Integrity for basic services - How the Asivikelane coalition is making a difference for city residents in South Africa Access to clean water, sanitation, and reliable basic services is a fundamental right. But ensuring these services are delivered fairly and consistently requires more than just policy—it requires integrity. These videos highlight the crucial role integrity plays in water and sanitation service delivery, particularly in vulnerable communities across South Africa. In a series of interviews, Mondli Mabuza, a Community Facilitator at Asivikelane , shared input on the corruption and integrity failures he sees and the ways they impact his community's access to water and sanitation. He showcases the power of holding municipalities accountable and driving real change. Asivikelane tackles corruption in the procurement and maintenance of essential services—such as broken taps and toilets left unrepaired, uncollected refuse, and misallocated budgets for infrastructure upgrades. Volunteers in informal settlements gather firsthand data on service delivery failures and engage directly with municipal departments to ensure waste, water, and sanitation issues are addressed Asivikelane—meaning “Let’s Protect Each Other” —reminds us that honesty, accountability, and collaboration are not optional—they are essential. Watch the stories. Listen to the voices. Integrity matters.

PROMOTING INTEGRITY TO IMPROVE WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES AND ENSURE SECTOR IS RESPONSIVE TO CITIZENS Creating an action plan for integrity using the IMT-SWSS, Kenya Dates 2011-Current Partners CESPAD, Kenya Water and Sanitation Civil Society Network (KEWASNET), Kenya Water for Health Organization (KWAHO), Neighbours Initiative Alliance (NIA), Water Sector Trust Fund, Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB) Programme focus Building awareness for integrity, working with civic organisations and integrity champions to advocate and hold decision-makers accountable.  Research on public financial management, sexual corruption, and integrity and performance of CSOs and sector stakeholders. Strengthening of youth parliaments for WASH and integrity advocacy Management, performance and compliance of rural or remote community water management committees, with support from Water Sector Trust Fund and national regulator, WASREB. Advisory to service providers and sector funders and stakeholders, for using InWASH or developing risk assessment and management frameworks. Climate finance monitoring and awareness raising on related integrity risks SUPPORT INTEGRITY WORK IN KENYA Help strengthen youth parliaments, reach new service providers, develop skills for data analysis and social accountability for climate finance: Contact the programme lead: --- HOW THINGS ARE CHANGING Recognised community groups are professionalising their service and management in rural areas; utilities are taking action on integrity risk WIN and partners work closely with the national water regulator to define clearer management models for rural water supply and capacitate local community water committees. WASREB has also adopted mechanisms and indicators in its oversight of service providers to promote integrity. Over 87 communities  and local groups have applied the Integrity Management Toolbox for Small Water Supply Systems (IMT-SWSS) , crafting action plans that improve governance, transparency, customer relations, and compliance. In Kericho County, for example, this approach significantly raised consumer satisfaction with Water Committee services. Community confidence that fees are used appropriately has increased, along with a better understanding of service costs, has resulted in a greater willingness to pay.  In Makueni county, at least four groups used the IMT-SWSS in 2023, with support from NIA and EKWIP partners. Before this work and new training, the Committees were informal groups with no legal standing. They were not budgeting to guide their operations. They are now changing this, taking steps to register as Water Resource User Associations (WRUA), engaging with and getting support from county government, and developing budgets. As a result of better management, one community group received new funding to facilitate a pipeline extension. Another group managed to repair their solar panels and thereby save on the cost of electricity, enabling them pay off a debt of 767,000 KES they owed to Kenya Power and Lighting Company. Larger urban utilities, like HOMWASCO and KIWASCO, are also taking action by using InWASH to assess integrity risks that could compromise their operations and sustainable service delivery. Youth and integrity champions are organising and getting results in prioritisation of water issues Kenyan youth, through youth parliaments supported by the programme, are organising and want to act on their conviction that WASH funds are not 'well utilised'. In the campaign period before general elections in 2022, youth parliaments engaged prospective candidates and obtained water-focused election promises from them based on the candidate manifestos. This formed the basis of the development of an Election Promises Monitoring tool (EPM) by the youth parliaments of Kisii, Kisumu, Kakamega and Busia and a national monitoring tool by the national youth parliament chapter. These tools are now being used to hold elected politicians accountable. The active role of youth was made possible by several years of engagement and training after initial set up of county then national-level youth parliaments for water. Partners have reported that, with election monitoring and current work, youth are now vocal change agents, influencing action, policy and budgets at county level. In some counties, like Nyamira for example, the youth parliaments have influenced leaders in prioritisation of resources for water resource management and spring protection. Ground-breaking research and awareness raising KEWASNET and ANEW put the issue of sexual corruption in water and sanitation on the global agenda. Their research in Nairobi was the first of its kind to show sexual corruption for water, or sextortion, is not uncommon and massively underreported and ignored. In 2024, their petition to 'Stop Sex for Water' was read in Parliament and as a result of their extensive campaign , new legislation against the practice is being examined, the impact of which will resonate far beyond the water sector. In a first study of its kind in Kenya, endorsed by both the Kenya Ministry of Water and Sanitation and the Council of Governors, the Pipes, Policy, and Public Money report h ighlights how strengthening integrity in public financial management can increase efficiencty and accountability towards citizens, while reducing costly money 'leaks'. It looks at root problems and why budget tracking is so complex, in terms of IT systems, reporting, and responsibilities. Major radio campaigns in Nakuru, Makueni and Kajiado focused on integrity with input from integrity champions and partner research (inluding on specific initiatives like the risk assessment of the Mwache dam development in Kwale or the results of integrity surveys in Kajiado). With the evidence, they were able to promote water and sanitation as human rights, and answer caller questions. The radio shows also helped clarify roles and responsibilities and explain avenues for participation and complaint mechanisms. They have had a major influence on public debate. --- MORE PUBLICATIONS Research On service delivery in informal settlements On public financial management Integrity management and community work On working in small communities with the IMT-SWSS On working with Water Resource User Associations

ENSURING BETTER WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES AND GENDER EQUALITY THROUGH INTEGRITY On the way to school, Bangladesh, photo by Sony Ramany, WIN photo competition entry Dates 2009-Current Partners Bangladesh Water Partnership (BWP), Change Initiative, DASCOH, Development Organisation for the Rural Poor (DORP), ITN-BUET, NGO Forum, WAVE Foundation Programme focus Research for advocacy and policy on service exclusion and integrity, including on: regulatory systems for integrity and Citywide Inclusive Sanitation  (CWIS) prevalence and drivers of the very sensitive issue of sexual corruption  (sextortion) and the way it impacts primarily women  integrity risks in the way resources are used for development and maintenance of WASH facilities in school s.  accountability and citizen engagement in climate adaptation work   integrity failures and regulatory concerns on wastewater treatment and pollution  in the garment industry.   Support to the Bangladesh Water Integrity Network (BAWIN) , launched in 2009 as a joint advocacy group for water and anti-corruption stakeholders. Integrity management for service providers  to manage integrity risks and improve performance and service delivery, with three of the largest utilities in the country (Khulna WASA, Chattogram WASA, and Rajshahi WASA) as well as several city corporations (using InWASH ) to address customer relation issues, billing, metering, human resources, and accountability of field staff. Strengthening capacity and involvement of local water committees and municipalities for rural water supply. SUPPORT INTEGRITY WORK IN BANGLADESH Help reach new service providers, make sure sanitation reaches everyone in the city, and strengthen the CSOs that make integrity a reality in Bangladesh: Contact the programme lead: (acting Lead: Mary Galvin) --- HOW THINGS ARE CHANGING Towards new regulatory systems for CWIS The Bangladesh government is looking at setting up a stronger regulatory system that addresses integrity risks, in light of new research with ITN-BUET highlighting strengths and weaknesses of current policy for advancement of Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS ). ITN-BUET is offering free training to support the change. Communities set up systems to manage their finances more transparently Following IMT SWSS training by WIN and partners, DASCOH engaged with youth groups in the Rajshahi district. They also organised a ‘democratic dialogue’, where stakeholders clarified local needs and roles and responsibilities of people engaged in WASH. Together, stakeholders of the Pirijpur Water Scheme, which reaches over 1000 people, decided to focus on making sure collected money is saved and sufficient to expand and run the system, and on overcoming people's refusal to pay. The system managers are now working on a simple billing system, opening a bank account, setting up a simple bookkeeping system, and setting a transparent tariff. ‘‘We have never been called before in such a decision-making process. After training we will be able to contribute to proper water supply for many people that are living in hard-to-reach places." -Mst Roksana Parvin, an elected women representative of local government on the work in Prijpur Utilities engaging with customers and reducing scope for malpractice  In Bangladesh’s third largest city, the Khulna Water and Sewerage Authority’s (KWASA) streamlined billing as a result of its work using InWASH . By introducing new software and processes, they now keep better customer records and have reduced undelivered bills by 75%, which has led to increased revenue. For higher customer satsifaction and transparency, KWASA also engaged with the media and launched a series of public hearings where they present company strategy and plans. In Chattogram, also as a result of using InWASH, CWASA improved and diversified customer compl aints channels and now logs and follows up more systematically. It also streamlined its field inspection processes to increase accountability. (Read more on CWASA's integrity work here . ) Ground-breaking research  A 2022 research initiative on sextortion , carried out with partners DORP and Change Initiative in 2 rural and 2 urban areas of Bangaldesh is the largest of its kind in water and sanitation and reveals how much sextortion is underreported. Research into the garment industry’s wastewater management in 2017 revealed gaps in regulatory enforcement and factory compliance, with significant pollution of local waterways. This research has highlighted the need for stronger regulations and enforcement on wastewater treatment to protect public health and the environment Water from a garment factor that should have functioning wastewater treament systems , photo by ENRAC Safeguarding school WASH resources  In schools in southern Bangladesh, looking at WASH in schools with an integrity lens has led to the mobilisation of students and teachers for better school WASH and a better understanding of rules and responsibilities for development and maintenance of school WASH facilities. The research, led by DORP, and involving students, parents, school authorities and local municipalities, is the basis of advocacy to safeguard the resources schools and municipalities are supposed to allocated for WASH facilities in schools. Read more here about how DORP led the work and the results in schools . --- MORE PUBLICATIONS Regulation and Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS) WASH in Schools English: Bengali: Integrity Management for utilities Wastewater and the garment industry

In Kenya, the Neighbours Initiative Alliance (NIA)  is working with communities to address root causes of water system failures and strengthen water management committees. To support this work, they use the Integrity Management Toolbox for Small Water Supply Systems (IMT-SWSS) initially developed by Caritas Switerland and WIN to build capacity on integrity and create linkages between communities, county water officers, and national regulators. The approach is transforming the way NIA works with rural communities and has led to coordinated, compliant, and transparent services, and increased revenue for water committees that enabled them to invest in sustainable energy supply and water source protection. An interview with Jane Nyamwamu of the Neighborhood Initiative Alliance Can you start by giving us more information on NIA and its work? And in what context did NIA start working with the IMT-SWSS? Established in 1996, Neighbours Initiative Alliance is a NGO that seeks to address the needs of poor and vulnerable pastoralist groups in Kenya. NIA's main mandate and core business is community empowerment through capacity strengthening, influencing and networking. NIA has experience implementing community-anchored programs in water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), health and nutrition, food security, governance, and economic development. Over the years, NIA worked to develop community water infrastructure, systems which were then handed over to management committees to run. The challenge was that the systems were not being managed in a sustainable way, leading to frequent breakdowns and the eventual failure of water projects after one or two years. In 2012, NIA adopted the IMT-SWSS tool to address governance and management issues and work to improve service continuity and sustainability. What were some of the main challenges that you were seeing in community-run systems? The key challenges we observed in community-run systems are either technical or related to management/governance. The technical challenges include: lack of technical knowledge on operation and maintenance, inactive connections, unprotected and polluted water sources, and non-functional infrastructure. The management/governance challenges include:   lack of financial record keeping, misuse of resources during procurement, non-compliance with regulations, tariffs not enabling cost-recovery, high non-revenue water due in part to many illegal connections and low payment rates, l eadership challenges, and undue political interference. What has been your experience of working with the IMT-SWSS? In what way is the tool making a difference for small systems? NIA has been implementing water projects since its inception in 1996. Typically, a training for water committees would last about three to five days, after which the system would be fully handed over to the committee. As mentioned, after one or two years the water system would often become non-functional due to technical and operational failures and a lack of resources and/or support. In addition, since many of the community members were illiterate, 3 to 5 days of training proved to be insufficient to enable them to manage their water system on a long-term basis. Using the IMT-SWSS has brought about major changes, since it is not a one-off process. It prioritises continuous follow-up and mentorship with the communities, which leads to the identification of gaps that the managers of the water system can practically address. By tackling these gaps with targeted support in collaboration with system managers, we have also seen that this builds their confidence to be able to address a range of other issues. The first step towards guaranteeing buy-in is to ensure that the county government leadership (Department of Water) is on board. This includes educating them on what the IMT-SWSS is and how it can assist in solving challenges. In turn, the county government usually recommends specific water systems that can be supported. Following this, two to three community meetings are held in partnership with the county government staff to inform the community on IMT-SWSS process and why their participation is crucial. By using the IMT-SWSS, these small systems are able to: identify better management models that work for their particular situation, become compliant with the current water regulations, and transition into water service providers with high ratings as small water companies under the WASREB impact reports.* WASREB’s framework (and the IMT-SWSS inputs on this) enables water management committees to better understand the legal implications of providing water services, and the  rights and responsibilities of committees. It helps the community to understand that they have a role to play in service provision, which includes reaching out to other partners or facilitating collaboration. We have therefore seen enhanced partnerships among key stakeholders e.g. water users, management committees, regulatory entities (WASREB and WRA), and/or the county and national governments. Other stakeholders have also come to understand that water service provision requires a multi-stakeholder effort. How, in particular, has the tool helped to empower women and marginalised communities? In marginalised communities, for example in Kajiado County, where women and people living with disabilities were not involved in the management of water supply, the tool has enabled them to be involved in the planning, management and implementation of water service provision. This is because the tool specifically calls for the inclusion of vulnerable and marginalised groups. It has also given them knowledge about holding leadership to account at the community and government levels. In Enkongu Enkare, where the water system is managed only by women, the use of the IMT-SWSS helped the committee members to improve their approach to water service provision. Specifically, they prioritised fundraising for solar panels and the setting up of a token mechanism to improve the payment system. This was supported by SIMAVI under the Water Justice Fund Project. Could you highlight a particular success story that is exemplary of the importance of working on integrity at the community level? We have had a lot of success in Nyamira County, for example in Kemasare, Bomwagamo and Machuririati. Improved water supply services Nyamira County is largely rural. There are very few individual and institutional water connections. People mostly rely on surface and groundwater sources for their water supply needs. The IMT-SWSS intervention led to a decision to start treating water by chlorination and to ensure more transparency on system management. This increased users’ confidence in consuming clean and safe water and new connections followed, leading to increased revenue. In Kemasare, connections increased from zero to 150, and in Machuririati from 80 to 265 connections. Registration as a legal entity By engaging with WASREB and the IMT-SWSS tool, system committees came to understand the importance of registering as a legal entity to gain access to financial and/or technical assistance and legal support services, to acquire assets such as land, to seek redress in court, or to sign agreements as service providers. Reduction of non-revenue water through improvements to operation and maintenance Before the IMT-SWSS process, there were many operational issues, at times so severe that services ground to a halt. By focusing on governance structures, the schemes were able to improve revenue collection and thereby employ more competent staff like plumbers, finance officers, and operation and maintenance officers. With this change, there was an increase in metering and leak control, which helped control non-revenue water losses. Better protected water sources In all three of the systems, participants cleaned up the river as a key activity, to better protect water quality and supply. In particular, they removed blue gum trees to increase water quantities, and constructed washing bays dedicated specifically for washing laundry to reduce water contamination. Realising gender parity The role of women as key water users and decision makers at the domestic level has been better recognised in the communities. The use of the tool and its emphasis on including women and other marginalised groups into the management of the system, has resulted in gender parity in the make-up of committees. Use of renewable energy As a result of the IMT-SWSS’s focus on improving operations, as well as the stakeholder analysis sessions, the committees assessed resources they might have available to them to run their system more sustainably. Recognising the opportunity to reduce energy-related costs as well as dependence on fossil fuels, all three systems decided to prioritise the installation of solar panels. Coordination and networking There has been significant improvement in the coordination and working relationships between the county government and the water committees. Within the communities themselves, there is also a good rapport between the water management committees and users due to regular community meetings. In particular, vandalism of the pipelines – largely due to illegal connections - that was previously rampant has greatly reduced. This is due to users having a new understanding and sense of ownership over their own water system, as well as regular interaction with the management committees. What possibilities do you see for future work with the IMT-SWSS, either in Kenya or more broadly? With proper funding and training of facilitators, the IMT-SWSS has the potential to be deployed more widely across Kenya and in different countries. It could be adopted into government plans like the County Integrated Development Plans and Annual Plans. This would mean that county governments could use the tool as a means of continuously training rural water scheme managers as part of a public initiative, which may also inspire other countries to pick up the tool and support sustainable service delivery in rural areas.   *In Kenya, t he Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB) is the national regulator of water and sewerage services. Its mandate is to protect the interests of consumers and ensure that water services are efficient, affordable, and sustainable. WASREB guidelines propose a range of management models for rural water schemes, and if a scheme meets the requirements of WASREB, it can officially become a small water company in Kenya.

A discussion on responsibilities, costs, opportunities and water quality in self-supply Self-supply occurs when individuals or small communities independently fund, develop and maintain water and sanitation systems. While self-supply can demonstrate autonomy and resilience and be an opportunity to improve service levels in some cases, it is often a response to major gaps in public service provision. It can also come with high integrity risks, can exacerbate inequalities, and raises concerns related to water quality and sustainability.  People self-provide on a massive scale across the globe, including in high-income countries, and especially (but not exclusively) in rural, remote and peri-urban or informal areas. Some people and communities resort to self-supply because they have no alternatives and no access. Some households invest in own systems for convenience and independence. Self-supply is not a temporary, localised phenomenon but rather a feature of water and sanitation provision globally. This means it cannot be ignored: there will be always households that self-supply. This can be an opportunity for reaching SDG6, in some cases. However, this also should not be used to dodge or shift responsibility. This Integrity Talk, organised by the Water Integrity Network (WIN) and the Rural Water Supply Network (RWSN)  on April 2, 2025, looked at these challenges and the path ahead. Sean Furey, Director of RWSN, moderated the panel with: Alana Potter, member of WIN’s Supervisory Board and Head  of Research and Advocacy at the Equality Collective (South Africa) ( see section 1 on the human rights to water and sanitation and the implication for self-supply ) Arto Suominen, Researcher at Tampere University (Finland) ( see section with case from Finland ) Tim Foster, Research Director at the Institute for Sustainable Futures (Australia) ( see presentation of research from Asia and the Pacific ) Henk Holtslag, Senior Advisor at MetaMeta SMART Centre Group (The Netherlands) ( see section on financing household self-supply ) Chola Mbilima, Senior Financial and Commercial Inspector at NWASCO (Zambia) ( see section on case of Zambia and regulation ) Speakers discussed the need to shift self-supply from an invisible and ignored phenomenon to a recognised reality and opportunity, that requires support in order to realise the human rights to water and sanitation and SDG6 . The discussion brought up differences between household-level and community-level self-supply. It showed the challenge of establishing the right balance for support--neither neglect nor over-regulation . The speakers also brought up the role of utilities, and the possibility that they become important counterparts (a case that is being formalised in Zambia). At the same time, they highlighted the need to recognise that there can be a vicious loop between poor municipal services leading to increased self-supply, which could reduce municipal revenue. As a starting point, the panel established the need for recognition, visibility, and information on the context and specificities of the systems and the needs and priorities of the users. More resources Go straight to video The discussion continues on the RWSN - self-supply discussion group, join here   Human Rights to Water and Sanitation and the Implications for Self-Supply “Human rights provide a normative framework for minimum standards and principles against which accountability can be held of public and private actors in courts, and other accountability mechanisms, both invented and invited” –Alana Potter, Equality Collective Alana Potter  (Equality Collective) looked at the reality of self-supply in the legal framework of the human rights to water and sanitation, focusing on cases where self-supply is not an active choice but a response to failures in public service delivery . The lack of public services can have many reasons and include corruption, mismanagement, discrimination, or a lack of prioritisation. Referring to the Hearing the Unheard campaign , she highlighted that people and communities who self-supply are often responding to discrimination that leaves them behind, they are creatively providing solutions and claiming their rights to water, and they want recognition. She highlighted three primary obligations for governments to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights to water and sanitation : The obligation to respect:  Governments may not interfere with or curtail the enjoyment of these rights; they cannot prevent or stop people from self-providing or arbitrarily cut off water supply. To progressively realise the right to water, governments are obliged to take deliberate, concrete and targeted steps to ensure that everyone can access safe, affordable, culturally acceptable water services, wherever they live and however the service is provided. The obligation to protect  the human right to water means ensuring that individuals or entities, including corporations and other private actors, do not interfere with access to safe and sufficient water for everyone. Governments and relevant authorities are responsible for regulating and monitoring activities that could jeopardise people's ability to enjoy their right to water. The obligation to fulfil  the human rights to water and sanitation requires states to ensure access to water and sanitation, and to create an enabling policy and regulatory environment for these rights to be realised and enjoyed by all, wherever they live. The efforts governments make must be in line with the human rights principles of equality and non-discrimination, participation, transparency, accountability and sustainability or non-retrogression, which align with integrity principles. She concluded with five measures governments can take to act on these obligations in the context of self-supply: Creating an enabling legal and regulatory framework, which means recognising supported self-supply in policies, strategies, guidelines, and bylaws  (this could include recognising community-based organisations as legal entities, recognising water for small-scale, productive use and doing better to enforce regulations on large-scale users and corporates that abstract and pollute water sources that downstream communities rely on). Provide financial support  for self-supply (this could include smart subsidies, cross-subsidisation, support to vulnerable groups, prioritising of affordable technologies, and quantifying and recognising the costs of self-supply). Ensuring inter-sectoral and inclusive planning  that puts communities at the forefront of decisions around planning and infrastructure development for supported self-supply. Supporting upgrading of various water supply systems  and advancing technologies , manufacturing and the marketing of affordable pumps, manual drilling, storage tanks, household water treatment etc. Supporting communities through monitoring : of quality, construction standards, surface and groundwater availability, pollution and abstraction by other actors. --- Evidence on Self-Supply in Practice, from Finland to Zambia Household-managed water supply in rural Finland “Every country should accept the fact that pipe water supply service cannot reach all. Therefore, the self-supply service delivery model should be part of the water supply access planning.” –Arto Suominen, Tampere University Arto Suominen (Tampere University) highlighted that only 8 to 10% of the total population in Finland self-provides. However, this represents between 50 to 70% of the rural population (including often vulnerable people, who live remotely and are getting older) and it is not accounted for in official JMP reporting, nor is it monitored in any national database. He showed responsibility for household supply systems (and water quality) is clearly with their owners and health authorities will intervene only in emergency cases, while environmental regulation is extensive and strictly applied. Groundwater use is free. Technology is available. Most households relying on self-supply are satisfied with their systems and do not want government intervention. There are however emerging issues: Transparency and access to information: there is plenty of free, good-quality information online but it is not always available in a format that more elderly people are willing or able to use. Affordability: Costs for a borehole and pump can be up to 15-20% of average annual income, a significant amount for elderly people with small pension, for example. Water quality: despite recommendations that water quality be tested at least every three years, this is not often the case. There are problems and there is no centralised self-supply water quality data. Household water supply across 21 countries in Asia and the Pacific “Self supply is widespread growing, and in many cases delivering a service that is equal to other service models. But it remains underappreciated and ignored by policy. What's clear is that households have made enormous investment in self supply. And, if we're serious about SDG 6, we need to recognise this and harness the opportunity.” –Tim Foster, Institute for Sustainable Futures Tim Foster  presented the results of recent research showing the very high prevalence of household-level self-supply across 21 countries in Asia and the Pacific. A third of the population self-provides across the region  (40% of the population in rural areas, and 20% of the population in urban areas) and this there is an increasing trend. Interestingly, there is a lot of variation across countries in terms of technology, who resorts to self-supply (sometimes the poorest, sometimes the richest), and water quality. For example, in countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar and Mongolia, self-supply is more likely to deliver a ‘safely-managed’ service but this is not the case across the board ( country factsheets with more detail are available here ). There are two major similarities across the region: self-supply is generally more reliable  than piped supply, and there is very little in policy that recognises the practice  despite its prevalence (at most are cursory mentions). Financing supported household self-supply “In Nicaragua there are 50,000 rope pumps installed at family farms, and together these families generated over 100 million dollars in the last 20 years. All this started with 2 million dollars of aid money for training.” –Henk Holtslag, MetaMeta SMART Centre Group Henk Holtslag  ( MetaMeta SMART Centre Group) discussed water quality and water availability and shared experiences on the cost-effectiveness of the supported self-supply service delivery model with examples from rural areas in Zambia, Tanzania, and Nicaragua, where investments in self-supply or home water systems have had significant returns. He opened up four main proposals for discussion: First, supporting the mainstreaming of household water treatment solutions for any service delivery model , as promoted by the WHO (especially water filters, that have been proven as effective). Actions can include large-scale awareness raising, building supply chains, and subsidies for the poorest. It is an approach he claimed could cost as little as $4 per person, in line with the “ 2 with 8 ” water action commitment submitted to the UN to provide safe water to 2 billion people with $8 billion. Second, supporting self-supply as a cost-effective solution to reduce costs to reach SDG6.1 in rural areas, to increase pump functionality, and to impact on poverty and other SDGs. He grounded this proposition with evidence showing that supporting household-level self-supply costs governments or funders 50% less than conventional community supply approaches . He showed examples indicating that a one-time subsidy of $25 per person would be sufficient to reach SDG6.1 in rural areas and that that when households own their wells,, they can generate income through the multiple uses of water, they will better maintain their systems and share water for domestic use with other people. Third, he suggested making similar water subsidies a basic right, on the premise that, in practice, people who already have “safely managed” or “basic service” received a subsidy for capital expenditure from government and /or NGOs of at least $25 per person. Those who still lack basic service deserve a similar subsidy. Fourth, he claimed that household level self-supply could be less vulnerable to corruption than communal supply. A regulatory model for supported self-supply: the case of Zambia “We cannot do away with self-supply systems. These are integral because they come in to cover a gap. (…) But we need rules for them to be able to actually operate effectively. (…) We need systems that will allow them to operate and be able to deal with integrity risks.” –Chola Mbilima, NWASCO Chola Mbilima  (NWASCO) discussed the integrity risks she has seen in relation to community-self-supply in Zambia: exploitation of vulnerable groups, low service levels, overpricing or even extortionary pricing, bribery. She also mentioned the lack of redress mechanisms: when the system isn’t satisfactory, where do you go? Who is accountable, and to whom? When there is a major breakdown, what then? In response, at the policy level and in regulation, Zambia has developed a framework to clarify accountability paths. First with a legal framework that recognises and documents self-supply systems, then by regulating, to ensure utilities act as umbrella organisations for self-supply systems in the area and support and oversee these systems. This means the utilities enter a formal agreement with the self-supply system that they jointly   negotiate the parameters  of. Utilities can provide technical or financial support. They have a role in monitoring water quality. The aim is sustainable service delivery models that will allow for integrity. --- Last Words on Finance and Responsibility “At the end of the day you are doing that work to support the overall objective of government. What I see is that there's a lot of inequity. Because when we talk about self-supply, then everybody says, well, it's the household that should finance. But when we talk about big systems, the government will actually go out of its way to borrow money to go and put up these systems. And yet, in most cases, for example with sanitation, those systems will actually benefit a very small portion of the population. The majority are on self-supply, and they don't get to benefit. I feel like government should find its place in financing these self-supply systems, and they must be creative about it.” –Chola Mbilima, NWASCO --- Integrity Talk 13 Recording

The Water Integrity Global Outlook 2024 (WIGO 2024) and its implications for utilities - a conversation with utility managers and experts from Latin America. Leer este artículo en español aquí Integrity is essential to ensure that water and sanitation services are accessible, equitable and sustainable. Corruption and integrity failures remain significant challenges for water and sanitation utilities. In response, innovative tools to assess and improve the integrity of the sector are key. In 2024, the Water Integrity Network (WIN) launched the  Water Integrity Global Outlook  with a focus on finance. The report provides an overview of the risks of corruption and poor integrity in financing, and proposes solutions to reduce the financing gap and improve financial management in the water and sanitation sectors. Here, utilities have an important role to play. Several Latin American utility leaders, as well as sector stakeholders and funders came together on March 26, 2025 for a discussion hosted by WIN in collaboration with  Red de Agua, UNAM and Centro Regional de Seguridad Hídrica under the auspices of UNESCO . This is an edited summary of the discussion, focusing on the importance of financial integrity in water and sanitation utilities in Latin America. With special guests: Marcello Basani, Water and Sanitation Lead Specialist, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) Patricia Hernández, Executive Director, National Association of Water and Sewerage Entities (ANEAS) Marcelo Rogora, Director of Integrity and Best Practices, Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos (AySA) Rolando Taquichiri Kussy, Head of Planning Unit (SeLA Oruro) Eduardo Bohórquez, Executive Director, Transparencia Mexicana Moderator: Jorge Alberto Arriaga Medina, Executive Coordinator, Water Network, UNAM and Regional Center for Water Security under the Auspices of UNESCO. View recording " The promotion of transparency and accountability should not be perceived as a threat, but as an opportunity to optimise management and improve services. "  -Marcello Basani, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (IDB) _____ Integrity challenges and opportunities for water and sanitation utilities in Latin America Water and sanitation utilities in Latin America operate in complex environments facing persistent integrity challenges, but they also have a strong basis and potential for action. Strengths Commitment to integrity: Several companies have dedicated integrity units, a fact which demonstrates a growing institutional willingness to fight corruption. Relatively high water access / coverage: The region has higher rates of access to water and sanitation compared to Asia and Africa. Strong legal framework: There are strong legislative measures that guarantee access to water and sanitation as human rights. Active civil society: Civil society organisations play a key role in monitoring and promoting transparency in the sector. Persistent challenges Social inequalities: there is a major gap between access and service levels of water and sanitation between groups, with rural communities and marginalised areas far behind. Institutional instability: High staff turnover and political appointments affect the continuity and efficiency of utilities. Abuse of emergency declarations: Situations such as droughts, floods or health crises (COVID-19) have been used to evade transparent contracting processes. Weaknesses in the judicial system: Impunity and a lack of independence in the judiciary make it difficult to sanction acts of corruption in the sector. Impact of climate change: Extreme events such as prolonged droughts and floods aggravate the water crisis and test the resilience of the system and the capacity of utilities to respond. Risks for environmental defenders: Threats against activists and communities defending water and the environment efforts for fairer and more sustainable management are high and increasing. Opportunities The talk focused on the need to understand integrity not only as a control and sanction mechanism, but also as a key tool to strengthen the water and sanitation sector. Integrity goes much further than control or punishment of corruption. Integrity is also a pillar of continuous improvement and credibility, ensuring that resources are managed efficiently and for the benefit of the company and society. Providers can foster a culture of integrity through incentives and tools that promote good practices. This implies, for example: Awareness raising and training in integrity for all actors in the sector. Use of digital technologies to facilitate monitoring and improve transparency and publication of quality data. Citizen participation spaces that strengthen accountability. " Providers must understand integrity as a tool for improvement, not as a punishment mechanism. Although in some cases it is necessary to resort to sanctions, it is not a matter of punishing for the sake of punishing, but of demonstrating that this is not the right way to go. " - Marcelo Rogora, Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos (AySA)   a) Integrity for public trust in utilities, through transparency and accountability Citizens depend on water and sanitation services being managed fairly and efficiently. Lack of transparency erodes credibility and trust in utilities and makes it difficult for citizens to participate in monitoring services. This can occur with greater intensity during emergency periods such as droughts or floods. Marcello Basani (IDB) : Standard rules and procedures, such as procurement practices, tend to become more flexible in order to respond more quickly. A clear example is direct contracting, which, if not properly managed, can open the door to corruption risks. For this reason, having transparent and quality data on what is being done is fundamental. But this brings us to a key question: who verifies the quality of this data? Is it the responsibility of the citizenry or of the regulator? And what happens in those contexts where there is no independent or effective regulator? These questions are important pertinent, and can bring valuable insights to the financial integrity debate. Eduardo Bohórquez (Transparencia Mexicana) : Without access to public information , it is difficult to detect and prevent acts of corruption that affect the management of water resources. Furthermore, accountability should not only be a formal exercise , but an effective practice that allows citizens and other stakeholders to monitor how decisions are made and how funds are managed. Open data and real-time monitoring systems can be key allies for more efficient and transparent water management. b) Integrity for utility efficiency, through citizen participation Citizen participation in decision-making, verification data, and monitoring of services is key to improving financial integrity in water management. Users should be more involved in decisions related to tariffs, budgets, planning, and monitoring. This ensures a more efficient use of resources. Patricia Hernández (ANEAS): Involving society in decision-making not only allows utilities to better respond to the real needs of communities , but also builds trust in the institutions in charge of water and sanitation management. c) Integrity for sustainability of the sector, through better data and strong regulation To attract investment and ensure the sustainability of the sector, it is essential that water and sanitation funds are managed with integrity and efficiency. This requires good quality data, clear indicators, good regulation and the support of the regulator. Marcello Basani (IDB): Without reliable and updated information, it is difficult to make strategic decisions that truly respond to the needs of the population and the challenges of the sector. The collection, systematisation and adequate verification of data make it possible to identify corruption risks, improve investment planning and evaluate the impact of projects . Transparency in information management not only strengthens public confidence, but also attracts investment , since financial institutions and donors require guarantees that resources will be used efficiently. La integridad debe entenderse no como una medida draconiana, o que sea únicamente para castigar, sino que sea una oportunidad para mejorar. - Rolando Taquichiri Kussy, SeLA Oruro _____ Best practices of integrity in water and sanitation management in Latin America   Marcello Basani (IDB): Integrity is a fundamental pillar at the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), so we have integrated it as a transversal axis in all infrastructure projects. In collaboration with the Office of Institutional Integrity, we have observed that infrastructure investment must be accompanied by strong integrity policies  because without them corruption risks can undermine the benefits of water and sanitation projects. As a mitigation measure, we conduct a risk analysis and trigger monitoring and response actions, ensuring that resources are used efficiently and transparently. Marcelo Rogora (AySA): In Argentina, a joint initiative has been launched between the public and private sectors to enhance integrity within organisations. It is the Integrity and Transparency Register for Companies and Entities (RITE) , created by the Anti-corruption office of Argentina. RITE promotes the adoption of integrity programmes that are adequate and accessible to the general public, thus fostering an organisational culture based on ethics and transparency. In this context, AySA has adhered to RITE as part of its commitment to strengthen its integrity work and reinforce trust in water management. This model allows utilities to adhere to ethical standards and be evaluated based on their commitment to transparency, with a positive impact on both their internal operations and their relationship with the public. Rolando Taquichiri Kussy (SeLA Oruro): In Bolivia, SeLA Oruro has been developing strategies to improve its financial integrity and promote more transparent and efficient management. Some of the most important actions include the implementation of the integrity toolbox , the performance of periodic audits and the promotion of citizen participation in decision-making. Likewise, SeLA Oruro has worked on updating, approving and disseminating its code of ethics, with a particular focus on operational and administrative personnel. In addition, the entity has invested in training its employees and in strengthening whistleblowing mechanisms, ensuring that any irregularities can be detected and addressed in a timely and effective manner. " An integrity approach is important for water and wastewater utilities, although it is a time-consuming, day-to-day job whose effects are seen in the medium and long term. " - Rolando Taquichiri Kussy, SeLA Oruro _____ Conclusion: priority measures to strengthen financial integrity in water and sanitation utilities Water and sanitation utilities play a key role in leading integrity efforts to reduce the negative impact of corruption. They can do this with a number of tools and strategies: Transparency in the use of resources : Publish everything that is done and implement clear processes to track the allocation of funds. This includes the adoption of open contracting and the development of corporate governance standards to prevent conflicts of interest. Promote accountability:  Clearly and effectively explain where resources are going. Increased citizen participation: Encourage dialogue with civil society and involve citizens in decision-making on tariffs, budgets, planning and monitoring of services. Effective integrity risk monitoring : Identify and assess risks in the budget cycle, especially in emergency situations, where direct contracting can generate vulnerabilities to corruption. Collaboration with anti-corruption bodies: Work together with anti-corruption offices and regulatory agencies to strengthen oversight mechanisms and ensure compliance with integrity standards.  Culture of integrity within companies: Promote a leadership committed to transparency and implement integrity training programmes at all levels of the organisation, including senior management, unions, suppliers and operators. Full recording (in Spanish):

We are delighted to welcome our newly elected supervisory board chair, Ede Ijjasz, to the network!  Ede brings with him a wealth of experience in financing, infrastructure, sustainable development, and climate adatpation from his time as a senior manager at the World Bank and now as professor at Georgetown and fellow at Brookings. “Achieving the water and sanitation SDG targets requires not only a massive jump in investments, but a laser-focused step up in transparency and integrity so that the public and water users can trust that their fees and taxes are reverting in water and sanitation service expansion and improvements for all”    -- Ede Ijjasz, new WIN supervisory board chair Ede Ijjasz was elected by the General Assembly at its meeting on November 19. He is taking over the role from Letitia Obeng, who led the board with wisdom and dedication since end 2020. It has been a real honor and privilege to work with Letitia over the years and we thank her sincerely for her contribution to water integrity. Thank you also to all the members of our Board, IRC, Alana Potter, Peter Conze, and Robert Gakubia, who continue to share their time and invaluable knowledge with us to change the water and sanitation sectors with integrity.

No Reason, No Room, No Reprieve: The basics of an effective integrity strategy  The world needs around $114 billion each year to fund the capital costs of ensuring universal access to safe water and sanitation services. Up to a quarter of this may be lost to corruption and integrity failures. Up to half of it, if you include mismanagement in infrastructure projects. Corruption in water and sanitation undermines efforts to provide decent services, drives up costs of already underfunded systems, erodes public trust, and leaves behind poor-quality and inadequate infrastructure. As always, marginalised communities are hit the hardest.  --- The cost of inaction on corruption in water and sanitation is unacceptably high  For water and sanitation professionals, integrity can’t be just a lofty statement – integrity is a practical necessity that must be built into every aspect of our work . But how can we make integrity actionable?    There are many ways to act and no blueprints - context and capacities matter. A lot. Still, it’s important to remember that measures in individual water and sanitation organisations and projects can work, and are important, and that sector-based anti-corruption programmes can be extremely effective.      Consider this example : you’re recording meter readings, site measurements, or feedback from the community. Do you use a pencil, a pen, or a GPS-enabled smartphone? Which method can be more easily manipulated? Which one leaves most room for errors or bribery?   Such seemingly simple decisions can have significant impacts on the finances available for the delivery of services and the effective use of those finances. The choices may often, of course, be more complex, but integrity risks, whether small or complex, are present throughout the life cycle of a project, and addressing them requires careful attention to detail and balanced responses .   --- Addressing integrity risks Once you are aware of risks, what then? Let’s take our little example further.   After deciding on a method for record-keeping, how do you ensure it’s done with integrity? You could ban all pencils, double-check records for signs of tampering, or train your team to value transparency. Each option has merit, and none is universally the “right” answer. It’s all about assessing the situation, understanding the risks, and choosing the appropriate response.    In the latest Water Integrity Global Outlook focusing on water and sanitation finance (WIGO) , we outline how anti-corruption and integrity work has evolved over the years. It’s clearer now how to construct and implement an effective integrity strategy, one that makes a difference in terms of water and sanitation service quality or programme impact. The evidence is decidedly against just more sanctions or more rules.     --- Combining three pathways for integrity: No Reason, No Room, No Reprieve WIGO outlines three broad pathways for integrity action. For an effective anti-corruption and integrity strategy in water and sanitation (or any other sector, for that matter), the ideal is to combine elements of all three of these pathways .  No Reason: Address root causes  Corruption thrives in environments where it's normalised or where social norms make it easy to rationalise. To prevent this, professionals must shift attitudes and make integrity a clear standard and reference point. Allow no reason for integrity failures.   Example actions to take:  Awareness campaigns and training : Launch initiatives to educate both staff and communities about the long-term harm corruption inflicts.  Ethical leadership : Encourage leadership that prioritises integrity and transparency within their organisations.  Rewarding accountability : Recognise and reward behaviours that demonstrate a commitment to integrity.  No Room: Close the opportunities for corruption  Corruption opportunities can persist due to weak systems. By tightening procedures and implementing safeguards, professionals can limit integrity failures.  Example actions to take:  Opening processes and limiting discretion : Make transactions and key processes -especially procurement- more transparent, digitising where possible. Reduce the number of situations where individuals have unchecked decision-making power, particularly in financial matters.  Clear rules and responsibilities : Establish clear rules and transparent criteria for decision-making processes, leaving no gaps or overlaps in responsibilities.  Getting reinforcements: Get support from civil society and anti-corruption or integrity organisations. Make it possible to share and collaborate on data.   No Reprieve: Detect and sanction, ensuring consequences for corruption  To deter corruption, there must be swift and certain consequences for such behaviour. Detection mechanisms and clear punishments help convey that impunity is not on the menu.  Example actions to take:  Whistleblower protection and redress mechanisms : Ensure safe and anonymous reporting channels and protect whistleblowers.  Risk assessments and data analytics for red flags : Monitor risk and red flags. Big data analytics can help, especially for procurement processes, financial transactions, and project expenses.  Collaborating with Supreme Audit Institutions : Work with external auditors to ensure transparency and accountability in all financial dealings, even in emergencies.    WIGO has more information on the typical risks in water and sanitation finance and examples of no reason, no room, and no reprieve strategies that have been used to address them.     Do you have more cases or examples to share? Please get in touch!

Self-supply is increasingly touted as a route to reach SDG 6. It can be a clear demonstration of community and individual agency, autonomy and self-reliance. Self-supply is, however, often the result of communities stepping into fill gaps in public services, with concomitant equality and sustainability impacts and implications. Self-supply in no way exempts states of their obligations to progressively realise the human rights to water, health, and food. It can only be a successful model if it is actively supported by governments - financially, technically, legally, and institutionally. A post by Alana Potter (Equality Collective), Rebecca Sands (WIN), and Barbara van Koppen (IWMI), Part of the Water Integrity Global Outlook: Finance series. Self-supply: What and why? Self-supply is a term used when individuals or groups independently develop, operate, and/or maintain their own water or sanitation systems. Individuals and groups can self-supply for domestic or productive uses, on a large or a small scale, for part or all of water-related infrastructure from source to use. The practice of self-supply has occurred for many years, both with and without government support. It has declined in some countries - and some areas within countries - and increased in others. This blog post focuses on self-supply that exists as a de facto response to unreliable or absent public services, prevalent in both rural and urban, low- and middle-income groups. Self-supply can be promoted as a sustainable, community-led solution, particularly in hard-to-reach areas. It is often an expression of self-sufficiency and can be seen as a resistance to dependency on unreliable state provision or corrupt systems. However, it most often reflects a failure of governments to adequately invest in water services delivery. Self-supply may also be the result of weak or corrupt governance contributing to a failure to deliver water services. Inadequate investment disproportionately affects marginalised groups, who are left with no choice but to develop and manage their own systems. It can be a costly burden, especially for women and the poorest households. It can result in reliance on contaminated or untested water sources, and it may impact water availability. When water sources dwindle during droughts, powerful parties may take more than their fair share of water, depriving smallholders and pastoralists of water for livestock, irrigation and domestic uses. Showing off the storage of the self-supply system in Tshakhuma, Vhembe, South Africa. (photo shared by B. van Koppen, 2016) Self-supply and human rights The human rights to water and sanitation entitle everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses, and to physical and affordable access to sanitation in all spheres of life which is safe, hygienic, secure, socially and culturally acceptable, and which provides privacy and dignity. Yet, 2.2 billion people do not have access to safe water, while 3.4 billion people still do not have access to safe sanitation . Under international human rights law, states are required to respect, protect, and fulfil people's rights, including the right to water and sanitation. There is progress towards universal access to water and sanitation, but the pace in low-income countries would need to be multiplied twenty-fold to deliver safe clean water, sanitation, and hygiene for all by 2030 . There is also much progress to be made to protect self-supply for productive uses that contribute to meeting the right to food. Mechanisms to protect small-scale water users from more powerful upstream users or users sharing the same aquifer, are underdeveloped. Yet, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to water and sanitation also recommends clearly that “ water for life should be given the highest priority” over other water uses . Self-supply for personal or productive use fills the gaps where progress is inadequate. Benefits of self-supply Self-supply can be a powerful demonstration of community agency. It represents the tenacity of people and groups who are not ordinarily provided with water and who often work and live informally or in areas where regulatory oversight is limited or absent. Because self-supply solutions are primarily implemented by communities themselves, they are likely to be locally appropriate and cost efficient . These solutions can also improve resilience and flexibility . They can aid communities to manage water for various uses , including household drinking water, other domestic uses, water for food production and livestock, or other small-scale enterprise uses. In a context where political vagaries render government support unreliable, leveraging local resources, knowledge, and investments by households can improve the longevity of infrastructure. Self-supply can also meet aspirations for higher levels of service than those included in minimum service level parameters, which do not always meet the human rights’ standards of accessibility, affordability or acceptability. Four schoolboys fixing a water pipe near Jos, Nigeria. Photo by Mac Mullengz - WIN photo competition 2020 Drawbacks of self-supply Equality issues: Self-supply is not just the result of inequality, but also a root cause of widening inequalities, especially among marginalised groups who cannot afford to invest in their own systems or where decision-making is dominated by powerful or influential individuals/groups within or outside a community. The need to self-supply, without government support, places immense pressure on communities. It can make their access to essential services discretionary and reliant on systems of patronage and unequal social capital. More, where self-supply isn’t officially permitted, the risk of criminalisation and its impacts can be very high. Health risks: Abstracting from unsafe sources severely compromises health and well-being, and addressing water quality issues is paramount. Reliability and sustainability issues: Self-supply is, in general, unregulated, and hence, unprotected. Over-abstraction of water sources, contamination, and seasonal variability, often driven by more powerful users like large-scale agricultural, property development or business use, can affect the reliability of self-supply systems, impacting on the human rights of poor communities in particular. Costs: Self-supply can be costly, particularly for communities in precarious economic situations who are not able to rely on government support for spare parts, materials, or maintenance and monitoring support. Even where self-supply is cost-efficient in financial terms, it still involves significant unpaid effort by community members that are already struggling to make ends meet. Transparency issues: Unsupported self-supply is also often invisible. There is little information available to enable better management and accountability, including for example on groundwater abstraction, costs, or accessibility. What then? Addressing issues through supported self-supply In progressively realising the right to water, including water for health and food, governments must ensure that everyone can access safe, affordable, and culturally acceptable water services, regardless of location or how the service is provided. This means they cannot roll back service or interfere negatively with existing access to water (or toilets). Despite this, self-supply is criminalised in many countries. Communities without access to public services are blocked from self-providing or arbitrarily cut off from their own water supply. Government must also use the maximum available resources to provide water to all residents in their jurisdiction, adhering to human rights principles such as equality, non-discrimination, participation, access to information, transparency, accountability, and sustainability. This is especially important with respect to safeguarding the rights of marginalised groups, many of whom are self-providing. The obligation to provide water services requires that governments create an enabling legal and regulatory environment; ensure inclusive, inter-sectoral planning; put financing mechanisms in place; develop water infrastructure; put appropriate institutional arrangements in place for ongoing provision of the service; and monitor water quality and other standards. Self-supply can contribute to progressive realisation and be co-created with communities. Governments are still obliged to create an enabling environment for progressive realisation of the right to water, including through self-supply. Support can include: Enabling legal and regulatory frameworks: Supported self-supply must be recognised in policies, guidelines, and bylaws. This can include for example the recognition of and engagement with community-based organisations as legal entities and as official water services providers. Also key is formal recognition of water for small-scale productive use, and better enforcement of regulations on large-scale users and corporates that abstract and pollute rivers or groundwater sources that downstream communities rely on. Financial support: Governments can creatively provide financial support for self-supply. Financing mechanisms could include “smart” subsidies, targeted support to highly vulnerable groups, prioritising affordable technologies, or combinations of these and other mechanisms to reduce the financial burden on water users themselves. In developing financing strategies for the provision of water, the costs of self-supply to particularly poor communities, should be quantified and recognised. Inclusive and inter-sectoral planning: Planning and infrastructure development for supported self-supply must prioritise participatory design, with communities at the forefront of decision-making. As the primary managers of their own systems, communities are best positioned to determine what works for them, and governments need to recognise and build on existing self-supply efforts and local expertise. Inclusive planning also works to help prevent elite capture within vulnerable communities. Governments must work to link different initiatives and align self-supply efforts with broader water sector planning including for sanitation, electricity, roads, land use management, and housing. Experiences from Zambia and Zimbabwe demonstrate that cross-sectoral collaboration, with various ministries working together at the local level, significantly enhanced the effectiveness of supported self-supply. This approach also contributed to progress on several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including those related to health, nutrition, and water. Technical and institutional support: It is essential that governments engage with, and provide technical support to, individual households and community-based providers, including guidance on contextually appropriate technical options and training and capacity building for spring protection, safely managing wells, and managing water quality among others. Support is also needed to advance technologies, to manufacture and sell affordable pumps, including solar pumps, manual drilling, storage tanks, household treatment and other devices. This requires widespread technical training. Monitoring: Monitoring, ideally in collaboration with communities is essential to ensure continued safe and secure access to water via self-supply. Key elements to track are water quality, construction standards, surface and groundwater availability, and pollution and abstraction by other actors. Alongside the physical and technical aspects, tracking the implementation of water and sanitation policies, standards, and plans on a regular basis, including the expansion of services to marginalised and disadvantaged groups needs to occur. Monitoring costs and integrity risks is also key to addressing issues around equality and discrimination. Supported self-supply: the way forward Without formal support, self-supply puts both urban and rural communities at significant risk, particularly as climate change unfolds. Community-driven, supported self-supply should be viewed as one of several solutions to achieving universal access to water and sanitation and improve resilience. Indeed, self-supply is already a reality and can play a crucial role where centralised water infrastructure is impractical or too costly. But government must be held accountable for their obligations. They can play a key role in providing vulnerable communities with the required assistance to make supported self-supply practicable and sustainable. What is non-negotiable is adequate and well-targeted support to enable communities to realise their rights to water, food, and life. This requires relationships built on trust. It requires frameworks guided by the human rights principles of equality and non-discrimination as well as the integrity principles of transparency, accountability, participation, and anti-corruption.

When we talk about integrity risks and failures in urban settlements, what do we really mean?  How do these issues play out for people moving to or living in a growing city? What are the challenges of water tanker operators and other service providers?  Let’s take a look at the city of Lima.  Many residents of Lima live in what are known as ‘asentimientos humans,’ or 'human settlements'. These are generally densely populated regions on the margins of the city, often on steep slopes where residents don’t always have land tenure. Residents generally do not have access to networked water or sanitation services. Some self-supply, some purchase water from tankers or informal providers, some organise themselves to collect, transport and pay for water from public, metered water fountains set up at the edge of the piped network.  Making all these systems work is a complicated and undervalued challenge, sometimes fraught with integrity dilemmas. Overall it sort of holds up, but the system is unfair, unreliable, and leaking at the seams. That’s where integrity risks and failures are.  From ignoring or bypassing water quality checks, to asking for bribes or giving preferential treatment, from ignoring human rights obligations, to taking advantage of people in desperate circumstances. Integrity failures take many shapes and colours.  Here are a few ways in which they effect, Manuel, Carla, Maria and thousands of other in Lima.  Keen to know more?  Check out our free online course on integrity and the human rights to water and sanitation in Lima.  Based on the course developed by the Water Integrity Network and Urbes Lab in collaboration with PUCP and Cap-Net, supported by SMUS, TU Berlin. SMUS - The Global Center of Spatial Methods for Urban Sustainability is funded by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) with funds from the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ).

Cuando hablamos de fallas de integridad en asentamientos humanos, ¿a qué nos referimos realmente? ¿Cómo afectan estas fallas a las personas que migran a las ciudades? ¿Qué desafíos enfrentan los operadores de camiones cisterna y otros proveedores de servicios? Veamos el caso de la ciudad de Lima.  Muchos habitantes de Lima residen en lo que se conoce como asentamientos humanos. Son zonas densamente pobladas ubicadas en las periferias de la ciudad, a menudo en laderas empinadas, donde los residentes no siempre posen títulos de propiedad sobre el terreno. Por lo general, estos asentamientos no cuentan con acceso a servicios de agua o saneamiento conectados a la red. Algunos residentes se abastecen de manera independiente, otros compran agua a camiones cisterna o proveedores informales, y hay quienes se organizan comunitariamente para recolectar, transportar y pagar el agua proveniente de pilones públicos, los cuales son puntos de agua ubicados al borde de la red principal y cuentan con un medidor.   Hacer que todos estos sistemas funcionen es un reto complejo y poco reconocido, cargado de dilemas de integridad. Aunque el sistema, en términos generales, funciona, lo hace de manera desigual, está sobrecargado y presenta múltiples filtraciones. Es ahí donde surgen las fallas de integridad.  Estas fallas se manifiestan de muchas formas: Desde el incumplimiento a los controles de calidad del agua, hasta la solicitud de sobornos o concesión de tratos preferenciales; desde la falta de respeto a los derechos humanos, hasta el aprovechamiento de personas en situaciones de vulnerabilidad. Las fallas de integridad se manifiestan y materializan de muchas maneras.  Aquí te mostramos cómo afectan estos problemas a Manuel, Carla, María y a miles de personas más en Lima.  ¿Quieres saber más? Explora  nuestro curso en línea gratuito sobre integridad y los derechos humanos al agua y al saneamiento en Lima.   Basado en el curso desarrollado por Water Integrity Network y Urbes Lab en colaboración con la PUCP y Cap-Net, con el apoyo de SMUS, TU Berlin. SMUS, The Global Center of Spatial Methods for Urban Sustainability, está financiado por el Servicio Alemán de Intercambio Académico (DAAD) con fondos del Ministerio Federal Alemán de Cooperación Económica y Desarrollo (BMZ).

FREE ONLINE COURSE Introductory level. Self-paced (4 modules, about 20 hours). Open now (until November 15, 2025). Register here . A deep dive into the practicalities of responding to the corruption and integrity failures threatening water and sanitation services in urban settlements in the city of Lima, Peru. This course shows the ways residents of informal settlements cope with service failures and integrity issues, highlighting the gaps between reality and universal access to adequate water and sanitation. The course also shows the technical, financial, and integrity challenges for service providers working in the area, the solutions they bring to the table, and the way integrity is crucial for their work. Participants explore how integrity failures impact access to water and sanitation at different spatial scales: city, neighbourhood, and household scale. They learn about what can be done at each of these scales to promote integrity in complex settings and address inequalities. Course outline: Module 1: Key concepts Module 2: City scale Module 3: Neighbourhood scale Module 4: Household scale Who is this course for? Political decision-makers, professionals, civil society advocates, regulatory entities, and water and sanitation utility staff. Students and researchers in social and technical disciplines. Urban planners, engineers, and architects. Language The course (with certification) is in Spanish. Key course videos are also available in English here. Download a course description in pdf: In Spanish: In English:   Based on the course developed by the Water Integrity Network and Urbes Lab in collaboration with PUCP and Cap-Net, supported by SMUS, TU Berlin. SMUS - The Global Center of Spatial Methods for Urban Sustainability is funded by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) with funds from the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ).