peer group These changes are expected to improve subsector (see endnotes)9 performance once fully implemented. In the meantime, RWS current levels of performance are assessed alongside related scorecard indicators, which look at the extent to which national policy addresses targets for water and sanitation, define institutional roles, and (where these are in place) how national stakeholders have been engaged in USH UWS these processes. Overall, Liberia performs poorly against its economic peer group, in all subsectors, except rural sanitation and hygiene, as depicted in Figure 4. This better than average performance in rural sanitation is due RSH to having a national policy and subsector targets in the PRS. The lack of sector leadership for sanitation and low Liberia average scores budgets are remaining weaknesses. Averages, LICs, GNI p.p.<=$500 Source: CSO2 scorecard. Figure 5 presents the intended architecture for the sector and subsectors as set out in the policy. many sector institutions still depend on aid organizations to carry out both routine tasks and investment. As the This section considers institutional challenges of WSSP concedes: “There is an acute shortage of qualified operationalizing the WSSP, which sets out the institutional staff especially engineers and accountants in the Agency. roles and subsector approaches in detail, building on the The Division of Environmental and Occupational Health snapshot provided by scorecard indicators. (DEOH) [for example] has one Sanitary Engineer trained at the University of Liberia, and needs capacity development Human resources and operational capacity: One of to handle sanitation programs on a large scale”. Many the legacies of the civil war was the severe loss of human employees fall into semi-skilled and unskilled categories. resources from Liberia. While Liberia set out its water and sanitation targets in the PRS1, current institutional and Sector leadership needs further clarification: human resource capacity at all levels (national and country) Institutional fragmentation, to a large extent, has led to challenge translating these into services. Even where they the lack of a strong sector leadership in practice. This is are available, the lack of operational budget means that partly responsible for the lack of visibility for water and 13 An AMCOW Country Status Overview Figure 5 Institutional roles and relationships in the water supply and sanitation sector Water supply Sewerage and General sanitation and School Urban related hygiene hygiene promotion sanitation sanitation Sector promotion leadership MoLME, MoPW, NWRSB MoHSW MoE National Regulation and Facilitation [ RWSSB Service CAs Regional LWSC development and provision VWSCs DEOH [ Local Source: WSSP. National Water Resources and Sanitation Board (NWRSB): When established, the NWRSB will be responsible for sector policy, strategy, planning, technical support, coordination, M&E, HRD, capacity building, decentralization, programs, financing, NGO support, management information systems (MIS), donor coordination and enforcement of standards, regulations and by-laws (including aspects of public health laws, and drinking water quality standards in the Environmental Protection and Management Law). It will have oversight of the WSSC and other entities: (a) LWSC; (b) Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Bureau (RWSSB); and (c) Directorate for Community Mobilization and Hygiene Promotion (DCMHyP). Supporting the NWRSB will be the National Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Promotion Committee (NWSHPC). The Board will be made up of the highest level of representation per ministry/agency and the NWSHPC will be made up of the technical staff that will be responsible for supporting the board. Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy (MoLME): The Ministry leads in policy formulation and has been responsible for the preparation of the IWRM Policy and the NWSP. Its water sector functions include provision of hydrological services (through the Liberia Hydrological Services Bureau), water analysis, and collection of hydrological data. It is also mandated to provide assistance and advice with the siting of boreholes and wells, and drilling techniques. Ministry of Public Works (MoPW): It is in charge of infrastructure and basic services under Pillar IV in the PRS. It had led the sector coordination at national level. The Ministry is engineering-focused, handling, among other tasks, the national rural water supply program. It also had oversight responsibility for the LWSC. The Ministry implements directly, and/or through contractors and NGOs. Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW): It is responsible for health promotion and community mobilization, environmental and occupational health, hygiene education and development of sanitation facilities. It is also responsible for ensuring the quality of domestic drinking water supply and sanitation and hygiene practices pursuant to the Public Health Law and setting standards of water quality control and environmental health. Its mandate includes, among others, waste management, disinfection, drinking water, industrial waste, and sewerage. Local level services are delivered through the Division of Environmental and Occupational Health (DEOH). Ministry of Education (MoE): The Division of School Health is responsible for school health and hygiene in the country’s 4,900 schools (private and public). It constructs hardware in collaboration with Education Facilities Unit in the Ministry. Software activities related to water supply and sanitation in schools are developed in collaboration with the Department of Hygiene Promotion in the MoHSW. Ministry of Finance (MoF): The Ministry is mandated to collect revenue; engage in loan arrangements, disburse government funds, and service the national debt. State corporations such as the LWSC whose operations do not generate sufficient revenues to meet all O&M, capital maintenance, and loan repayments have to rely on the Ministry to stay in business. National Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Promotion Committee: This will be a resource group made up of the line ministries and service agencies, civil society, and development partners. The committee will operationalize the NWSP, including the development of strategies to coordinate all water supply and sanitation activities. National Water Supply and Sanitation Commission (NWSSC): The NWSSC will act as the service regulator and developer and shall, among other functions, establish measures and standards for water quality, serve as a regulatory authority on water and sanitation activities, and make policy decisions on water and sanitation (supported by the NWSHPC) within the framework of national legal institutions/instruments. The NWSSC will also have responsibility for (a) promoting the rights of access to basic water supply and sanitation; (b) setting standards and norms for consumer service standards; (c) regulating tariffs charged to consumers; (d) issuing Water Services Provider Licenses; and (e) promoting public-private partnerships. Liberia Water and Sewerage Corporation (LWSC): The LWSC is mandated to (a) engage in the development, construction, installation, manufacture, operation, transmission, distribution, sale, and supply to all urban areas of water and sewerage services; (b) establish and maintain water and sewer facilities, offices and/or agencies within and everywhere inside Liberia; and (c) determine fair and reasonable rates, fees, and charges which shall be charged in connection with the provision of water and sewage services. Some of these functions will be taken over by the NWSSC. Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Bureau (RWSSB): The primary role of the RWSSB will be hardware delivery, provision of technical expertise and knowledge, and building capacity in rural Liberia. This is required in the short- to medium-term as County Administrations and the Community Water and Sanitation Committees (CWSCs) have limited technical capacity to undertake implementation. Other significant players in the sector include both local and international NGOs, civil society in the form of the WASH Working Group and the private sector, which is yet to be adequately developed and resourced. 14 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond sanitation issues in the national budget, where the only objectives. The high-level representation on its Board— institution with a dedicated WSS budget line is LWSC. The Ministers of Finance, Justice, Planning, and Economic fragmentation and sector leadership are being addressed Affairs—may have some advantages; however, this is likely through the creation of the National Water Resources and to compromise checks and balances and be a challenge Sanitation Board (NWRSB) and National Water, Sanitation, for any regulator. and Hygiene Promotion Committee (NWSHPC). However, it is not clear whether the NWRSB will report to, be Role of the central government in direct service advisor to, or will operate above, the MoLME and its sister delivery: In transitioning from emergency service delivery ministries. The national policy notes that “the long-term to country-led development, central government ministries objective of the proposed institutional framework is the will need to take up a strong leadership role in coordinating eventual establishment of a Ministry of Water Resources reconstruction activity, developing sector policy, and and Sanitation”. The obvious question is: Why not now? building national capacity for service delivery. However, The WSSP is going to take some time to operationalize all this leadership role should not be confused with taking its intents and it will be useful to address all issues once over direct service delivery. Rather, central government and for all. The proposed ‘interim arrangement’ appears WASH agencies should develop a proactive facilitating complex and may present political economy problems role. This is consistent with regional good practice. at the level of the Board, whilst sector leadership and a However, the WSSP indicates that the primary roles of the champion may still be missed. RWSSB will be “hardware delivery, provision of technical expertise and knowledge and build capacity in the sector” Creation of the regulatory body and its autonomy: in rural Liberia. In the medium-term such references to Currently, the regulatory function—particularly to review hardware delivery should be replaced with a stewardship and implement tariff increments—is irregular as the role, that is, facilitation, knowledge and capacity building institutional roles and responsibilities make it difficult and regulation of standards allowing counties, the private for one of the institutions to exercise the arms-length sector (and NGOs) to play a more hands-on role in service regulatory function required. The LWSC has some development and delivery (see priority actions set out in regulatory responsibilities which are inconsistent with its the rural water supply, in Section 7). role as a service provider, particularly in relation to tariff- setting and standards of performance. The NWSSC will Leadership for sanitation: The institutional home and address this. It will operate under the NWRSB, a body champion of sanitation has been an issue in Liberia. whose representation is made up of many of those to Whilst many recognize the MoHSW as responsible for be regulated. However, as a referee it is likely to lack sanitation (through the Environmental Health Division), in independence, a major requirement for it to enjoy the practice the Division has not received adequate financial confidence and trust of both providers and consumers. and logistical support. It is noted also that the NWRSB There have also been concerns expressed about the will have oversight responsibility of the Directorate of creation of the commission as it has financial implications Community Mobilization and Hygiene Promotion which and, as such, its creation is not envisaged to happen in the will have a Bureau status within the Ministry of Health and near future. The United Nations Development Programme Social Welfare. This again raises issues regarding reporting, has a technical support program aimed at operationalizing supervision, and accountability as it is not clear which this body between 2011 and 2013, and the cost of body—NWRSB or MoHSW—takes ultimate responsibility mobilizing and running the WSSC for three years has been for the work of the Bureau. Sanitation, which covers a determined as $3.3 million for which funding is actively very wide spectrum of activity (and not just WASH), should being sought. not be overshadowed by water, especially if it is to get the needed attention in relation to planning, budgeting, and Governance of the LWSC: There is a clear need to speed monitoring. More specificity is required on the aspects of up the commercialization of the LWSC and review its sanitation that are not addressed in the WSSP. 15 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 5. Financing and its Implementation Priority actions for financing • Prioritize WASH and increase the level of sector funding by linking PRS2 and MDG targets to the domestic budget process. • Establish clear budget and expenditure lines for WASH to enable outputs to be measured, and to capture and coordinate development partner contributions. • Support counties to prepare WASH Development Plans. • Establish a WASH Pool Fund. Financing of the sector has been weak, particularly from subsector requirements and anticipated sources of funds, the domestic side which annually allocates below 1 percent including how complementary funding from revenues of total annual government budget to the sector. This is from users could be used to sustain services. in large part a result of there being very little discretionary budget to allocate to infrastructure development. The Budgeting—inadequate financing: Liberia’s PRS entire national budget for 2009/10 was around US$370 estimated that US$143.5 million was needed for the million. The legacy of a long-drawn out war and the need sector up to 2011. However, estimated financing levels fall to spend a significant proportion of resources on security, well below the expected funding levels. Liberia’s budget limited economic activity (particularly in its traditional shows the allocations for the LWSC, and these have been sources of tax revenue, including mining and forestry), well below 1 percent of the national budget. For the widespread poverty, and restrictions on borrowing have three years, since 2006, the total allocation to the LWSC severely limited Liberia’s ability to invest in the water was approximately US$1.9 million, provided as a grant. and sanitation sector. Following Highly Indebted Poor Spending by the Government of Liberia (GoL) on water Countries (HIPC) debt relief in 2010 additional domestic and sanitation ranged from $439,000 in 2006/7, $900,000 resources will be freed up going forward. Viewed against her peers as captured in Figure 6, Liberia Figure 6 falls short in all the subsectors in the area of financing. The Scorecard indicator scores relating to financing, compared to peer group10 factors for the low performance include: RWS Finalizing the sector strategy and investment plan: The PRS1 articulated sector targets (increase access to safe drinking water, from 25 percent to 50 percent by 2011, including to 45 percent of the rural population, and ensure the sustainability of 90 percent of water and sanitation USH UWS facilities in the country). It is particularly notable that there is a target for sustainability of facilities.11 However, whilst the PRS is an instrument for setting sector targets, the sector strategy and investment plan that will be RSH launched in November 2011 are needed to articulate how Liberia average scores these targets will be achieved. This will greatly enhance Averages, LICs, GNI p.p.<=$500 resource mobilization and utilization for the sector. The investment plan should be developed further to detail Source: CSO2 scorecard. 16 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Figure 7 Overall and per capita investment requirements and contribution from different sources Rural water supply: Urban water supply: Rural sanitation: Urban sanitation: Total: $19,800,000 Total: $36,500,000 Total: $24,100,000 Total: $44,200,000 Per capita (new): $93 Per capita (new): $140 Per capita (new): $130 Per capita (new): $291 Domestic anticipated investment Assumed household investment External anticipated investment Gap Source: CSO2 estimates. (2007/8) and $1,766,000 in 2008/9.12 Corresponding and early 2011 significant progress has been made in allocations to education (also major casualties of the war) donor coordination. The African Development Bank is the were $11 million, $45 million, and $58 million over those lead donor for WASH in Liberia; with the largest funding same years. For health these were $10 million, $17 million, portfolio at US$37 million, it is due to set up mission and $23 million. Clearly, the government’s allocations for in Monrovia in 2011. It is envisaged that the African the sector are far below the required level of funding Development Bank will facilitate donor coordination for needed to reach the MDG target on water and sanitation. the sector and the establishment of a WASH Pool Fund. At 0.23 percent of the total budget, Liberia is one of the The most significant milestone in the sector has been countries in Africa which allocates the lowest proportions the development of the Liberia WASH Compact.13 This of national resources to the sector. Compact between the GoL led by the Ministry of Planning and development partners, under the global Sanitation Low disbursement rates of domestic funding: The and Water for All initiative, sets out a roadmap of action low level of domestic funding is made worse by difficulties under four jointly agreed commitments: securing disbursements of these funds within the government systems. Some government departments in 1. Establish and strengthen institutional capacity: charge of water and sanitation have expressed difficulties Appoint the National Water Resources and Sanitation in accessing the available, if minimal, domestic funding Board; Operationalize the required institutions (set out allocations. This is on account of difficulties to satisfy in the policy); Mandate assessment and strengthening the new public finance management requirements. of county-level structures within existing policies Annual budgeting processes now seek to improve budget 2. Ensure equity and prioritized service provision: allocations, disbursements, and align planning to resource Mandate implementation of WASH standards and allocation within the parameters of the PRS. regulation protocols; mainstream WASH in the education system; ensure policies support community- Strengthen donor coordination and leadership: Aid is led processes to sanitation and hygiene. crucial to the development of Liberia due to the years of 3. Develop a monitoring system: Establish monitoring massive destruction to infrastructure, high poverty levels mechanisms; refine and disaggregate the structure of exacerbated by high unemployment, and limits imposed budgets; share WASH data/information internally and on borrowing part of the conditions for going through the externally; institute reviews of the Compact. HIPC process. In the absence of a SWAp, donor financing 4. Improve sector financing mechanisms: Establish a is project-based. The MoPW initiated a sector donor detailed, prioritized Sector Investment Plan; deliver on coordination process in 2009 but it was poorly attended the GoL’s previous financial commitments; establish by the six or eight sector donors. However, through 2010 WASH pooled fund mechanism. 17 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 6. Sector Monitoring and Evaluation Priority actions for sector monitoring and evaluation • Establish a national information management system for the sector that consolidates reporting on schemes being built and monitors functionality. • Institute an annual multistakeholder review to evaluate progress and set priority actions for the sector. Monitoring and evaluation of sector activities is still weak, Figure 8 though significant progress has been made. The WSSP Scorecard indicator scores relating to sector M&E, attributes the weak M&E framework to problems related compared to peer group14 to institutional fragmentation, geographical connectivity RWS and mobility, besides lack of adequate trained manpower and funding. On the whole the average indicator scores, as captured in Figure 8, call for strengthening sector M&E. Specific areas that require improvement are: USH UWS Quality, availability and systems for management: As the WSSP document concedes, “there are multiple sources of data indicating different coverage figures of water and sanitation in the country, and these are not necessarily comparable. There is also no proper reporting mechanism RSH in place, besides ad hoc and inconsistent reporting of interventions by the partners to the government”.15 This Liberia average scores requires resolution, driven by a strong sector leadership Averages, LICs, GNI p.p.<=$500 that will bring all actors into line with agreed definitions, indicators, and systems of data capture and management. Source: CSO2 scorecard. As targeted in the PRS, all national statistics are expected to be fed into the Liberia Info Database, managed by the Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services, process to acquire the information. For the PRS2 period, and capacity will be developed to publish this online. renewed emphasis has been placed on reporting; it has been agreed that the NWSHPC will collate reports from Linking local and national data to planning and the GoL and development partners aligned with the PRS2 outcomes: Liberia’s planning for service delivery should be reporting schedule. anchored on credible data gathered through the nationally agreed M&E system. Current plans, particularly the PRS1, Annual sector review and consolidated annual are a result of information derived from a joint government sector reporting: There is the need to institute an annual and NGO working group. The government has introduced multistakeholder review to evaluate progress and set the 90-day PRS deliverables cycle which tries to report priority actions for the sector. This would bring all sector progress on a 90-day basis. This is a welcome idea but it actors together to discuss sector plans and output as is also contingent on what implementing partners report, well as address its challenges. This should also involve a combined with a proactive and pragmatic government-led consolidated reporting of sector output. 18 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond 7. Subsector: Rural Water Supply Priority actions for rural water supply • At community level, enforce cost recovery and local management of water points by CWSCs where they are not already established. • At county level, build capacity to manage spare-part supply-chains and train more pump mechanics. • At national level, improve the registration, vetting, and quality control of pump installers, and roll out technical guidelines on handpumps and water quality. Before 2000 there is little subsector data on which to base Based on the coverage figures adopted by stakeholders in estimates. The JMP includes the 1986 Demographic and the PRS1, and using the CSO2 costing model, an estimated Health Survey from which the 1990 baseline is estimated. US$20 million is required annually, of which US$18 million The government has adopted this 1990 baseline for is to be sourced from public sources (domestic or donor). rural water supply but estimates 2008 coverage to have With an anticipated US$11 million in annual external been 20 percent, while the JMP’s estimate for 2008 is 51 funding leveraging capital contributions of around US$1 percent. There is no rural subsector estimate for 2003 million from rural households, the subsector needs to raise (only an overall water supply estimate; see Section 2) but an additional $8 million annually. the PRS1 estimate of 17 percent coverage in 2003 is used here denoting coverage in the immediate postconflict Additional OPEX requirements are estimated at US$2 period. The 2011 water point mapping survey confirmed million per year—currently this is either a real or deferred that over 3,000 rural water points have been built since burden on public finance, since recovery of operations 2005, strongly suggesting that the downward trend to and maintenance costs from user fees is rare for rural and 2003 has since been reversed. small town schemes. The rural water supply target for the PRS2 period is 67 Figure 11 shows the scorecard results for the rural water percent. supply service delivery pathway. The scorecard uses a Figure 9 Figure 10 Rural water supply coverage Rural water investment requirements 100% Required CAPEX Required OPEX 80% Coverage 60% 40% 20% 0 5 10 15 20 25 0% 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 US$ million/year Government estimates Government target Public CAPEX (anticipated) Household CAPEX (assumed) JMP improved JMP piped CAPEX deficit Source: PRS1 and JMP 2010 report. Source: CSO2 costing. 19 An AMCOW Country Status Overview Figure 11 Rural water supply scorecard Enabling Developing Sustaining Policy Planning Budget Expenditure Equity Output Maintenance Expansion Use 1.5 1.5 1 1.5 1 2 1.5 1 2.5 Source: CSO2 scorecard. simple color code to indicate: building blocks that are Figure 12 largely in place, acting as a driver on service delivery (score Average RWS scorecard scores for enabling, >2, green); building blocks that are a drag on service sustaining, and developing stages of the service delivery and require attention (score 1–2, yellow); and delivery pathway, and peer-group comparison building blocks that are inadequate, constituting a barrier Enabling to service delivery and a priority for reform (score <1, red). The assessment is based on contributions from sector actors. The scorecard (represented by Figure 11) shows that there are concerns throughout the service delivery pathway in the rural water subsector. Liberia scores low in the ‘enabling’ and ‘developing’ building blocks whilst it is just above its peers in the area of ‘sustaining’ services (Figure Sustaining Developing 12). Some of the factors underlying this performance are discussed below. Liberia average scores Averages, LICs, GNI p.p. <=$500 Whilst the policy documents (PRS1 and WSSP) have Source: CSO2 scorecard. articulated the sector vision and targets, these are yet to be rolled out. Institution-building is required to ensure that those identified in the policy documents are established Though marginally better than peers due to an attempt to and strengthened. County administrations are expected to revive community involvement in management of water drive delivery and then sustain it through CWSCs, but both points, there are concerns in Liberia about sustaining sets of institutions are challenged by capacity constraints. existing services (maintenance) and not mechanisms to Budget allocations are very low, whilst utilization rates support expansion of existing rural and small town piped and releases remain a challenge. schemes. Indicators for maintenance include conducting regular functionality surveys, raising user fees to finance In terms of developing services, the equity building block O&M costs for service delivery and whether there is scores poorly as a result of the absence of criteria and adequate back-stopping and a functioning spare parts a systematic mechanism for allocating resources across delivery network. counties and communities, no national guidance on participation and inclusion of communities at the project With the long-drawn out war many facilities fell into development stage and no periodic analysis of equity disrepair. NGOs delivering services are not subject to outcomes. Most interventions have been undertaken gazetted national guidelines, and solving immediate by NGOs and criteria have included logistical concerns community needs (rather than long-term sustainable including levels of accessibility and security. mechanisms) is what has driven projects. In many instances 20 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond communities do not pay for the use of water and O&M; significantly reduce the likelihood of pump breakdown, capital maintenance costs are rarely met. yet thousands of points still have no CWSCs. CWSCs need to be put in place where they are not already established. Even for water points built since 2004, a third are Second, at the county level, spare-part supply-chains need nonfunctional according to the national water point to be strengthened and more pump mechanics need to mapping exercise carried out in 2011.16 The mapping be trained. Third, at the national level the registration, exercise also revealed that over 80 percent of all rural vetting, and quality control of pump installers should be water points in Liberia are of just one type—the Afridev improved and technical guidelines on handpumps and handpump and that there is considerable scope for repair water quality rolled out. and rehabilitation. County administrations, however, do not have the capacity to develop plans for maintenance On the positive side, indicators for use are high as around support. 84 percent of the rural population covered by improved sources spends less than 30 minutes (round-trip) to fetch Three steps should be taken to improve the sustainability water. Among subsector activities is a concerted effort by of rural schemes. First, the water point mapping survey development partners to improve water storage and point showed that active community water committees of use treatment. 21 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 8. Subsector: Urban Water Supply Priority actions for urban water supply • Develop a detailed urban water sector investment plan aligned to the sector strategic plan. • Develop a financing strategy that puts the LWSC in a position to carry out basic efficiency improvements in its operations. All estimates for urban water supply coverage show a decline US$11 million is anticipated from domestic and donor in coverage between 1990 and 2008. Over the period of sources. Urban households are required to meet another review, the urban population has close to doubled, driven US$11 million through cost recovering measures adopted by conflict-induced rural-urban migration. While JMP data through current policy intentions. OPEX requirements are show a decline in coverage from 86 percent in 1990 to estimated at US$8 million, and the ability to recover these 79 percent in 2008, government estimates suggest a far from user fees will determine the true extent of public greater drop in coverage to 30 percent coverage in 2008. sector funding requirements. The PRS1 reports that Monrovia’s water supply production fell from 18 million gallons daily to just 1 million gallons The scorecard depicted in Figure 15 demonstrates that over the period of conflict. This has since recovered to several of the building blocks in the service delivery 5 million gallons per day in 2010.17 pathway raise concerns for subsector performance. Compared to its peer group, Liberia underperforms in The urban water supply target for the PRS2 period is all three building blocks (Figure 16). An examination of 93 percent. the scorecard highlights weaknesses in planning, equity, output, maintenance, and expansion building blocks. Based on the coverage figures adopted by stakeholders for 2008 for urban water supply, and using the CSO2 costing Sector planning and coordination (for the sector as a model, an estimated annual US$36 million is required whole) was very weak until early 2010 with only rough for investments in the subsector. Of this amount around estimates of requirements to meet 2011 PRS1 targets in US$18 million is attributed to the public sector, of which place. Since then a sector strategic plan has been under Figure 13 Figure 14 Urban water supply coverage Urban water investment requirements 100% 80% Required CAPEX Required Coverage 60% OPEX 40% 20% 0% 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 0 20 40 60 US$ million/year Government estimates Government target Public CAPEX (anticipated) Household CAPEX (assumed) JMP improved JMP piped CAPEX deficit Source: CSO2 costing. Source: CSO2 costing. 22 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Figure 15 Urban water supply scorecard Enabling Developing Sustaining Policy Planning Budget Expenditure Equity Output Market Uptake Use 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2.5 Source: CSO2 scorecard. development. This includes a rudimentary investment plan Figure 16 but this is yet to be finalized and will need to be supported Average UWS scorecard scores for enabling, by a more detailed urban investment plan. sustaining and developing stages of the service delivery pathway, and peer-group comparison In addition, a platform for annual subsector reviews Enabling of outputs which embraces all stakeholders and drives subsector agenda has yet to be put in place. No comprehensive equity criteria exist for the allocation of resources among urban centers and among segments of the population, even though all donor projects have incorporated components for service delivery to low income and peri-urban communities. Maintenance and expansion score low principally as a result of the lack of commitment to achieving cost recovery through improved Sustaining Developing tariff-setting mechanisms. As a result the LWSC also has a weak financial position undermining its ability to finance Liberia average scores O&M or put in place basic efficiency improvements. This Averages, LICs, GNI p.p. <=$500 situation is attributed to “inadequate tariff; weak billing Source: CSO2 scorecard. and collection structure, high level of arrears and high unaccounted-for water, amounting to 65-75 percent of the water production in most of the areas, and particularly in Monrovia”.18 23 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 9. Subsector: Rural Sanitation and Hygiene Priority actions for rural sanitation and hygiene • Clarify the institutional lead for sanitation and scale up Community-Led Total Sanitation. • Adapt and adopt a nationwide hygiene promotion toolkit to scale up current levels of progress. All estimates for rural sanitation show that little progress therefore, needs to demonstrate the mechanisms for this has been made since 1990. The JMP estimates that open leveraging of household expenditure by putting in place defecation rates have increased from 68 to 77 percent credible nationwide sanitation promotion including the between 1990 and 2008. Access to improved sanitation budgets, staff, and materials to carry this out. has remained very low, increasing from only 3 to 4 percent over the same period. The remainder of the population An examination of the scorecard for rural sanitation share facilities. Government estimates for rural sanitation (Figure 19) shows a poor performance throughout the default to JMP estimates. service delivery pathway, with concerns in planning and budgeting, poor access, equity as well as all the building It is clear that Liberia has a long way to go, given that blocks pertaining to sustaining the delivery of facilities. its commitment to achieving the MDG target remains Liberia’s rural subsector underperforms its peer group unchanged. The rural share of this target for the PRS2 (Figure 20), with average scores in the group reflecting period is 52 percent. the challenges that countries as a whole have in their sanitation agenda. The high score for policy is explained CAPEX requirements for rural sanitation infrastructure are by the existence of the WSSP, one of the indicators in estimated at US$24 million, of which the public component the enabling factors in the service delivery pathway. is around US$5 million. This public component is expected Whilst the policy clearly identifies household sanitation to leverage the remainder (US$19 million) from household as essentially a household-driven activity, the strategies expenditure using low or no-subsidy CLTS sanitation for achieving this are not in place and it is not clear how approaches. The service delivery pathway for sanitation, households are to be encouraged to invest in sanitation, Figure 17 Figure 18 Rural sanitation coverage Rural sanitation investment requirements 100% 80% Required CAPEX Required Coverage 60% OPEX 40% 20% 0% 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 0 10 20 30 US$ million/year Government estimates Government target Public CAPEX (anticipated) Household CAPEX (assumed) JMP Improved JMP, improved + shared CAPEX deficit Source: CSO2 costing. Source: CSO2 costing. 24 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Figure 19 Rural sanitation and hygiene scorecard Enabling Developing Sustaining Policy Planning Budget Expenditure Equity Output Markets Uptake Use 2.5 0.5 1 2 0.5 2 0.5 0.5 1 Source: CSO2 scorecard. and how this will be financed—an especially urgent issue Figure 20 given the current emphasis on CLTS. The equity building Average RSH scorecard scores for enabling, block scores poorly as the key indicators for this—criteria sustaining, and developing stages of the service for allocation of sanitation funding, procedures for local delivery pathway, and peer-group comparison participation in planning, budgeting and implementation, Enabling and periodic analysis by government and civil society to assess equity issues—are only beginning to take root or are not currently in place. The markets building block also scores poorly due to the absence of a supply chain for sanitation equipment to meet household needs and insufficient supply-side artisanal or technical capacity, major requirements to complement the CLTS approach. The indicators for uptake include the sufficiency of quantity and quality of facilities being rolled to meet the MDGs, Sustaining Developing and the percentage of rural households practicing hand Liberia average scores washing at critical times. The poor rating is more the result Averages, LICs, GNI p.p. <=$500 of the lack of data than an objective assessment of the current practices, even though there are some significant Source: CSO2 scorecard. findings that could support the above verdict.19 25 An AMCOW Country Status Overview 10. Subsector: Urban Sanitation and Hygiene Priority actions for urban sanitation and hygiene • Develop appropriate sanitation technologies for densely populated urban slums. • Clarify strategy for the promotion of sanitation in low income and peri-urban communities. • Identify low cost sanitation/sewerage options including small-bore sewerage and decentralized, neighborhood-based treatment plants. • Clarify use of shared facilities (based on researched evidence on quality, appropriateness) and incorporate in decision making regarding investments. With a rapidly growing urban population, sanitation are estimated at US$6 million. There is a financing gap of in urban areas is critical. The JMP estimates that open US$32 million, given that only US$6 million is anticipated defecation rates have increased from 15 to 30 percent in public expenditure. Furthermore, the programmed between 1990 and 2008. Access to improved sanitation public investment in urban sanitation is principally for increased marginally from 21 to 25 percent over the same rehabilitation of the Monrovia sewerage system. For the period with a similar proportion of the urban population poor living in informal and peri-urban communities, it is sharing facilities. Monrovia is by far the largest urban noted that CLTS may not be effective, but there is as yet center with a population of over 1 million. There are no clear strategy for promoting sanitation delivery in such reported to be only 724 household sewer connections in communities. Monrovia with a further 15 percent of households being connected to the septic tanks.20 Government estimates The scorecard for urban sanitation (Figure 23) shows poor for urban sanitation are very close to JMP estimates. The performance throughout the service delivery pathway, with urban sanitation target for the PRS2 period is 61 percent. concerns in planning, equity as well as very low scores in the building blocks sustaining the delivery of facilities, Based on the CSO2 costing, an annual CAPEX of US$44 namely, markets and uptake. Liberia’s urban subsector million is required to finance investments in urban sanitation underperforms its peer group (Figure 24), with the very and hygiene. Of this amount US$22 is expected from low average scores in the peer group reflecting the major public funding (domestic and donors), whilst household challenges that these countries have in addressing the contributions leveraged through the public investment urban sanitation agendas. Figure 21 Figure 22 Urban sanitation coverage Urban sanitation investment requirements 100% 80% Required CAPEX Required Coverage 60% OPEX 40% 20% 0% 0 20 40 60 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 US$ million/year Government estimates Government target Public CAPEX (anticipated) Household CAPEX (assumed) JMP improved JMP, improved + shared CAPEX deficit Source: CSO2 costing. Source: CSO2 costing. 26 Water Supply and Sanitation in Liberia: Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond Figure 23 Urban sanitation and hygiene scorecard Enabling Developing Sustaining Policy Planning Budget Expenditure Equity Output Markets Uptake Use 1.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1.5 0 0 1 Source: CSO2 scorecard. Though there are national targets set for urban sanitation Figure 24 in both the PRS1 and PRS2, the national WSSP does not Average USH scorecard scores for enabling, provide any policy guidance for the urban sanitation sustaining, and developing stages of the service subsector other than to say that pro-poor services should delivery pathway, and peer-group comparison be adopted and that this should be done at full cost recovery. The policy does not stipulate a lead agency for Enabling urban sanitation nationally or mention the role of the Monrovia City Council (MCC).21 Monrovia is by far the largest urban center with a population of over 1 million and accounts for over a third of the country’s population. The MCC is the agency that has taken on the charge of solid waste and on-site public sanitation (public toilets). Piped water supply and sewerage Sustaining Developing are the responsibilities of the LWSC, while drainage is the responsibility of the MoPW.22 Liberia average scores Averages, LICs, GNI p.p. <=$500 In Monrovia, the sewage from the flush toilets and sewage from hundreds of septic tanks (collected by vacuum trucks) Source: CSO2 scorecard. is discharged into the sewer network. However, since the sewage treatment plant is not operational, the sewage with users not resident in the immediate vicinity; those eventually finds its way untreated into the environment. A in unplanned settlements with users from the resident multidonor project managed by the LWSC is rehabilitating community; and those that have both resident and the waste stabilization ponds. nonresident users. • Finding solutions for efficient emptying, transfer, In fast growing, unplanned areas of the city, space for and disposal of fecal sludge while maintaining the on-site sanitation is limited, the water table high, and affordability of public facilitates to users. resorting to open defecation common. In an effort to meet the huge unmet demand for sanitation facilities, Nevertheless, additional initiatives are also needed to communal latrines were constructed in urban communities promote and improve household sanitation solutions in during the humanitarian period but many of these filled urban areas as public toilets alone will not mitigate the up, fell into disrepair, and were abandoned. Since then high fecal contamination of ground water in shallow wells the MCC and its development partners have implemented used by the majority of the city’s residents.23 This will need a number of rehabilitation programs aimed at reviving and to include developing a strategy for the promotion of expanding public sanitation facilities. Though still limited sanitation uptake and mobilization of markets for sanitation in number, these public facilities are becoming a well used services for densely populated urban slums, as well as low solution. The two challenges have been to: cost sewerage options including small-bore sewerage and • Identify and put in place effective management decentralized, neighborhood-based treatment plants in models across different types of public facilities: those the medium and lower density urban areas. 27 An AMCOW Country Status Overview Notes and References 1 PRS2 targets for water supply and sanitation. The target investment program based on MDG needs assessment; for sanitation is for unshared sanitation. The target for sufficient finance to meet MDG (subsidy policy for sanitation including shared sanitation is 63 percent. sanitation); percent of official donor commitments utilized; 2 The first round of CSOs was carried out in 2006 covering 16 percent of domestic commitments utilized. countries and is summarized in the report, Getting Africa 11 The national water point mapping survey carried out On-Track to Meet the MDGs on Water and Sanitation. in 2011 indicates that progress on the sustainability of 3 IMF. 2008. Liberia: Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper systems is yet to be achieved. Of the 7,500 rural water (pg 106). http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2008/ points surveyed 29 percent were not functional and a cr08219.pdf. further 11 percent functional but with problems, for example, water available for only part of the dry season. 4 Government of Liberia, UNDP, UNECA. 2008. Liberia’s Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals. 12 Figures provided by official of Ministry of Finance. http://www.lr.undp.org/Documents/RecentPublic/Liberia- 13 www.wash-liberia.org. MDG-Report-2008-small.pdf. 14 Indicators relating to the M&E section are as follows: WaterAid. 2008. Scoping Study to Liberia, London. All subsectors: annual review setting new undertakings; 5 JMP estimates are based on a linear regression of nationally subsector spend identifiable in budget (UWS: inc. recurrent representative household surveys. WASH stakeholders subsidies); budget comprehensively covers domestic/donor in Liberia feel the LDHS access figures for water and finance; RWS, RSH, and USH: domestic/donor expenditure sanitation have not been realistic over the years. The reported; UWS: audited accounts and balance sheets baseline access figures quoted on page 106 of PRS 2008 from utilities; RWS, RSH, and USH: periodic analysis of are attributed by the sector to the joint Government-NGO equity criteria by CSOs and government; UWS: pro-poor Working Group on Water and Sanitation. These figures plans developed and implemented by utilities; RWS/UWS: were said to have been extrapolated using the year 2004 nationally consolidated reporting of output; RSH/USH: as baseline and accounting for the water and sanitation monitoring of quantity and quality of uptake relative to projects undertaken nationally by the government and promotion and subsidy efforts; All subsectors: Questions partners since that time. They are used as the baseline and choice options in household surveys consistent with indicators for the government’s strategic objectives in MDG definitions. water and sanitation, including the MDGs, with the 15 NWSP, section 3.4.3. proviso that these baselines and targets may be adjusted 16 GoL. 2011. Liberia Waterpoint Atlas: http://wash-liberia. during the PRS implementation period. org/uploads/Final_Review_Version_-_Waterpoint_ 6 In the absence of a clear policy on user contributions, Atlas___Investment_Plan_x.pdf. the proportion of capital costs assumed to be met by 17 LWSC Operation Department. Monthly report. December households was estimated in Ministry of Infrastructure 2010. Task Force meetings, as: 5 percent for rural water supply, 18 AfDB, Project Appraisal Report, Liberia, Monrovia Water 0 percent for urban water supply, and 70 percent for both Supply and Sanitation Rehabilitation project, 2007. rural and urban sanitation subsectors. 19 A study by Subah-Belleh Associates on hygiene-related 7 Due to rounding, component figures may not sum to behavior in around 1,000 communities in eight counties totals. in Liberia in early 2008, made the following findings: 60 8 The CSO2 scorecard methodology and conceptual percent practiced open defecation; and 43 percent did not framework are discussed in detail in the synthesis report. practice hand-washing with soap. 9 Indicators relating to the Institutional framework 20 Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy. 2009. Water Supply section are as follows: All subsectors: targets in national and Sanitation Policy. development plans/PRSP; subsector policy agreed and 21 Ibid. approved (gazetted as part of national policy or as standalone policy); RWS/UWS: institutional roles defined; 22 Sen, Somnath. 2007. Improved Management of Public RSH/USH: institutional lead appointed. Toilets in Monrovia by Outsourcing. 10 Indicators relating to the Financing section are as follows: 23 WSP (forthcoming). Survey of Water Quality in Monrovia’s All subsectors: programmatic Sector-Wide Approach; Public Water Supplies. 28 For enquiries, contact: Water and Sanitation Program–Africa Region The World Bank, Upper Hill Road P.O. Box 30577, 00100, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +(254) 20 322 6300 E-mail: wspaf@worldbank.org Web site: www.wsp.org