The water sector stakeholders of Benin validated a new governance and integrity charter in June 2016. This tool and the operationalization mechanism that goes with it are a practical demonstration of the willingness of different stakeholders to act in favour of integrity with a view to achieving the SDGs. The development of the charter is an inspiration for such processes for integrity. We met an integrity ambassador and key promoter of the charter at the RWSN forum in Côte d’Ivoire in December: Arnauld Adjagodo of the Benin Global Water Partnership (GWP Benin). He shared his experience and his thoughts on the future of integrity promotion in Benin. What big changes have you observed in Benin in the last few years in terms of integrity? Since the launch of our work on integrity in Benin supported by WIN, we have seen a real transformation in how different stakeholders understand and are receptive to the topic. At first, we would almost get chased away. Now, the stakeholders are with us and we have a minister of water that has voiced his willingness to become an ambassador for the water integrity charter. To reach this point, we had to bring added value to the ongoing work of the sector stakeholders and build tangible tools responding to their priorities. You have to start with concrete action, everything starts there. It helps to concentrate primarily on the promotion of integrity and not only, not directly anti-corruption. There are institutions for that, there is justice. We are in preventive work and we support the sector stakeholders to sweep in a changing dynamic. That requires resources and patience. It isn’t always easy. Could you tell us more about the water governance and integrity charter? The idea of the charter to promote water integrity was first examined by the multi-stakeholder water integrity coalition of Benin. We thought of putting forward a voluntary engagement process for sector stakeholders, which we believed would be more consensual and beneficial than an imposed process. The charter has its roots in the national regulatory framework and the existing anti-corruption mechanisms. It was developed after a quick integrity scan of the sector and an analysis of the strong points and weak points of existing charters in Benin. Other national charters have not always been so successful when it comes to implementation. To avoid this kind of problem, the integrity charter was developed from the start with an operationalization mechanism agreed on by each stakeholder group. How was the charter developed? It was essential that the process be progressive and participatory. Consultations were initiated with different stakeholder groups of the water and sanitation sector — state actors, civil society organizations, private sector, municipalities, technical and financial partners — to finalize a text with engagements that will be adapted and integrated into individual implementation plans for each stakeholder group. Regulation and anti-corruption authorities were invited to participate in the process, as were the institutions in charge of controlling procurement processes and the general audit authorities. The charter was then validated in multi-stakeholder workshops. It was recommended that all stakeholders adhere to the charter at the annual sector review. We opted for a voluntary process rather than an obligatory one. This was controversial but we bet on the active and positive engagement of the stakeholders. Although there still is an observation committee and a few sanction elements in the charter. The Minister of Water, Mr Dona Jean-Claude HOUSSOU, is committed to being an ambassador of the charter. We are now moving towards the publication of a decree authorizing the institutions reporting to the ministry to fully adhere to the charter. What are the next steps for the GWP Benin? After the decree is taken, we will have a lot of work raising awareness and explaining the charter. We have to make it accessible, promote it and encourage everyone to adhere to and work by it. We’ll be accompanying different stakeholder groups in detailing their implementation plans. And we’ll be fundraising, to finance all this work. You’re also working on several other water integrity promotion initiatives. Could you tell us more about those? Yes, that’s right. There are several other initiatives ongoing. We advocate for integrity at different levels. We’re working on an assessment of integrity and corruption for Benin. In the long run, we aim to set up an early warning system for governance issues to minimize the impact of poor governance and avoid wasting the resources that would allow us to realize the human right to water in Benin. We’re also working with the National Water Institute, developing higher education training syllabi on integrity. We have syllabi for bachelor's degree students now and are working on course syllabi at the master’s degree level. We’re also launching a very interesting project at the municipal level. With a citizen audit and an annotated water integrity scan, we identify good and bad practices in water point leasing to farmers. We’re already seeing that there regularly are issues with the payment of licence fees. There are false declarations and disparities between the information the municipalities have and the realities on the ground. There is not enough monitoring of quality, service levels, price, and failures. It’s a key question for decentralization. We have already made an assessment in 2 municipalities and are looking to extend this programme to at least 10 other municipalities in 2017. WIN helps us mobilize the technical expertise required to implement our activities and facilitates knowledge sharing among partners. It is useful to see what’s being done elsewhere, to present our ideas, and get feedback from the network. We heighten our credibility by showing that our activities are part and parcel of a global dynamic. Thank you!

A strong legal framework but a complex reality In Mexico, access to public information is a recognized human right in the Constitution. After more than a decade since the publication of the first Ley Federal (Federal Law) and numerous reforms, our legal framework has been rated the best in the world, according to the Global Right to Information Rating, developed by the Centre for Law and Democracy. And, indeed, Mexicans have an excellent legal framework on the right to information that was built with the participation of various social actors, including civil society organizations (CSOs) with extensive experience in the use of public information to monitor government performance. Water is also included in the framework. We can currently find very large volumes of public information on water, from the government and various other actors: academics and other specialists, CSOs, foundations and corporations. The variety of government information available is remarkable: from the situation of water resources, quality, infrastructure, uses, concessions, and municipalities at risk of drought, to open data on the number of wastewater treatment plants and volume treated, and much more. Good news, don’t you think? Yes, but… We sometimes find flaws in the government information that is publicly available. For example, it is not always updated or does not correspond with what can be directly observed. For example, according to an investigation y ControlaTuGobierno on the National Inventory of Treatment Plants, some of the infrastructure reported as “operational” is actually not working or treating even a tenth of the declared volume. In addition, the abundance of information does not always translate into useful public knowledge, ie. that can be used by the population to know what to do during emergencies or natural disasters, or that serves to make better decisions in purchasing goods and services. It certainly doesn’t always translate into data that people can use to solve their daily affairs, improve their quality of life, or reduce corruption. The role of civil society: from local to national and vice versa An intermediary is required for information, just like water, to reach those who need it the most. That is precisely a role of CSOs can play. They are the ones translating government information into socially useful information and making it available to vulnerable populations. The good news is that there are many organizations that know how to find the information people need in Mexico, have the ability to process it, and make it accessible for the population. For example, ControlaTuGobierno has been working in the area of the volcanoes since 2005 with organizations that have roots in the region, like Centli, Guardianes de los Volcanes, and the Basin Commission Comisión de Cuenca de los Ríos Amecameca y de la Compañía, advising them on the use of public information and its potential to conserve water resources of communities. Another example that brings together several organizations of various states is the Agua para todos movement, which involves neighbourhood and community organizations, research and academic institutions, small businesses and many other stakeholders throughout the country, are all interested in conserving water resources and ensuring their sustainability for current and future generations. Various online tools and applications that facilitate interaction between citizens and the government for the water sector are available thanks to different Mexican CSOs. For example in Oaxaca, one of the poorest states with many water issues, CSOs in collaboration with the state government have developed a website to report failures and any problems with supply or drainage. They have secured a commitment that these issues be addressed immediately. Another example is the portal Nuestra Agua, where a map can be used to locate water sources, infrastructure, organizations and a host of geo-referenced information on water. This project, designed and managed by civil society, is based on open data from public and private institutions. It provides socially useful information, which is needed by ordinary people to make decisions, participate and, most importantly, make sustainable use of water in Mexico. At the national level, Mexican civil organizations are also working on water issues. For example at the legislative level, they have developed the Bill Ley General de Aguas (General Water Law) by conducting a series of forums, workshops, events and consultations with different sectors in 29 states. Currently, the deadline for issuing this law has expired, but the Bill is still being discussed in Congress. In parallel, it is important to highlight the participation of CSOs in the preparation of the Third National Open Government Plan for Mexico 2016-2018 where it has been possible to include a commitment to drinking water of utmost importance for the conservation of this resource. - A non-operating water treatment plant in the State of Mexico© C. Fernandez Fernandez. The importance of consulting the population Today in Mexico, the large amount of information that is publicly available is an undeniable reality, especially since the entry into force of the Ley General (General Law), which clearly states the characteristics of the information that public bodies must make available to the public in their electronic portals [1]. One of the objectives of the law is to “encourage citizen participation in public decision-making in order to contribute to the consolidation of democracy”[2]. This however is still often not the case. Let’s look for example at the real case of a farmer in Huitzilzingo, in the State of Mexico. One day this man woke up with the news that there were plans to build a wastewater treatment plant on his property. No one consulted or informed him about it; his neighbours told him that there were machines on his land and people measuring and making calculations on the plot –which certainly ruined his harvest. The paradox is that the information is public: anyone with internet access and a computer can find it in the transparency portal of the National Water Commission, CONAGUA and its state counterpart CAEM. The tender for the construction of the plant, the winning company, the assigned budget and the date of completion of the works are all published. Neither the farmer nor his neighbours, who could all benefit from the treated water, not even the municipal authority, knew anything about the project. All this is despite the constitutional mandate and the existence of numerous laws that require the government to consult the people before planning and building infrastructure. The study by ControlaTuGobierno on wastewater treatment plants and the reports of the Supreme Audit Office, emphasizes the importance of consulting the population before planning and building such infrastructure. The benefits are manifold. First of all, the treatment plant would be constructed in accordance with the resources available in the area, for example near a source of electricity. In addition, if the plant responded to a social need, the community would not feel it is an imposition and be considered a public good that belongs to and benefits everyone. As a consequence, it is highly likely that the community would care for its maintenance. Information in this case would not only discourage corruption but also be the most efficient way to protect the public interest and its associated goods. What happens to people when they have no information and cannot participate? There are many scenarios: in some regions, neighbourhoods are flooded and people observe how in a couple of hours water destroys their properties, in other areas vegetables are irrigated with sewage due to lack of potable water, in many housing complexes in large cities water rarely flows through their pipes. Should you be living in a rural area, you may also be very careful when using water from a well since it is not uncommon that such water is poisoned by spills from the nearby (or even faraway -water finds its way) industry. Information in movement A good law, coupled with an alliance between civil society and a transparent government, seems to be the best way to set public information in motion. In the water sector, this is particularly relevant because it implies that the huge public investment in water infrastructure reaches its destination and fulfils its function, which is to achieve integrated and sustainable water management. The information in the hands of people is dynamic information, which is used and contrasted with reality and thus enriches the data produced by the government. For example, in the case of the farmer from Huitzilzingo, ControlaTuGobierno mobilized the information on the treatment plant that is planned on his land by sharing it with him, setting the basis for a real involvement of the community in the project. When discussing data and public information for the water sector, we cannot forget that we are talking about individuals and families, often vulnerable, and about nationally recognized human rights: access to drinking water and sanitation. [1] “oportuna, congruente, integral, actualizada, accesible, comprensible y verificable”. Ley General de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública, Artículo 61. [2] Art. 2, fracción VIII de la Ley General de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública.

“In terms of water sector integrity, we have made good progress, but there is still a long way to go”. For the past twelve years, Dr. Zaman has been the Executive Director of Transparency International Bangladesh (TI-B), which is also the largest country chapter of TI with over 250 staff. As an elected member of the International Board of Directors of TI, Dr. Zaman is internationally renowned for his outstanding contributions, influence and impact in pushing for more transparency and good governance in Bangladesh. Dr. Iftekhar Zaman was instrumental in establishing the Bangladesh Water Integrity Network (BAWIN)*. We caught up with him to discuss his views on integrity, and his take on the progress that BAWIN is making in promoting integrity in water in Bangladesh. Could you tell us about the work that BAWIN is currently promoting on water integrity and good governance in the water sector of Bangladesh? A lot is happening. Besides country assessments, ongoing research, campaigns and advocacy activities, I would like to highlight one specific ongoing initiative that is generating enthusiasm: BAWIN’s partnership with the Khulna Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (KWASA). The partnership was established to promote integrity and increase transparency, accountability and participation in service delivery. The work is based on the Integrity Management Toolbox (IM Toolbox) approach, which was introduced in KWASA with the technical support of WIN and cewas. BAWIN has not only facilitated KWASA’s integrity-related capacity building but also supported KWASA to develop a strong business model and roadmap to institutionalize water integrity in their catchment area. This is the first example of such a Government and NGO partnership with integrity in the water sector in Bangladesh. When I personally met the Managing Director and other relevant senior officials of KWASA, we agreed to explore options to upscale these efforts and share experiences with peer Water Supply and Sewerage Authorities. Working on integrity with the Chittagong WASA is the next step for us. BAWIN also leads advocacy activities. To mark World Water Day 2016, we organized a National Water Rights event with eleven other organizations and delivered conclusions and recommendations including water integrity to the Water Resources Minister who pledged to bring necessary reforms in the sector. We also organized activities in schools for over 7000 students and 2000 other stakeholders (teachers, civil society) on the linkages between the Sustainable Development Goals and water integrity practices. In terms of research, we are soon going to undertake a study on the use and effectiveness of the Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) in the garments industry of Bangladesh from a water integrity perspective. How have these programmes been received so far in Bangladesh and have you noted any impact? The most important impact of BAWIN’s work in my view is that water integrity now occupies a prominent place in the water sector narratives and that there is a platform for discussion on institutionalizing water integrity in Bangladesh. Before BAWIN, TI-B advocated for the promotion of better governance in the water sector in terms of transparency, accountability and participation in general. With the establishment of BAWIN, the opportunity arose to integrate these concerns under the banner of water integrity in a systematic manner. This shift as well as the introduction of practical tools such as the IM toolbox was well received by various stakeholders and has helped get buy-in from the public sector. Where do you see further opportunities for collaboration with WIN to push for more water integrity in the sector? We have made good progress, but there is still a long way to go. We would like to generate more evidence-based data to highlight the need for further work on water integrity. Depending on available resources, we could undertake a national survey to assess the nature and extent of integrity gaps, the opportunity and cost of corruption, and to identify potential entry points of integrity interventions. We aim to widen our outreach activities at several levels: engaging a greater number of people, particularly the youth; involving the media, especially in building their capacity and skills on issues related to water integrity; and exploring opportunities to work with national and international NGOs, currently mainly focused on WASH issues. Strengthening the platform for collaboration created by BAWIN will consolidate the enabling environment to raise public demand for integrity, transparency, accountability and participation in the water sector. What current and future challenges do you see to reducing corruption in this sector? Integrity has already been built into policy and institutional commitments. The National Integrity Strategy which was adopted by the Government of Bangladesh is a good example of this. The Sustainable Development Goals are reinforcing the importance of these commitments and providing new opportunities to promote integrity in the water sector. However, as in other sectors, a change in mindset does not happen overnight. There has been progress, for example with the successful implementation of integrity tools within KWASA. But, in other similar bodies personal inhibitions and resistance to change are hindering progress. An equally important issue in this regard is a lack of capacity. More capacities would allow leaders to translate professed political will into practice without fear. Although there is widespread dissatisfaction about the ill effects of corruption and poor integrity, people are generally not sufficiently ready to take a strong stance against the issues. This is primarily due to the lack of trust in the actual application of laws and the effectiveness of institutions mandated with the task of corruption control. There is indeed a tendency to take corruption and governance deficit as a way of life, which constitutes a major challenge from the demand side. As you know a lot of funds are pushed into climate projects. TI-B has been successfully implementing the Climate Finance Tracking Programme. Based on your experience, where do you see the vulnerabilities in relation to water and integrity within climate projects? In parallel with BAWIN, we have successfully developed a method of hands-on tracking of governance performance of projects funded by climate finance and implemented by both the government and NGOs. While tracking, we examine transparency and accountability throughout the whole value chain of projects, from project approval through implementation procedures. We initially started this as a separate project and have more recently integrated it TI-B’s core programme. TI-B successfully raised awareness about the need for effective governance of climate financing mechanisms in government and among experts, and CSOs as well as several other relevant international agencies. In terms of the relevance of this experience for our future work under BAWIN, I would like to add that many of the climate change adaptation projects with relevance to water integrity, especially relatively large infrastructure ones, have been, and are likely to be implemented by institutions that are traditionally among those that are the most vulnerable to corruption. In the same way, water-related projects where integrity is highly needed are also the ones that are resource-intensive and most vulnerable to corruption. TI-B’s experience from the climate finance tracking programme, coupled with the platform of opportunities already created under BAWIN, may therefore enrich the content and quality of implementation of water-integrity-related projects. *About the Bangladesh Water Integrity Network (BAWIN) BAWIN was established in 2011 as an initiative of Transparency International Bangladesh (TI-B) and the Water Integrity Network (WIN). BAWIN is a multi-stakeholder network that includes civil society water sector institutions at national and subnational levels as well as committed individuals. BAWIN promotes integrity in the water sector of Bangladesh through research, campaigns and advocacy to promote the engagement of various stakeholders. The members of BAWIN include the Bangladesh Water Partnership, Transparency International Bangladesh, WaterAid in Bangladesh, the NGO Forum for Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation, Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon, VOICE, Bangladesh Center for Advanced Studies, BRAC, Nagorik Uddyog, LEDERS, Institute of Water and Environment and Initiative for Right View. More specifically, BAWIN actively: Stimulates public debate and support for integrity in the water sector in Bangladesh by promoting transparency and accountability in policies and actions affecting the sector; Helps institutions in the water sector to measurably improve transparency and accountability in policies, programmes and operations through knowledge and fact-based advocacy, campaign and engagement; Facilitates change that improves content and quality of services in the water sector with particular emphasis on the sustainable livelihood of all, especially the poor and disadvantaged sections of society. The vision of BAWIN is a water sector in Bangladesh that represents the highest standards of integrity, transparency and accountability, so that people at large, especially the poor and the disadvantaged are ensured of their right to access to water for life and livelihood without being affected by governance deficit and corruption.

The government of Nepal recently released the Nepal Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene Sector Development Plan (SDP) for the period 2016 – 2030. The document is primarily aimed at achieving the SDGs and is the culmination of an ongoing consultative effort started in 2013. The SDP encompasses not only WASH, but also IWRM, and suggests a holistic view of handling water management from source to sink, in line with SDG Goal 6. The SDP delves into details on the governance aspects of WASH, and water management. Within the ambit of governance, water integrity has found a prominent place. It is difficult to discuss or address the problems of corruption and politics in the country. The fact that the government recognized the importance of tackling accountability issues in the water sector is remarkable. Nepal is a young democracy still troubled by political turmoil, but with the SDP it has taken strides towards fulfilling the dreams of the Nepalese people. WIN and Helvetas have been advocating the inclusion of integrity in the SDP for the past three years, under the Swiss Development Cooperation supported Multi-Country Water Integrity Programme (MCWIP). This effort, primarily led at the country level by Helvetas Nepal office in close collaboration with WaterAid, NEPAD and FEDWASUN, focused on pushing for TAP in the sector policy as critical element of water governance in Nepal. The publication of the document is a major milestone. It is also proof that policy developments favouring integrity are possible and within reach. Integrity and accountability take a central place in water policy The SDP states that “Water integrity refers to the adherence of water sector actors and institutions to governance principles of transparency, accountability and participation, based on core values of honesty, equity and professionalism. Integrity, by requiring that public interest be paramount, provides the basis for accountable WASH projects and service delivery.” The document emphasizes trust, integrity, and accountability, and further adds that for ensuring accountability in WASH services and operation it is necessary that politicians, policy-makers and service providers are transparent and accept responsibility for their actions. In particular, Chapter 5 on governance emphasizes the rule of law and integrity and suggests a WASH governance framework with accountability as a component. Chapter 8, which focuses on WASH sector themes, has a comprehensive section on water integrity highlighting the need for both vertical and horizontal accountability and the need for transparent and inclusive processes. It also highlights the communities’ right to WASH. An honest assessment of remaining challenges, with integrity as key way forward The sector already has become more inclusive in Nepal. Water Users Committees represent more and more women and marginalized groups. Still, as highlighted in the SDP executive summary, there is room for further improvement in relation to equality and integrity. The disparity in access, inequality in services, and quality of services remain key challenges. Financial resources are distributed unequally among regions and ensuring greater trust and collaboration to develop shared strategies is also still a challenge. It will now be crucial for the government to ensure that the tenets of the SDP are implemented with transparency and integrity. WIN welcomes the SDP as a step forward in reaching the SDG targets and will continue to support its partners in Nepal in strengthening water integrity.

The OECD Water Governance Initiative (OECD-WGI), a multi-stakeholder platform co-founded by WIN, advises governments on how water policies can be designed and implemented to improve livelihoods. The approach used by the OECD-WGI is to increase multi-stakeholder engagement and support bottom-up processes which will enable the development of policies for the water sector. For this purpose, the OECD-WGI has developed a set of principles for the sector which guide policy reform. To help government institutions and other stakeholders in different countries to monitor the implementation of these OECD principles on water governance, the OECD-WGI is developing an indicator framework. Indeed, monitoring is a crucial means to help identify where reform is needed and how it should be structured. At the Stockholm World Water Week, the President of the OECD-WGI, Peter Glas confirmed, "We all need to work towards putting in place the right conditions for efficient, effective and inclusive water governance systems at different scales. Measuring water governance is a cornerstone to achieving this objective. A proper measurement framework can help policymakers to take the right decisions and to monitor the progress towards ever-better water management." At the session co-convened by the OECD-WGI, IWMI, SIWI, UNDP-SIWI Water Governance Facility and the Water Research Commission, on how public policies can be designed and implemented to contribute to achieving water-related goals, he also called participants to join the action: ‘let’s get to work’. Building a strong monitoring framework During the interaction of the audience with the panel, composed of Transparency International, ASTEE, WIN, the International Network of Basin Organisations and SIWI, Teun Bastemeijer from WIN shared insights related to promoting water integrity and measuring the impact of good water governance programmes. Some of the questions asked were: What measures need to be put in place which promote good governance in the water sector? How can we ensure accountability and avoid corruption creeping into water governance? Indicators that measure good governance in the water sector cannot be developed in one day. The process will require the trust and engagement of stakeholders and should include the development of input, process, output and impact indicators. The effort of setting up a strong indicator framework is worth it, as it can help public institutions together with stakeholders at different levels to determine which results in areas to focus on in achieving better water governance for sustainable and equitable outcomes. Bastemeijer was clear to stress that improving good governance in the water sector ’is not just a matter of having the right indicators, but also of documenting and learning from evolving practice‘. Indicators cannot replace the documentation of best practices. What to measure Choices on what to measure need to be made in a specific country, basin and local contexts, and can relate to one or more of the twelve OECD principles that stakeholders decide to focus on. But in water governance improvement processes, more urgent attention is generally needed for monitoring of effective and efficient use of financial resources. According to the Water Integrity Global Outlook 2016 (WIGO), there is no comprehensive overview of funding levels available to the water sector and weak financial data makes it difficult to track finances and losses. Therefore, it becomes nearly impossible to ‘follow the money’, to see what exactly it is spent on, and to identify where it is lost. At the same time, we know that at least 10% of investment in the water sector is lost to corruption. This translates into billions of dollars disappearing annually. Better financial monitoring is therefore needed to ensure that water governance is “clean” and it will be key to establishing social accountability mechanisms in public financing systems for water sector financing. This may help ensure that risks or gaps are identified at an early stage. Whilst financial monitoring alone is not enough, it has to be a strong element of any comprehensive monitoring framework. What indicators are you using to measure effective water governance within your organization? Share your story in the comments section below and join the discussion to tell us what needs to be done to help promote more efficient, effective and inclusive water governance systems.

HUMAN RIGHTS ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH CORRUPTION Brief Published in 2016 with the Water Integrity Global Outlook 2016 By Peter McIntyre with inputs from Binayak Das (WIN) and Carmen Fernandez Fernandez (Associated consultant) Download (pdf, EN): Human rights are incompatible with corruption and will never be achieved in a sector where corruption is accepted as part of the landscape. The mechanisms and alliances which work to achieve the human rights to water and sanitation must be closely allied with those that work to increase transparency and protect the integrity of the sector. Efforts to combat corruption and realize human rights are always mutually reinforcing: both are necessary. The Water Integrity Global Outlook 2016 demonstrates that integrity in water sector governance is central to the delivery of sustainable development and to achieving the human rights to water and sanitation. It calls on policy-makers, governments, international agencies, institutions, citizens and the private sector to collaborate to build integrity in policies, investments, decisions, implementation and monitoring and evaluation. Delivering on global commitments to human rights goes to the core of what we mean by integrity, which is fundamentally about matching actions to words and about keeping promises. A rights-based approach has sharpened the lens through which the negative impact of corruption on water and sanitation can be evaluated (Bailat 2013). Corruption leads to loss of efficiency, sustainability and trust; it breeds cynicism, undermines public confidence and pushes up costs. It is an assault on human rights. COMMITMENTS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS TO WATER AND SANITATION The UN General Assembly declared the human right to water to be ‘essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights’ on 28 July 2010 (UN General Assembly, 2010b). In September the same year, the UN Human Rights Council clarified that the right was part of existing, binding international human rights obligations, affirming: “The human right to safe drinking water and sanitation is derived from the right to an adequate standard of living and inextricably related to the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, as well as the right to life and human dignity.” - UN General Assembly, 2010a This underlined, as many had argued, that these rights were already enshrined in international human rights law. In 2002 the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights stated: “The human right to water is indispensable for leading a life in human dignity. It is a prerequisite for the realization of other human rights.” (CESCR, 2003) It took time for the UN to recognize the rights to water and sanitation as distinct and independent of each other. On 17 December 2015, the UN General Assembly accepted that the rights to safe drinking water and sanitation are separate rights, while maintaining that both are derived from the right to an adequate standard of living (UN General Assembly, 2016). The right to water requires “sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic use”, and the right to sanitation means having “physical and affordable access to sanitation, in all spheres of life, that is safe, hygienic, secure, socially and culturally acceptable and that provides privacy and ensures dignity…” States are required to bring about the progressive realization of these rights while eliminating inequalities for at-risk and marginalized groups. Several resolutions pertaining to the the right to sanitation have highlighted the importance of hygiene promotion, water resource management, improved wastewater treatment and reduced surface and groundwater pollution. The UN also emphasizes that such efforts need women’s leadership and full partnership in decision-making. It calls for programmes to reduce the time women spend collecting water and the threats they face including sexual violence. Lack of menstrual hygiene management in schools damages girls’ right to education. HUMAN RIGHTS NOT BEING MET In 2015, 663 million people were still without access to an improved drinking water source, while more than 2.4 billion – almost a third of the people on earth – were without access to improved sanitation facilities. The rights to water and sanitation are far from being met. The 2015 UN resolution calls on States to monitor and analyse progress towards these rights and identify patterns of failure and address structural causes of violations in policymaking and budgeting. The sector lacks capacity for monitoring and evidence-based decisions. The vast majority of surveyed countries have no comprehensive process in place to track funding to water and sanitation. Consequently, countries are unable to confirm whether funding has been directed to investment needs, nor credibly report back on whether they have met financial allocation targets (UN-Water and WHO, 2014). Fewer than half the countries reporting on the MDG goals tracked progress in extending sanitation and drinking water services to the poor (UN-Water and WHO, 2015). There is no “victim-free” corruption The main victims of corruption are the poor and the powerless, who lack the means to assert and enforce their rights. Globally, about 2,000 children under the age of five die every day from diarrhoea diseases, and 90 per cent of these linked to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) (UNICEF, 2013). Women usually manage household water but have little say in how services are provided. Poor households may be expected to bribe officials to secure water. The urban poor often pay more for water than the rich. Those who rely on land or water for their livelihoods – farmers, fishers and pastoralists – lose out when water resources are annexed or polluted. Schoolchildren, girls especially, are affected by the lack of clean water and basic sanitation in schools, including menstrual hygiene management. Discrimination in access to water is a form of corruption that disproportionately affects minorities and vulnerable groups. MEETING THE OBLIGATIONS The human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation entail three levels of obligation: the obligation to respect; the obligation to protect; and the obligation to fulfil (CESCR, 2003). Reports from UN appointed Special Rapporteurs have highlighted specific issues that block realization. In 2014, the then Rapporteur (Catarina de Albuquerque) published a series of guides to realizing these rights. In 2015, her successor identified corruption and poor governance as significant factors in increasing the cost of water and sanitation services. Léo Heller told the UN Human Rights Council: “Corruption tends to disproportionately affect poor and disadvantaged individuals and groups, as they lack the necessary power to oppose the vested interests of elites, and do not have the necessary resources to pay bribes.” - UN General Assembly, 2015 The 2010 UN Resolution noted the responsibility of states “to ensure full transparency of the planning and implementation process in the provision of safe drinking water and sanitation and the active, free, meaningful participation of the concerned local communities and relevant stakeholders”. (UN General Assembly, 2010a) TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND PARTICIPATION “Corruption violates the core human rights principles of transparency, accountability, non-discrimination and meaningful participation in every aspect of life of the community. Conversely, these principles, when upheld and implemented, are the most effective means to fight corruption.” - Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR, 2013) Transparency, accountability and participation are recognized as essential for combatting corruption and to enabling the right to development. In 2013, the Human Rights Council included the need for accountability, in guidance to States on incorporating the human rights to water and sanitation, including the means for citizens to enforce rights and seek remedies through effective courts and tribunals. (de Albuquerque and Roaf, 2012) The Special Rapporteur underlined the role of participation in a report to the Human Rights Council, noting that “participation is a human right in itself” and that “violations may arise from direct denial of participation as well as indirect, by failure to take reasonable steps to facilitate participation, including by ensuring the right to access to information.” (de Albuquerque, 2014) To be effective, participation must be active, free and meaningful. “It must go beyond mere information-sharing and superficial consultation, and involve people in decision-making, providing real opportunities to influence the planning process.” (de Albuquerque, 2011) The 2015 UN Resolution on the rights to water and sanitation emphasizes the importance of consultation and coordination with communities, civil society, the private sector and other stakeholders on the need for effective accountability mechanisms to ensure that service providers respect these rights and do not cause violations or abuses. HUMAN RIGHTS MUST BE AFFORDABLE The lead responsibility for delivering on human rights rests with governments. They remain accountable regardless of whether they are directly involved in water and sanitation service delivery or delegate this to commercialized, civil society or private providers. The UN Special Rapporteur has explained that the rights to water and sanitation do not mean that services have to be free but they do have to be affordable for all, including for those in severe poverty. Water supply tariffs should reflect the costs of producing and distributing water but also address affordability, and likewise for sanitation services. The Special Rapporteur stated: “Economic perspectives and human rights perspectives are not impossible to reconcile, but human rights require ensuring affordable service provision for all, regardless of ability to pay, and economic instruments must be (re-)designed to achieve this objective” (UN General Assembly, 2015). The Special Rapporteur pointed out that subsidies often fail to support the poor, but instead benefit the better off: ‘Subsidies are “hidden” when public financing is used to construct infrastructure and services that are intended to be used by all, but in fact are only available to middle- and high-income households’ (UN General Assembly, 2015). These are clear breaches of integrity, especially where political interference leads to reduced tariffs at election times or to neglected services in poor areas. An international grouping of CSOs that make up The Article 2 and Government Budgets Project has published suggestions for how civil society can engage with governments to ensure that budgets support human rights. It explains what is meant by key phrases such as “achieving progressively”, “to the maximum of its available resources” and “without discrimination” (Blyberg and Hofbauer, 2014). LEGAL SYSTEMS HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY The judiciary has a role to play in enforcing these rights. In Colombia, for example, article 365 of the constitution notes that addressing “unsatisfied drinking water needs” is one of the basic objectives of the state. The Administrative Tribunal of Cundinamarca declared that the Capital District had a constitutional obligation to provide services to under-served informal settlements near Bogotá, in conjunction with the public water service provider and residents (Bohórquez Forero, 2012). When States make commitments to improve their records on meeting the rights to water and sanitation, there is a need for follow-up action to be monitored. At the Sanitation and Water for All High Level Meeting in Washington in 2014, 43 developing countries made commitments, two thirds of them (35 countries) to eliminate inequalities and improve sustainability, and more than half (23 countries) to achieve universal access to water and sanitation by 2030. Government ministers, donors and development banks agreed to report annually on the progress made in implementing the commitments. In August 2015, a mid-term review reported that significant progress had been made on 56 per cent of commitments tabled at the High Level Meeting. Other sector stakeholders have an important role to play in ensuring that human rights law is followed. The UN Global Compact lists ten principles that the private sector should adopt based on human rights conventions, including: “Business should work against corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery.” The Water Integrity Global Outlook (WIGO) makes a number of recommendations that arise in part from the human rights to water and sanitation. It calls for steps to strengthen water integrity to support the implementation of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and ensure the realization of the human rights to water and sanitation. In particular WIGO highlights the need to develop and enforce water policies that incorporate transparency, accountability and participation (TAP) principles along with anti-corruption measures to meet these obligations. It calls for stronger enforcement mechanisms and cooperation between anti-corruption, judicial and water institutions. REfERENCES Baillat, A. 2013. A Human Right-Based Approach to Tackling Corruption in the Water Sector. Berlin: WaterLex and WIN. Blyberg, A., and Hofbauer, H. 2014. Article 2 and Governments’ Budgets. Washington, DC: International Budget Partnership. Bohórquez Forero, D. 2012. ‘Empresa de Acueducto y Alcantarillado de Bogotá y Otros‘. Geneva: WaterLex and WASH United. CESCR. 2003. ‘General Comment no.15 (2002): The Right to Water (Arts. 11 and 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)’. De Albuquerque, C. 2011. ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Right to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation’. New York: UN General Assembly. De Albuquerque, C. 2014. ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Right to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation’. New York: UN General Assembly. De Albuquerque, C., and Roaf, V. 2012. On the Right Track: Good Practices in Realising the Rights to Water and Sanitation. Geneva: OHCHR. OHCHR. 2013. ‘The Human Rights Case against Corruption’. UN General Assembly. 2010a. ‘Human Rights Council Resolution on Human Rights and Access to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation’. New York: UN General Assembly. UN General Assembly. 2010b. ‘Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly: 64/292: The Human Right to Water and Sanitation’. New York: UN General Assembly. UN General Assembly. 2015. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Right to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation. New York: UN General Assembly. UN General Assembly. 2016. ‘Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly: 70/169: The Human Rights to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation’. New York: UN General Assembly. UN-Water and WHO. 2014. Investing in Water and Sanitation: Increasing Access, Reducing Inequalities: UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) 2014 Main Findings. Geneva: WHO. UN-Water and WHO. 2015. Investing in Water and Sanitation: Increasing Access, Reducing Inequalities: GLAAS 2014 Findings – Special Report for Africa. Geneva: WHO. UNICEF. 2013. ‘Children Dying Daily because of Unsafe Water Supplies and Poor Sanitation and Hygiene, UNICEF Says’. New York: UNICEF.

Integrity still does not get the attention it needs, yet lack of integrity imposes a serious burden on the functioning of societies and, in our case, the water sector. When we discuss integrity, the first question which comes up, of course, is What do we mean by integrity? You all have some idea of this – sharper or vaguer, narrower or broader. When we at the Water Integrity Network talk about integrity, however, we talk about the integrity of people when they are making decisions on water management and the integrity of the decision-making process. Integrity means that people and organisations act in the best interest of the people that they are serving, that they can be held accountable for that, that stakeholders are heard when decisions are made, and that outcomes are fair and sustainable. This may sound pretty much normal to you, and a situation that you would expect. Unfortunately, we all know that often it is not the reality. Lack of integrity results in waste of resources, rigged decisions, and often outright corruption. This can take many forms. We see embezzlement of funds at various levels, directly reducing the resources available for their purpose. We see investments being made in the wrong place because someone pays to have them there for personal benefit rather than where it is most needed. We see building with sub-standard materials. We see investments in construction and no subsequent maintenance. So much for sustainability. Again: it is known. Often people try to do something about it. Too often they do not. I will share some concrete examples — cases that we have documented in the Water Integrity Global Outlook, a report that we will publish in December of this year. These examples show both what can go wrong but also what has been done to promote integrity and reduce various forms of malpractice and illicit behaviour. I will start with an example from the city where I currently live, Germany’s capital Berlin. Germany & the case for civic action Berlin’s water utility (BWB) provides drinking water and sewage services to almost 4 million people. In 1999, despite strong opposition, the Berlin city-state government decided to privatize a 49.9 per cent share of the utility. Details of the 30-year, €1.7 billion contract were kept completely secret. A number of civil society organisations in Germany criticized the deal, claiming that it was a guarantee of high profits for shareholders at the cost of a strong increase in water prices for consumers. Only after they were able to organize a successful campaign for a referendum to return the water utility to public hands, did the citizen’s alliance, Berliner Wassertisch (‘water table’) succeed in reversing the privatization decision. In the referendum, they won a 98 per cent majority. However, despite this apparent level of public support, it took them more than a decade to get there. As a further result, contracts and documents about the purchase negotiations dating back 12 years were made public. In 2012, the German anti-trust office declared the contract to be in breach of competition law and demanded a water price cut of 19 per cent. An investigation was started to determine whether the sale also breached EU law on state aid to private companies. The Berlin case demonstrates the dangers of lack of transparency and exclusion of civil society from negotiations, through agreement on ‘confidential’ contracts for public works, manipulation of legal processes, and one-sided advantages for corporations at the expense of the public interest. However, it also demonstrates how sustained advocacy, public participation, and civil action for greater integrity can lead to success. Bangladesh & the case for community research Climate change and sea level rise are major risks for Bangladesh as a low-lying delta state. Understandably, the Bangladeshi government has created several multimillion-dollar funds to cope with these risks. But in a country where corruption is endemic, large funds obviously do not only attract the attention of those who use them for their intended purpose but also of those who see it as an opportunity for illegally generating private income. Wary of the quality of governance in the water sector, Transparency International Bangladesh decided to do an assessment of climate finance governance for 2011-2013. To this end, they developed a dedicated tool, the National Climate Finance: Governance Risk Assessment Toolkit. Through this toolkit, they: mapped and assessed of key actors in climate finance governance; tracked the implementation of climate fund projects. To track project implementation, project areas were visited and local communities were interviewed. Illicit practices which they encountered included: inflation of budgets, with budgets for instance 40 per cent higher than the final bid costs; violation of public procurement rules such as allowing sub-leases to staff of the procuring organisation; disbursement of funds without significant progress in works; and embezzlement of tens of thousands of dollars. In reaction to the findings, the Funds considered were forced to reassess a portfolio of more than 3 million dollars of water-related climate projects. And please bear in mind that these funds are meant to protect the Bangladeshi people from disasters like typhoons and floods. We say sometimes that “corruption kills”. This kind of case makes the point. India & the case for multi-stakeholder dialogue In India, in the early 1980s, the Waghad irrigation scheme was set up in Maharashtra and the Waghad dam was built. However, soon after, the scheme fell into dysfunction. To get an allocation of water, farmers had to bribe irrigation officials. On the other hand, farmers also simply tried to steal water from the system. Maintenance and performance were poor. It resulted in a situation in which there was a total lack of trust and respect between authorities and farmers. In 1991, local NGOs started to work on rectifying this situation, particularly by setting up and supporting water user associations. It was a long journey — about 15 years —but highly successful in the end. It resulted in an overall project-level users association that was tasked with the management of the scheme. Ultimately, they were able to fully recover its costs. Bringing together farmers and officials in dialogue, engaging in capacity building, and, in particular, building trust between key actors — these were all key components that led to success. Concrete steps taken along the way included: creating consensus on water allocation rules; robust monitoring and enforcement arrangements; theft deterrence mechanisms; a de-politicized and fair voting process; sound financial management. Now, farmers are involved in both decision-making and operation and maintenance. Average income rose approximately 50 times over the last 20 years. Burkina Faso & the case for integrity-led governance Fortunately, there are more and more cases, in which integrity risks are addressed early on. In Burkina Faso, the National Office for Water and Sanitation, ONEA, in close cooperation with its donors, took on managing integrity risks from the start when the Ziga Dam was developed at the beginning of this century, a $300 million project. This was addressed fundamentally by: establishing a completely new unit to manage the project; putting in place a range of proactive measures for both procurement and construction phases; setting strict procurement rules; and welcoming external international monitoring to safeguard compliance for finances as well as technical progress. All of these measures served both to prevent corruption and to ensure the timely and quality construction of the dam. What the Ziga Dam project shows is that we know how things should be done and that it can be done … if there is sufficient leadership to make it so. Water integrity global outlook As I mentioned in the beginning, the Water Integrity Network together with its partners Transparency International, Cap-Net, SIWI, IWMI, UNESCO-IHE, GIZ, and GWP will soon publish the Water Integrity Global Outlook (WIGO). Much more comprehensively than I summarized above, WIGO describes what we are learning about enhancing water integrity. Here are a few key learning points: Firstly, it is clear that ensuring integrity is essential for the effective and efficient use of resources. To make that happen, open, public accountability is key. There needs to be external scrutiny of processes. Scrutiny by stakeholders means accountability to stakeholders. Of course, this doesn’t happen by itself. Leadership is needed to make it happen. This can be leadership from the top. It is there, sometimes, and even faster, but unfortunately, too often it is lacking. But it can also come from the bottom, as we recognize in the cases I described above. Leadership from civil society, but sometimes also from managers and professionals in the sector. Public accountability requires empowerment and capacity building of both citizens and officials and professionals. More practically speaking: we must act early. Prevention is much more efficient than later correction. And finally, taking responsibility and acting responsibly lies at the basis of it all. Taking responsibility at the top level, or as a civil society leader, to generate change. But also for every individual to say No, I am not going to pay a bribe. I am not going to solicit or accept a bribe. Without ensuring integrity in public management, a few people win but the whole society loses out. I look forward to the continued discussion and to our success. The statement above was first presented at Stockholm World Water Week in August 2015. Click here to learn more about the water integrity presentations of #SWWW15.

Most people in Sierra Leone are of the notion that water is a free gift and that one should not pay a cent to afford it. The government holds the notion that to maintain water service delivery sustainability, the masses must be in a position to pay water rates and other charges, so as to pay workers, secure more machines, and also repair and construct more water resources. This conflict is adversely affecting the operations of the Water Resource Ministry in ensuring that the people, especially the poor that are in deprived communities, are accorded pure and affordable drinking. As a result of this gap between the rich and the poor in accessing water, there are a lot of social, economic, and environmental impacts on water resource management. As the struggle between the rich who can opt for all means to secure water at all times, and the poor who struggle, some business water companies and some officials are having a field day in embarking on corrupt practices that are affecting the water service delivery system in various parts of the country. Illegal water tapping It is a common practice for the youths to either divert the flow of water from the main resources to the households by illegally using rubber pipes and charging inhabitants to pay money that goes into their pockets. As a result, those paying their bills go without the service for some time. This situation has degenerated to the point that in broad daylight, along the major streets of the city, people are visible with cans or buckets in their hands destroying the pipes to scoop water. The unfortunate aspect of this situation is that most of these pipes are located in drainages that are very filthy or near poor sewage facilities, thereby polluting the drinking water or serving as breeding grounds for the transmission of water-borne diseases. This issue can be addressed if effective an monitoring mechanism is instituted to protect the structures for effective water service delivery and educate the people on the dangers involved. Illegal business practices Another disheartening corrupt activity in the water sector is the act of private water companies not going through the correct processes involved before selling their products to the masses. For a water company to be accorded the right to operate in a state, it must be registered, samples of the product tested, and later the structures evaluated. Today with the desire to exploit the masses, some of these private water companies waste no time after registration and start processing and selling untested water to the public. Recently, for example, the management of Family Care Water implicated the management of Sierra Spring Water for using their brand. According to the report, the management of Sierra Spring Company is currently being investigated by the Aberdeen Police Division on allegations ranging from forging and using Family Care Water Company brand to packeting and selling water to the public. This issue came to light when the head office of Family Care Water was stormed by the Sierra Leone Police, the media, and some customers on the grounds that some of the water plastics sold to the public contained a lot of particles that will affect the human system. With this dismal situation, a team from Family Care Water contacted [the intellectual property offices of] Roxy Building to inquire if there was any other organization or company in the country that had registered with that name. As there was none, the search team mounted an investigation. On Thursday, they were able to locate a hideout at 27 Gordon Street. In the said building, it was realized that Sierra Spring Water had a lot of packet Family Care Water bundles that were to be sold to the public. The Office of Standards Bureau was alerted to the issue. Inspector Martin attached to the Water Industry of the Sierra Leone Standards Bureau visited the scene and placed the company under lock and key with the message that the manager of Sierra Spring Water must report on Monday, 20th October 2015 to help in the investigations. The management was to explain how they acquired the brand of Family Care Water, the process of registration to establish a water company and other relevant documents. Speaking to the Public Relations Office of Standards Bureau Mr. Abu B. Bah on the said issue, it was revealed that when the matter was brought to their attention, Inspector Elvis Mohamed Koroma was dispatched to the scene and the following findings were made: The management of Sierra Spring Water was using the plastic roll (sachet) of Family Care Water to packet. It was realized that the packet water sold by Sierra Spring was not tested at the Standards Bureau so the officer was left with no option but to seal the door. Already samples have been collected for analysis and this will lead to a police investigation and charging of the matter to court. All efforts were made to get the side of the manager of Sierra Spring Water Company. This problem can be addressed if Standard Bureau embarks on massive on-the-spot checks of these water companies to ensure that they comply with the laid down procedures at all times and that defaulters are fined or have their licenses seized. Illegal contracting In the area of awarding contracts for the establishment of boreholes or standing pipes in many places, during the dry season, most of these facilities are non-functional on the grounds that the contractors failed to actually reach the water level. In a situation where this happens especially in the provincial areas, most of the pipes are either sold to scrap metal business people or criminals have a field day with this equipment. If such a situation is to be addressed, credible contractors that have vast ideas in drilling for water must be awarded the right to undertake such a venture. Reposted with permission of the author. To view the original article, visit the West Africa WASH Journalists Network. Click here to learn more about WIN’s water integrity programmes around the world.

LOOKING AT SCHOOL TOILETS IN ANDRHA PRADESH WITH AN INTEGRITY LENS By Binayak Das, WIN Programme Coordinator Published in 2014 with the Freshwater Action Network South Asia and Arghyam School children in many countries are deprived of basic sanitation and hygiene facilities despite ample funds and projects. This can happen when funds for building toilets get siphoned off; when maintenance funds go missing leaving the toilets unusable by students… School sanitation is a factor of school education completion, especially for girls, yet UNICEF estimates that more than half of the world’s schools lack clean toilets, drinking water and hygiene lessons for all school children. Official figures seem to project success while in reality the situation is dire. Take the example of Andhra Pradesh, a state in southern India which has a total of 96,277 schools. It is reported that 89% of the schools have a toilet facility according to the District Information System for Education statistics from 2010. However, this number does not indicate if the facilities are benefiting the students. Data from the State education department states that only 26% of the facilities are functional. Toilets are lying idle because of various reasons: shoddy or incomplete construction, lack of water facility, no toilet cleaning or no hand-washing ingredients. Accountability and transparency is missing from the processes of planning, constructing and maintaining toilets in schools, with as a result, a situation that runs contrary to the required standards and norms defined in the Right to Education Act. Accountability and transparency are missing from the processes of planning, constructing and maintaining toilets in schools Strengthened policy and implementation processes can go a long way in improving sanitation facilities for children and in turn empowering them with education. A lack of integrity is one of the stronger process gaps and therefore must be assessed in a thorough and reliable manner. A project initiated by the Fresh Water Action Network South Asia (FANSA) with support from Arghyam and the Water Integrity Network, aims to undertake this needed assessment. The project is focused on 225 schools in three districts of Andhra Pradesh: Kurnool, Warangal and Viskhapatnam. It uses an adapted version of the Annotated Water Integrity Scan approach as one element of the methodology to encourage discussion on root causes and risks in a non-confrontational and constructive manner. Download the report:

THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY WATER BOARDS “Our duty is to protect the forest and groundwater levels. When I took office, I pointed out that the billing system was not transparent and presented serious risks of weakening trust in the Community Water Board. […] We installed water meters to establish equity and access. This was successful.” - María del Rosario Pérez (President of the Community Water Board of Aldea San Juan, Municipio de Salamá, Guatemala) Many Community Water Boards in Central America establish their legitimacy by making sure they work honestly, transparently, and in an accountable manner, with the support of their community. Our report on Integrity and the Human Right to Water in Central America highlights their essential role in ensuring the fulfilment of the human right to water. Yet these non-profit organizations manage the capture, treatment and distribution of water often with little backing from State authorities, in unclear regulatory frameworks, and with too little capacity. Based on interviews with Community Water Board presidents in Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador and Costa Rica, and with a case study on water contamination issues around pineapple plantations in Costa Rica, the report looks into this paradox. In English In Spanish

LESSONS FROM THE FIRST AFRICA WATER INTEGRITY SUMMIT IN LUSAKA Water integrity ambassadors from 22 countries in Africa met to exchange case examples and good practices at the 1st African Water Integrity Summit in Lusaka, April 29-30 2014. Their experiences have been collated in a case book, which highlights the persistence and courage needed to promote water integrity in difficult political and organizational contexts. In their cases, the water integrity ambassadors discuss the very different methods that were helpful in promoting integrity within organizations, at local and national level: communication and advocacy, networking, monitoring and transparency initiatives, community participation and more. The cases included are: Burkina Faso – Lutte contre la pratique de la corruption dans la construction de grands barrages: l’expérience du barrage de Ziga Sierra Leone – Going Against the Cabal at Guma Valley Uganda – Dialogue Sessions Unearthing Allocation of Funds to Ghost Villages Zimbabwe – Integrity Ambassadors Changing Local Water Management Cultures Gambia – The IWRM Roadmap for Gambia Kenya – Scaling Up Water and Sanitation Services for the Urban Poor Zimbabwe – Promotion of Transparency and Integrity Systems in Local Authorities Malawi – Preventing Theft of Repair Materials to Avoid Prolonged Water Shortages Kenya – Social Accountability Approach to Rainwater Harvesting for Women in Mwhihoko Nigeria – Water Integrity in Hadejia Jamaare Komadugu Yobe Basin (HJKYB) Benin – Contribution à la reddition des comptes à l’amélioration du service publique de l’eau dans les Communes du Bénin Nigeria – Strengthening Social Accountability in Small Town Water Services Using Water Associations Uganda – Community Involvement in Rural WASH Procurement East Africa – Coordinating Transboundary Resources Management at the Horn of Africa Rwanda/Burundi – Renforcement de la résilience des communautés locales a la sécheresse Malawi – Citizen Action Initiative Supports Communities Demanding their Rights Somalia – Fostering NGO Accountability Through Remote Monitoring Sudan – Community Water Supply Management: Kebkabiya Water Supply System Case Study Tunisia – Integrité de l’eau dans le système aquifère du Sahara Septentrional (SASS) Cameroon – Campagne de sensibilisation des organisations de la societé civile, médias et élus locaux sur l’integrité de l’eau au Cameroun South Africa – Business Integrity Initiative in Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality Zambia – Integrity Management Toolbox for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises Malawi – Building Water Integrity Practices into National Water Development Plans Kenya – Human Rights-Based Approach to Sustainable Water Governance Download (pdf, EN)

THE EXPERIENCE OF BURKINABE UTILITY, ONEA CONTEXT In the early 1990s, the public Burkinabe utility, ONEA, was performing poorly and was in a difficult financial situation. The rate of access to water in Ouagadougou, the capital, was barely 50%, and the rate of access to improved sanitation around 5%. By 2011, the utility was leading the successful development of the Ziga dam project and had increased access to water rates to 80%. The utility has reformed and reorganized to improve performance, assessing integrity risks to steer some of the changes. ACTION AND OUTCOMES: ONEA REFORM The reform process of ONEA started in the 1990s with a clarification of the role of the utility as a state company. The supervisory board was expanded to include representatives from municipalities and consumer associations. Changes and improvements were made to HR management systems, accounting and quality control. A key success factor in improving performance was to give more focus to client relationships and service delivery and expand accordingly. The restructuring was accompanied by a series of measures to increase transparency and accountability on financial results. A brief integrity risk mapping exercise based on the AWIS approach was a useful in steering change. ONEA was certified ISO 9001:2008 in 2010. Find out more about the restructuring process in this ONEA case study (in French only) ANTI-CORRUPTION MEASURES FOR THE ZIGA DAM DEVELOPMENT The Ziga dam is a flagship project for ONEA and a key development to ensure wider access to water in the Burkinabe capital. Specific attention was given to anti-corruption and integrity measures and processes during project management to ensure timely and in-budget completion of the dam construction. Some of these measures included a restructuring of some of the company units to better control project management. Care was also given to integrated resource management and sustainable development strategies. The procurement project was specifically regulated and controlled to minimize risk of corruption. For example, special attention was given to defining project specifications, getting integrity commitments from potential suppliers and controlling the offer submission process. The Ziga dam is now regarded as an example of good practice in the construction of works of this scale and kind in West Africa. See the whole case study on the Ziga dam project development: in English: in French: