Developments & Trends in Tanzania’s Water Sector Dar es Salaam - September 2005

Percentage of rural households using improved water sources Mainland average = 42%

Why is past performance not a guide to future performance?

Out of: rural water projects - Nordic countries all exited leaving only investments from Netherlands and in future JICA. Into: basket funds - health, education, roads budget support - including key development partners who worked in rural water ‘bankable’ urban water projects - WB, AfDB, EIB, EC, KFW as well as France (small towns), Swiss (Tabora, Dodoma) Shifting aid modalities and investment priorities of Tanzania’s development partners

Centrally implemented ‘national’ projects - GOT is channelling >90% of water sector development funding to the Lake Victoria - Kahama- Shinyanaga pipeline. Centrally controlled rural water supply project - WB funded RWSSP run by a central project implementation unit. No fiscal decentralisation - Only 10% of the water sector budget goes to LGAs. No LGA investment in water supply - LGAs are not using their locally raised income to fund water But no counter-shift by Government of Tanzania

Research on local government reform REPOA & Chr Michelsen Institute Citizen survey in six councils found those satisfied with education 70%, with health 36%, with water supply 22%. Respondents that had seen an improvement in services for education 85%, health services 37%, water supply 20%. When asked which service is most important to improve now water supply was the priority. But … council resources allocated to water sector were by far lowest of the three services at between 0.3 and 2% of total expenditures Are there disincentives to allocating budget for water (check MTEFs)?

Result of current state of play Rural investment vacuum Costs of technology up - Shift from low cost to high cost technologies; from shallow well and simple gravity schemes at $30 per capita to large piped systems at $260 per capita Equity of investments down - in terms of: geography - from investment in most regions to investment in one region socio-economic - from point sources to piped schemes

Rural and Urban Population Trends in Tanzania

1.Build and rehabilitate 3,000 rural water points each year 2.Increase LGA spending on rural water supply by $30 million a year 3.Targeted urban water sector spending of $66 million a year (first generation beneficiaries) What will it take to meet MDG & MKUKUTA targets for water supply?

Rural Water Supply Dar es Salaam - September 2005

Percentage of rural households using improved water sources Mainland average = 42%

7 districts in which fewer than 10% of rural households have access to improved water supply : Sikonge (4%), Igunga (5%), Kishapu (9.6%), Liwale (8%), Mkuranga (6%), Rufiji (9%) and Mafia (3%) 4 districts in which over 80% of households have access: Arumeru (82%), Mwanga (82%), Kyela (83%) and Rombo (93%). In 63 % of districts less than 50% of households have access to improved water supply Extreme inequalities across districts

District Case Studies

Rural population: 385,877 21% of households get their drinking water from an improved source (Source: Census) In 2004 there were 355 water points but >35% not working (Source: WaterAid water point mapping) Nzega needs at least 1000 working water points to meet MDGs 80 water points need to be built/rehabilitated per year Nzega District (below average access to water)

All water points ever built in Nzega by funder Water points Nzega District Council 19 built since 2000

Functionality by type of water point Type of water point

Rural population: 232,909 62% of households get their drinking water from an improved source (Source: Census) In 2004 there are 357 water points but >25% of not working (Source: WaterAid water point mapping) To meet MDGs Mpwapwa needs at least 700 working water points 40 water points need to be built/rehabilitated per year Mpwapwa District (above average)

All water points ever built in Mpwapwa by funder Water points Mpwapwa District Council 9 built since 2000

Strengthen situational analysis + performance monitoring (e.g. thro’ water point mapping) Integrate planning with Medium Term Plans and Expenditure Frameworks (e.g. thro’ PlanRep). Push for a system of monitoring to prevent ‘terminal’ breakdowns. Support LGA contracting process in order to build up local NGO and private sector capacity Support needed at local government level

Based on existing LGA set up (at best one qualified district water engineer and technicians) Planning and expenditure managed by LGAs with support from Region Low cost technology ($ 20 per capita) sub- contracted to local private sector Long-term funding stream has generated capacity both in LGAs and of local private sector 200 water points built in Shinyanga Region each year by 7 district councils Netherlands Rural Water Supply Programme

GoT vision for the rural water supply sub-sector is there Responsibility for planning and expenditure for rural water supply with local councils Prioritise investments in low-cost water supplies Private sector participation at local level Cost recovery for operation and maintenance … and there are examples of good practice Netherlands project in Shinyanga WaterAid work in Singida

But if no money is getting to LGAs … … because the core reforms are not delivering Public Financial Management, Local Government, Public Service. What can be done in the meantime?

1.Special purpose grant for rural water supply to local councils 2.Sector investment coordination mechanism led by Government Possible transition arrangements

Urban water supply central to development Urban population growing Tax base is in urban Policy for urban water supply in place … Autonomous urban water and sewerage authorities Bankable investment projects paid back from internal business models Grant investment for low income areas Sector Wide Approach to investment … albeit practice still messy Dar water reforms Subsidies still going to some urban utilities