1. WATER AND WASTEWATER BENCHMARKS IN AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND AND THE PACIFIC ISLANDS A COMPARISON OF INITIATIVES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALIGNMENT

2. Background and Introduction

3. Why use benchmarks

4. Identify opportunities for improvement

5. Why use benchmarks Identify best practices Identify opportunities for improvement

6. Why use benchmarks Identify best practices Set internal key performance indicators Identify opportunities for improvement

7. Why use benchmarks Identify best practices Set internal key performance indicators Identify opportunities for improvement Information for stakeholders

11. Comparison of Areas that are Benchmarked NON REVENUE WATER BILLS METERING RESIDENTIAL WATER CONSUMPTION STAFF Recycled water Greenhouse Gas Emissions Wastewater sludge AREAS WE ALL BENCHMARK COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE NETWORK PERFORMANCE QUALITY OF SERVICE

12. Totally different benchmarks…. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AustraliaNew ZealandPacific Islands Net profit Dividend pay-out Total CAPEX Operating cost per property Revenue Capital expenditure as a ration of budgeted expenditure Operating Cost Coverage Ratio Debt Service Ratio Operating Cost Coverage Ratio QUALITY OF SERVICE AustraliaNew ZealandPacific Islands Call answered by an operator within 30seconds Fault attendance and response times Wastewater treatment level Continuity of Service Quality of water (chlorine residual)

13. Some interesting comparisons: consumption DIFFERENCES: Australia reported per property

14. Some interesting comparisons: metering

15. Case Studies of International benchmarking: European Benchmarking Commission EMPLOYEE EXCHANGE GOOD PRACTICE CASE STUDIES

16. Some interesting comparisons: tariffs Household tariffs for 200m3 yearHousehold tariffs for 72m3 year

17. Some interesting comparisons: tariffs DIFFERENCES Household tariffs for 200m3 yearHousehold tariffs for 72m3 year 200m 3 /year 72m 3 /year

18. Limitations of benchmarking Different countries collect different data Different definitions interpretation Measuring the wrong indicator might take us in the wrong direction Different system influences can lead to misleading conclusions

19. Not really a comparison… Water Loss Real LossesNon Revenue Water

20. Not really a comparison… Water Loss Real LossesNon Revenue Water DIFFERENCES -Connection density -System pressure -Unbilled consumption -Unauthorised consumption

21. Selection of fit for purpose indicators OBJECTIVEGOOD PRACTICE PERFORMANE INDICATOR FOR LEAKAGE Volume per year Litres/ service connection M3/km mains % of system input volume % of water supplied Infrastructure Leakage Index with Pressure Set targets and track performance of an individual system Yes, for large systems Yes No Only if pressure management completed Technical performance comparisons of different systems No Yes

22. Case study of benchmarking using the IWA Methodology The Infrastructure Leakage Index in Malta: FROM 20 to 2.1! *see leaksuite.comleaksuite.com Adoption of 5 forces model Pressure Control 300 Zones Checked Weekly

23. What could we do now…. Include Australian and New Zealand data that aligns in IBNET database Consider alignment of indicators when developing reports Share our reports with each other, with stakeholders involved in funding and operations

24. Over time…… Share best practice learnings Identify twinning/training and collaborative partnership opportunities CONTACT: lesley.smith@waternz.org.nz