UNDERSTANDING INTEGRITY RISKS RELATED TO HOW WATER AND SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE IS DECIDED ON, PLANNED, AND RESOURCED DATES 2023-Current LOCATION(S) Global PARTNERS CoST WHAT IT'S ABOUT We often hear of water and sanitation projects that are not living up to expectations. Wastewater treatment plants that are not in operation after being built, pipelines with maxed out budgets that are years behind schedule, systems that do not have the capacity to deliver sufficient service even before they are completed. Poor planning is often to blame and poor integrity is a major underestimated driver. There are many tools and approaches to identify and limit integrity risks in infrastructure procurement and construction. Far less attention has been paid to ensuring integrity in early-stage planning even though issues at this phase -like capture, rent-seeking, favoritism - directly influence whether a project is viable, appropriate, sustainable, and adequately addressing needs including for the most vulnerable. In response to this challenge, WIN and the Infrastructure Transparency Initiative (CoST), with support from the Inter-American Development Bank, mapped risks and developed a Framwork for Integrity in Infrastructure Planning. The tool includes a set of indicators and associated data points, with reporting templates for institutions involved in infrastructure planning. The tool is currently being piloted in Latin America. PUBLICATIONS Lessons learned from piloting the Framework for Integrity in Infrastructure Planning: FIND OUT MORE OR GET INVOLVED Contact our programme coordinator

A shortfall of finance is hampering progress on SDGs. Yet available public funds, for water in sanitation in particular, often fail to be used effectively, or do not reach those most in need. Mismanagement, inefficiencies, and corruption are contributing to the situation. In this Integrity Talk, organised with Sanitation and Water for All , partners discussed ways to increase participation and integrity, as means to use public funds more effectively. This is an edited summary of the main discussion points of Integrity Talk 8 on Participation and water and sanitation sector finance, which took place online on September 19, 2023. See other Integrity Talk summaries here . With special guests: Meghna Abraham, Executive Director of the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) ; Bubala Muyovwe, Coordinator of the Zambia NGO WASH Forum; Alejandro Calvache, Coordinator at The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Moderated by Mary Galvin, Research Coordinator at the Water Integrity Network (WIN). Key Takeaways There are contested agendas and narratives on financing and the availability of public funding . People are struggling to find answers to whether the public sector can provide and meet the finance gap and what role other actors can and should play, on whose terms and with who benefitting. These are debates that relate to voice, power, capture, and ultimately integrity. There is no doubt that there are financing challenges and these impact service providers acutely in many regions, as in Zambia. There is not one solution however. It’s important to consider challenges in context, along with issues related to international donor funding, international financial flows, and debt burden . Water and sanitation sector actors are building successful and important alliances to hold authorities and funders to account (as shown by the cross-sector advocacy work of the NGO WASH Forum in Zambia) and to address financing needs at local level (as shown by the impact of multi-actor Water Funds Latin America). Session Overview Mary Galvin (WIN) explained that this session was linked to WIN’s forthcoming launch of its flagship report, the Water Integrity Global Outlook on ensuring integrity in financing water and sanitation , with a focus on one aspect of the puzzle: participation and integrity in public sector finance. Meghna Abraham (CESR) framed the session by highligting the need for a human rights perspective on financing the sector, which puts an emphasis on the responsibilities of States. ( See recording ) Bubala Muyovwe (NGO WASH Forum) shared information about NGO WASH Forum’s work to hold the Zambian government accountable on its budget promises to the water and sanitation sectors. ( See recording ) Alejandro Calvache (TNC) presented Water Funds, local collective action platforms to mobilise resources for catchment protection measures. ( See recording ) Finally, speakers answered questions from participants and noted their takeaways from the session. Discussion What do you consider the main challenges for financing in the WASH sector? Meghna Abraham: The human rights framework allows us to focus on the basic right to water and highlight the intersections of different discriminations people face when it comes to water and sanitation, which have deep historical context. It also sheds light on WASH’s relationship with other issues of unequal access, for example in education or health. The framework puts emphasis on the responsibilities of States to provide access and also on obligations for international assistance and cooperation. Here we arrive at the problem of finance. The current narrative on WASH financing is one of scarcity, by which there is a funding gap because there isn’t enough money in the public sector for progress on SDGs. Private money is proposed as the solution to the funding gap, which leads to an emphasis on creating incentives for private investment, on making investments profitable for the private sector, and on creating new asset classes for infrastructure and nature itself. This leads to financialisation. The key question we must ask is whether this is a good model. We tend to focus on developing or calling for safeguards, like due diligence standards or participation, instead of looking at the model itself. Are we actually addressing the problems and huge inequalities that are inherently built into the model? Who is setting the terms of the discussion? It’s important to acknowledge that a lot of countries are being forced into this position because of a very vicious debt and austerity cycle, in itself imposed by international actors. [Water and sanitation] requires a lot of investment, in infrastructure, in addressing inequalities, which cannot be driven by a profit logic but by the logic coming from human rights. It is a state obligation. These are public goods and we require investment whether or not it is profitable in the end. - Meghna Abraham, Executive Director, Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) If you look at the SDG agenda, there really is a massive financing gap. The money we anticipated as necessary is not on the table, not from ODA and not from other sources. But there isn’t enough focus on how to free up public resources and address weaknesses in tax rules or look at profit sharing methods, all neglected ways to raise revenue. There is one narrative, that obscures alternative solutions. This should be questioned. We want the conditions internationally and domestically that make public financing both available but also accountable to people in terms of how it's being spent. - Meghna Abraham, Executive Director, Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) How has civil society participation improved the use of public funds for water and sanitation in Zambia? Bubala Muyovwe: The NGO WASH Forum in Zambia is a network of 40 international and local NGOs and community-based organisations advocating for improved financing and equitable, sustainable service delivery. We also work to strengthen civil society capacity and participation in these spaces. Zambia is landlocked. It has a population of almost 20 million people. About 72% of the population has access to water and 54% has access to sanitation, but these overall figures hide big inequities between rural and urban areas. The big issues we see in terms of public finance for water and sanitation are: a general decrease in budget allocation despite commitments to progressively increase investment much higher per capita spending for people living in urban areas compared to people living in rural areas, and poor budget execution, with only 37% of promised budget actually disbursed to the water and sanitation sectors. These issues combine with inadequate or dilapidated infrastructure, challenges in informal settlements, high non-revenue water levels, high energy costs that impact utility finances, a huge debt stock, and climate change. Historically Zambia has been donor dependent but sources have claimed that even donors are not fulfilling their complete pledges for contributions. This means institutions and services providers are squeezed for resources, there is a financing gap. The NGO WASH Forum built alliances with other networks focusing on gender issues or poverty alleviation, education, or social protection. This ensured that even when we were not in the room, there was always someone speaking WASH. We engaged with political parties and members of Parliament. We reviewed and highlighted gaps in manifestos. We also began dialogues with the ministries – Finance, National Planning, Water – highlighting human rights obligations, the need to focus on the needs of rural populations as well as women and girls, and discussing the big issue of debt. As a result, water, sanitation, and hygiene has much more visibility, including from the highest offices in the land. New avenues have been opened to use resources from local funds (The Constituency Development Fund in particular). Some of the submissions we made to various committees were adopted. Importantly, the water sector received 94.1% of its national budget allocation, a huge improvement. A large number of MPs have now expressed willingness to set up a WASH parliamentary caucus and we have also seen improvements for accountability, in the planning and reporting mechanisms. We’re able to ask questions on why progress is slow, why targets haven’t been met. And the government representatives share some of the challenges they face, whether it’s with procurement processes that slow down getting services to people or something else. - Bubala Muyovwe, Coordinator of the Zambia NGO WASH Forum We have struggled a little to directly discuss corruption issues in the sector. There have been studies and the auditor general did a report on the performance of water utilities which raised a number governance issues. What we have done is respond to parliamentarians and make proposals. We do want to go a step further and assess willingness of service providers to adopt some of the recommendations of the auditor general. How has The Nature Conservancy approached financing of water programmes in Latin America? Alejandro Calvache : The main premise of our work, is that everything we do, everything we promote as a human activity has consequences on our water flows, in terms of quantity but also in terms of quality. This is not just one problem, it’s a collective one which needs to rely on everyone for a solution, from homes, to citizens, to companies, to governments. It is not enough to have good dams, good treatment plants. It is also important for nature to be able to recover and provide water over the long term. To support this, our proposal is collective action platforms which we call Water Funds. A Water Fund has a board that provides guidance on Water Fund interventions, priorities and funding. There’s a jointly defined strategic plan of interventions with the protection of the watershed as main goal. It’s a flexible model. Each Water Fund can involve different players but it’s always multi-stakeholder and most often involves both the public and private sector. How the Water Funds finance their interventions varies. Some funding commitments are from external donors. The Inter-American Developmebt Bank has provided significant funding in some regions for example. The private sector also makes commitments in certain Funds, and in some contexts, funding is primarily from the public sector. The financing does not change the governance models or the decision making process. In the Water Funds, there is a long term relationship, based on strategic plans, which are based on science and agreements between the stakeholders to reach a common goal. - Alejandro Calvache, Coordinator at The Nature Conservancy (TNC) There are three critical elements to our interventions. First our Water Funds are meant to be operational for the very long term, at least 20-30 years. Second, the collective action concept is key. These platforms are meant to be formed not only by public sector stakeholders but also corporate ones, but especially with civil society, local communities, local organisations, local authorities. The third element is science. We need to make sure we have science robust enough to develop a best approach in conservation or in any activity we deploy in the watershed. What are other ways to make better use of public funds? We know that corruption drains funds and preventing corruption can free up resources. Participants in the chat are also suggesting ICT, especially for reducing non-revenue water, or indigenous approaches to water management and WASH. What are your views? Alejandro Calvache: Many activities led by indigenous communities for conservation, or fisheries, or water management are better and more cost effective than plans brought in from the outside. And respecting culture and promoting local ways of conservation is not only important for sustainability but also for local participation. Working at the local level is key. Bubala Muyovwe: I am curious as to what we really mean by indigenous WASH. Some traditions work, and we shouldn’t interfere with them. We can’t copy-paste everywhere. But others are not so clear cut. Using ash to wash hands is a traditional practice but it’s also a practice that stems from people not being able to afford soap. Constructing sanitation facilities with local materials is another example that has advantages and disadvantages. Meghna Abraham: It is key that we do look at empowering communities to be able to protect and continue practices that are important to them. Sometimes we have to acknowledge there are also tensions, maybe on gender, maybe on health or other aspects. We do have to consider the price tag. We also need to build better alliances, with groups working on agriculture and food sovereignty, with groups working on health, because the issues are linked. In terms of corruption, it is a bit convenient to use corruption as a scapegoating exercise for developing countries but there is corruption everywhere. We need to broaden our reference framework. The issue of state capture is indeed also key to the debate and we need to critically examine who dictates the agenda. Recording Part 1 Meghna Abraham, CESR, framing the discussion on availability of public funding for water and sanitation and possible solutions to a funding gap. Part 2 Bubala Muyovwe, NGO WASH Forum, discussing her work holding the Zambia government to account on its WASH budget promises. Part 3 Alejandro Calvache, TNC, presenting Water Funds, local multi-stakeholder action platforms for water protection Part 4 Discussion and Takeaways from Integrity Talk 8 on water and sanitation sector finance

Loss and damage is already hammering the water sector. Thanks but no thanks for the empty promises. By: Barbara Schreiner, Water Integrity Network; Tim Brewer, Water Witness International; Patrick Moriarty, IRC; and Malesi Shivaji, KEWASNET A “landmark deal” on the Loss and Damage Fund was agreed at the start of COP 28 , to a standing ovation from delegates. We welcome progress on this fund – it aims to help the poorest and most vulnerable countries pay for the irreversible impacts of the climate catastrophe, many of which will be felt in the water sector. However, history suggests that a healthy dose of scepticism is in order. That’s because it enters into force in a context in which existing commitments have not been met. And, at a time in which aggressive tax avoidance and illicit financial flows continue to undermine the financial health of developing countries. To combat this, transparency and accountability are critical for the loss and damage fund, and, indeed, all climate funding. Equally important is the need to curb the ongoing outflow of dirty money from the south to the north. The tremendous need for funding for loss and damage The climate catastrophe is hitting increasingly hard. Many of the impacts are water related; through floods, droughts, deteriorating water quality or destruction of water supply systems. Vulnerable communities across the globe are experiencing water-related crises, devastating huge numbers of lives and livelihoods. As organisations active in water, we are seriously concerned about the world’s ability to manage these impacts and move forward with meeting SDG 6 and realising the human rights to water and sanitation. In July and August 2022, massive floods inundated one third of Pakistan, driving millions from their homes. The flood caused ongoing food shortages and outbreaks of waterborne disease, and a $16.3 billion reconstruction bill . Pakistan is responsible for less than 1% of global carbon emissions , hardly commensurate with the devastation it suffered due to climate change. Unsurprisingly, Pakistan has been a leading voice in the call for a Loss and Damage Fund, a call that has been resisted for many years by wealthy nations. Carbon emissions continue to climb and it is increasingly unlikely that we will meet the 1,5 degree target. Adaptation processes are not up to speed. Vast numbers of poor people in developing countries are suffering from the impacts of climate change which they did not cause. Funding for adaptation, and for loss and damage are essential. The bill for the Pakistan flood in 2022 - in the billions , for one event - is indicative of the desperate need. Insufficient pledges. Unfulfilled pledges. Creative accounting. We can do better. At COP28, just over $700 million has been committed to the Loss and Damage Fund so far, as a once off (noting that it is still early days). This is a drop in the bucket when set against the projected economic cost of loss and damage by 2030; estimated at USD 400 billion a year by one study and between USD 290 and 580 billion in another - in developing countries alone. By 2050 this cost rises to USD 1 to 1.8 trillion . The type and timing of these pledges is still unclear. This is important, as wealthy, polluting countries are failing to meet the pledges they have already made. In the 2015 Paris Accord, 196 countries pledged to provide $100 billion a year in new funding for low- and middle-income countries to adapt in the face of climate change. By 2021, six years later, the OECD reported that total annual climate finance amounted to USD 89.6 billion , approaching, but not yet meeting the Paris Accord target. However, Oxfam reports that up to a third of these funds are repurposed development aid , not new funding . In addition, a large proportion of the funding is in the form of loans, which must be repaid. At the same time, adaptation finance (critical for the water sector) dropped by USD 4 billion, reducing the adaptation share of total climate finance from 34% to 27%. This is a major concern since effective adaptation will significantly reduce the requirements from the Loss and Damage Fund. The provision of climate financing through loans is particularly problematic. It means that poor countries must pay twice (if not three times) for climate change: once through the devastating impacts of a climate crisis that they did not cause; again through the payment of loan interest, adding to the debt burdens of already heavily indebted countries; and, sometimes even a third time, through the currency risks related to foreign currency loans. The Green Growth Fund is to be lauded for its initiative to provide green finance in local currency for the markets where it operates. Such an initiative could well be adopted far more widely by climate financiers. All of this takes place in a context in which illicit financial flows continue to move vast sums from the global south to the global north every year. UNCTAD's Economic Development in Africa Report (2020) said Africa could gain $89 billion annually if it curbed illicit financial flows. A new report confirms this possibility, revealing that African countries have generated €1.7 billion in additional revenues from tackling tax evasion and illicit financial flows since 2009 – a real start, but with a long way remaining to go. This is not a problem that should be on the shoulders of developing countries alone. The international tax regime, and the laundering of money by northern based banks make these outflows of capital possible. Against this sorry background, sensible questions to ask include: where all those billions for the Loss and Damage fund are to come from, whether they will constitute new funding or a further repurposing of existing development or humanitarian finance, and whether they will be sufficient to meet the needs of affected countries and to offset the flow of funds from the south to the north. The track record of climate finance to date does not provide food for optimism: development finance repurposed as climate finance; finance provided through loans not grants; failure to meet commitments. Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-corruption are a must It is increasingly urgent that the creators of the climate crisis are held to account. Developing nations must fight for stronger systems that will hold the wealthy, polluting countries accountable on their promises and responsibilities. As civil society organisations, we have a crucial role to play in making sure accountability is a reality. In conclusion, we welcome the overdue establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund, but we call for stronger mechanisms to hold wealthy nations to account for their commitments to funding the disaster that they have and continue to impose on poorer nations.

Focusing on civic and integrity infrastructure for more and better financing in the water and sanitation sectors By Claire Grandadam and Kelly Acuña, Water Integrity Network The Spring Meetings are concluding; Finance Ministers of Latin American and Caribbean countries are meeting today in Washington DC at the SWA FMM to share good practices and build partnerships for water and sanitation sector finance. This is a big opportunity to rethink funding to the sector. “ The moment to prioritize water and sanitation is now ”, enjoins Catarina de Albuquerque. The moment to priories the needs of the poor or left behind, and to prioritise investments in systems for long-term financial sustainability is also now. Civic and integrity infrastructure is a crucial part of this system. In Latin America and the Caribbean, it needs urgent attention. Action, Ambition, Accountability – the call of civil society Along with civil society leaders in Latin America and the Caribbean, we call for Action, Ambition and Accountability  in defining national financing strategy and commitments for the water and sanitation sector. Because we are who we are, we also call for an extra A, that of Anti-corruption. To ensure funds are not wasted to corruption, we need strong safeguards, for example to limit conflicts of interest and protect whistle-blowers. We have essential services to deliver; corruption is too expensive, and it is holding us back. As the SWA civil society constituency highlights, there are essentially two paths forward for sector financing: Within all funding, existing and new, specific attention must be paid to provisions for vulnerable populations . Complying with our human rights obligations and responsibilities is a crucial element of integrity. We must improve sector efficiency and integrity, to free up funds lost to corruption and mismanagement, to reallocate available resources more equitably (also towards technologies and systems of delivery that benefit low-income residents), and to open avenues for new finance. For this second path to work, we need better data and information on financing challenges, and on public financial management in particular . Fortunately, there is a lot we can learn from and collaborate on with open government, anti-corruption, public finance, and integrity partners in Latin America, the Caribbean and beyond. Strengthening multi-stakeholder action for transparency that works for the water and sanitation sectors We are currently putting the finishing touches on the next Water Integrity Global Outlook , which focuses on water and sanitation finance integrity. A key message emerging is that by building alliances with anti-corruption, integrity, and public finance institutions and organisations, water sector actors can give a boost to sector financial systems . Research is still ongoing, but we can already see that, in Latin America and the Caribbean, there are significant opportunities. Time to make new friends. From data... Latin America distinguishes itself as a pioneer in participatory budgeting and key player in open government . There are movers in the region, a good number of planned national and local open government commitments for fiscal transparency (like those made through the Open Government Partnership ), and open procurement initiatives that are making a difference for infrastructure and other sectors . Overall, there are relatively high levels of available government data . It’s true, there is still room for major improvement and these big trends hide a lot of variation across the region . The Global Data Barometer of 2022 also notes limited evolution in data availability or openness in last years. But there is a non-negligible basis of good practices, data, and invested partners to work with in understanding financial management challenges across the region. ...to information The picture is a little more cloudy when we drill down to examine how this plays out at sector level and for different public financial management processes. Here again however, there are partners who have important insight: We need better information on infrastructure planning processes in water and sanitation ( but we’re working on this with CoST) . We need better information on debt ( Transparency International  is working on this, with a checklist to empower civil society and accountability actors to demand transparency and encourage oversight of public debt – something to watch for). We also need more information on actual expenditure . Supreme audit institutions, with support from civil society organisations, can help with this and provide valuable insight on improvement and efficiency opportunities ( as demonstrated by Controla Tu Gobierno with its analysis of reports on wastewater treatment ). But the Organization of Latin American and Caribbean Supreme Audit Institutions unfortunately has reports for water from only a few countries , and none older than 2022.  Budgeting information could also be more complete, as highlighted by the International Budget Partnership Open Budget Survey of 2021 . Importantly, the biggest weakness this survey points to in relation to budget information is public participation. The need to support participation, accountability, and integrity This weakness in participation, and the difficulty of using data effectively as information to adapt sector strategies, is the where the big challenge lies. Participatory budgeting can be highly local and may be quite common, but across the region and across the budget process, public participation is still actually quite low. In a similar vein, the Global Data Barometer highlights the region’s relative weakness in capacity to govern open data and use it for impact . This challenge is compounded by limits on civic space . Of particular concern in the region, is intimidation and harassment of journalists and water and environment defenders . This is why we are calling on the finance ministers, the funders and the other decision makers gathering in Washington today, to focus on another urgently needed investment: an investment in the civic and integrity infrastructure of the region. This infrastructure is the participatory processes and the people, the organisations, the media, the compliance and oversight institutions who keep track of money, use and analyse data, hold decision makers accountable, and can strengthen all planning processes, to make sure money is allocated where it is needed, and spent as it is intended . Investing in civic infrastructure is also recognising and funding community organisations for the work they do to reach vulnerable populations. It is a necessary investment, that pays for itself.

The case of Sedapal utility in Lima, Peru Case study Published: 2023 Developed in cooperation with the Inter-American Development Bank and SEDAPAL A media investigation in September 2022 exposed concerning irregularities in the process of distributing free water in informal settlements in Lima, a measure that had been put in place in response to the COVID pandemic. Water was diverted and sold for completely different purposes than intended or in some cases resold to residents, instead of provided for free. The Lima utility, SEDAPAL, took swift action in responst to the investigation, issuing public condemnations, applying sanctions, working on better oversight systems for its contractors, and working with WIN to examine integrity risks related to service in informal settlements or low-income communities. Notably, SEDAPAL revamped its contracting procedures to include stringent clauses mandating adherence to ethical codes and community engagement protocols. It also took several measures to track the contracted tankers and open avenues for complaints. Read the case study in English: Leer in Espanol:

Centrarse en las infraestructuras cívicas y de integridad para obtener más y mejor financiación en los sectores del agua y el saneamiento Por Claire Grandadam y Kelly Acuña, Water Integrity Network Las Reuniones de Primavera están concluyendo; los ministros de Finanzas de América Latina y el Caribe se reúnen hoy en Washington DC convocados por SWA para compartir buenas prácticas y crear asociaciones para la financiación del sector del agua y el saneamiento. Se trata de una gran oportunidad para replantear la financiación del sector. " El momento de dar prioridad al agua y al saneamiento es ahora ", afirma Catarina de Albuquerque. El momento de priorizar las necesidades de los pobres o de los que se han quedado atrás, y de dar prioridad a las inversiones en sistemas para la sostenibilidad financiera a largo plazo también es ahora. La infraestructura cívica y de integridad es una parte crucial de este sistema y en América Latina y el Caribe, necesita atención urgente. Acción, Ambición, Rendición de Cuentas - el llamado de la sociedad civil Junto con los líderes de la sociedad civil de América Latina y el Caribe, hacemos un llamado a la Acción, la Ambición y la Rendición de cuentas  a la hora de definir la estrategia de financiación nacional y los compromisos para el sector del agua y el saneamiento. Porque somos quienes somos, también pedimos una llamada adicional, la de Anticorrupción. Para garantizar que los fondos no se malgastan en corrupción, necesitamos salvaguardias sólidas, por ejemplo, para limitar los conflictos de intereses y proteger a los denunciantes. Tenemos que prestar servicios esenciales; la corrupción es demasiado costosa y nos está frenando. Como subraya el grupo de la sociedad civil de la SWA, hay esencialmente dos vías para avanzar en la financiación del sector: Dentro de toda la financiación, existente y nueva, debe prestarse una atención especial a la provisión para las poblaciones vulnerables . El cumplimiento de nuestras obligaciones y responsabilidades en materia de derechos humanos es un elemento crucial de la integridad. Debemos mejorar la eficiencia y la integridad del sector para liberar fondos perdidos por la corrupción y la mala gestión, reasignar los recursos disponibles de forma más equitativa (también hacia tecnologías y sistemas de prestación que beneficien a los residentes con bajos ingresos) y abrir vías para nuevas financiaciones. Para que esta segunda vía funcione, necesitamos mejores datos e información sobre los retos de la financiación y, en particular, sobre la gestión de las finanzas públicas . Afortunadamente, podemos aprender y colaborar con nuestros socios en materia de gobierno abierto, lucha contra la corrupción, finanzas públicas e integridad en América Latina, el Caribe y otros lugares. Fortalecimiento de la acción multilateral en favor de una transparencia que funcione para los sectores del agua y el saneamiento Actualmente estamos dando los últimos retoques al próximo informe Water Integrity Global Outlook,  que se centra en la integridad de la financiación del agua y el saneamiento. Un mensaje clave que emerge es que, mediante la creación de alianzas con instituciones y organizaciones anticorrupción, de integridad y de finanzas públicas, los actores del sector del agua pueden dar un impulso a los sistemas financieros del sector . La investigación aún está en curso, pero ya podemos ver que, en América Latina y el Caribe, existen importantes oportunidades. Es hora de hacer nuevos amigos. De los datos... América Latina se distingue por ser pionera en presupuestos participativos  y actor clave en gobierno abierto . Hay impulsores en la región, un buen número de compromisos nacionales y locales de gobierno abierto para la transparencia fiscal (como los realizados a través de la Open Government Partnership ) e iniciativas de contratación pública abierta que están marcando la diferencia para las  infraestructuras  y otros sectores . En general, el nivel de datos públicos disponibles es relativamente alto.  Es cierto, todavía hay margen para mejorar  y estas grandes tendencias ocultan las variaciones en toda la región . El Barómetro Global de Datos de 2022 también señala una evolución limitada en la disponibilidad o apertura de datos en los últimos años. Pero existe una base nada desdeñable de buenas prácticas, datos y socios comprometidos  con los que trabajar para comprender los retos de la gestión financiera en toda la región. ...a la información El panorama se ensombrece un poco más cuando se examina en detalle cómo funciona esto a nivel sectorial y en los distintos procesos de gestión de las finanzas públicas. Sin embargo, también en este caso hay socios que tienen una visión importante: Necesitamos mejor información sobre los procesos de planificación  de infraestructuras en agua y saneamiento (pero estamos trabajando en ello con CoST ). Necesitamos mejor información sobre la deuda  ( Transparencia Internacional  está trabajando en ello, con un listado de control para empoderar a la sociedad civil y a los agentes de la rendición de cuentas para que exijan transparencia y fomenten la supervisión de la deuda pública, algo a lo que habrá que estar atentos). También necesitamos más información sobre el gasto real. Las entidades fiscalizadoras superiores, con el apoyo de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil , pueden ayudar en este sentido y aportar información valiosa sobre las oportunidades de mejora y eficiencia ( como demuestra Controla Tu Gobierno con su análisis de los informes sobre el tratamiento de aguas residuales ). Pero la Organización Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Entidades Fiscalizadoras Superiores – OLACEFS- lamentablemente sólo dispone de informes sobre el agua  de unos pocos países, y ninguno anterior al 2022. La información presupuestaria  también podría ser más completa, como destaca la Encuesta de Presupuesto Abierto de 2021  del International Budget Partnership. Cabe destacar que la mayor debilidad que señala esta encuesta en relación con la información presupuestaria es la participación pública. La necesidad de apoyar la participación, la rendición de cuentas y la integridad Esta debilidad en la participación, y la dificultad de utilizar los datos eficazmente como información para adaptar las estrategias sectoriales, es donde reside el gran reto. Los presupuestos participativos pueden ser muy locales y bastante comunes, pero en toda la región y en todo el proceso presupuestario, la participación pública sigue siendo en realidad bastante baja. En una línea similar, el Barómetro Global de Datos pone de relieve la relativa debilidad de la región en cuanto a capacidad para gobernar los datos abiertos y utilizarlos con fines de impacto . Este reto se ve agravado por las limitaciones al espacio cívico . Especialmente preocupante en la región es la intimidación y el acoso a periodistas y defensores del agua y el medio ambiente. Por eso pedimos a los ministros de finanzas, a los financiadores y a los demás responsables de la toma de decisiones que se reúnen hoy en Washington que se centren en otra inversión que se necesita urgentemente: una inversión en la infraestructura cívica y de integridad de la región. Esta infraestructura son los procesos participativos y las personas, las organizaciones, los medios de comunicación, las instituciones de cumplimiento y supervisión  que hacen un seguimiento del dinero, utilizan y analizan los datos, exigen a los responsables de la toma de decisiones rendición de cuentas y pueden reforzar todos los procesos de planificación, para garantizar que el dinero se asigna donde se necesita y se gasta como está previsto . Invertir en infraestructuras cívicas es también reconocer y financiar a las organizaciones comunitarias por el trabajo que realizan para llegar a las poblaciones vulnerables. Es una inversión necesaria que se amortiza sola.

LESSONS LEARNED FROM PILOTING A NEW INDICATOR FRAMEWORK ON EARLY STAGE INVESTMENT PLANNING Integrity risks related to the selection and planning of new infrastructure are high. They also have significant long-term impacts for people and planet. However, risks related to procurement tend to be better understood and are more often the focus of integrity initiatives. It’s time to look under the hood. The main integrity risks are conflicts of interest occurring during the identification and implementation phase. In many cases, the identification of the project is politically motivated. And in the implementation phase, there are many interested parties. Other issues include the limited capacities of implementing partners, poor compliance with laws and regulations, and activities being implemented outside the contract, leading to increasing costs - Namarome Lukelesia of the Water Sector Trust Fund (Kenya), when describing the integrity management practices of the Fund for the development of projects in rural areas of the country (for Integrity Talk 3 on Small Water Supply Systems ) Over the years partners have shared many examples of early-stage water infrastructure risks, as in the quote above. In 2022, our research case study on wastewater in Bangkok revealed rent-seeking is often a bigger driver than need in the way wastewater treatments plants are built. Insufficient or inadequate data (because of inadequate capacity or, of more concern, because of selective or discriminating practices), as well as poor participation, can lead to water and climate adaptation infrastructure that doesn’t reach those most in need or cannot be used (as highlighted in recent discussions on maladaptation and on new tech for integrity). Despite cascading impacts on people’s lives and livelihoods and the possibility of exploding costs, risks at strategic planning, project identification, preparation, selection and financing phases, have received llimited research and practical attention and remain somewhat opaque. In response, WIN worked with CoST and the IDB, to identify indicators and associated data points that can ensure stakeholders have visibility and input for decision-making and planning. The result is a data framework for decision-making and accountability: the Framework for Integrity in Infrastructure Planning. In a pilot test in Latin America, data points related to, for example, project location, timing, beneficiaries, vetting process, and project budget, contribute to an examination of nine main risks: Undue influence in decision-making Non-accountable decision-making Unmanaged conflict-of-interest Priority misalignment Misuse of public funds Biased preparation processes Biased budgeting approval processes Manipulation of budgeting processes Non-accountable budgeting processes The first results are promising in terms of ease of use and relevance of results. Indicators made it possible to identify red flags for further investigation related to feasibility studies, inadequacy of project choices, and compliance with procedures. The framework will be further testing in 2023 for further validation before dissemination. Find out more about the framework and early lessons from the pilot:

A simple set of indicators providing input on the status of procedures, practices, and structures for integrity within a utility, based on international best practices. WHEN TO USE IT To give water utility managers quick, actionable input on risk management and compliance processes and possible improvements. To benchmark integrity management across utilities. To share evidence with funders or stakeholders on integrity management, risk preparedness, and creditworthiness To launch an InWASH process, or as input and evidence for an integrity management process. HOW IT WORKS The Integrity Assessment for Utilities is a straightforward survey with 15 indicators covering 5 integrity principles: Tone at the top Risk assessment Integrity controls Corrective action Monitoring The Integrity Assessment can be conducted as a self-assessment or as a full assessment verified by an Integrity Coach. HOW IT WAS DEVELOPED The Integrity Assessment was developed by WIN as an objective benchmark to launch integrity management processes in utilities. It was improved with support from the Inter-American Development Bank in line with developments on the Aquarating Focal Analysis on Business Integrity For Water Operators. It was piloted in multiple utilities across Latin America, where it provided a useful starting points for integrity discussions and work. It is now simplified and accessible online in English, French, and Spanish. HOW TO USE IT The Integrity Assessment for Utilities is accessible online as self-assessment. The data collected is anonymised and processed in the strictest confidentiality by the WIN research team as input to a global trends report on integrity management challenges and best practices for utilities. GOING FURTHER InWASH is a complete integrity management toolbox for utilities that builds on the Integrity Assessment. It makes it possible to develop an integrity management plan for a utility in a participatory and practical manner.

Measurement of city-level water corruption risks based on big-data analysis of procurement data and survey results. WHEN TO USE IT As a quantitative city-level assessment to convince decision-makers To track impact of policy changes and variations in integrity levels over time or across different cities To identify red flags for integrity violations at the level of individual transactions HOW IT WORKS WIRI is a composite index of ratings in three risk areas of urban water and sanitation: investment risk (public procurement risk indicators and a pipe length-based indicator) operation risk (public procurement risk indicators from maintenance , e.g. chemicals, equipment, tools, etc.) client-utility interaction risk (public procurement risk indicators and survey results on bribery in water and sanitation services) HOW IT WAS DEVELOPED WIRI was developed in collaboration with the Government Transparency Institute. It has been piloted in several cities with open data on procurement. It has also been used at national scale with more data for the larger cities in Kenya, Bangladesh, and Peru, where procurement data is publicly available. It has shown that it can detect changes in integrity risk levels between cities and over time and provides insight on which areas of risk may be more problematic. HOW TO USE IT The tool is currently available as an open-source tool for data analysis. For information, help on how to use it, and feedback do contact the WIN team!

The Water Integrity Network Association (WIN) is an international NGO that researches the impact of corruption and poor integrity in the water and sanitation sectors and advocates for better governance jointly with a global network of partners. We develop and promote tools for more transparency, accountability, participation, and the introduction of integrity measures at all levels. We focus on capacity development and risk prevention in water and sanitation sector programmes worldwide, with the aim of improving performance and equity, to the benefit of all. Having actively engaged in Bangladesh for nearly a decade, WIN has undertaken a programme over the past five years to mobilise the government, CSOs, donors, and communities in addressing corruption within the water and sanitation sector, contributing to the improvement of SDG 6 delivery. WIN, with its partners in Bangladesh, has developed a country strategy for Bangladesh, which is to be implemented from 2024 to 2026. To support the successful implementation of our country strategy, WIN is seeking to build a dynamic and proficient pool of experts in Bangladesh. We are calling for expressions of interest for WIN’s Bangladesh Experts Database for the period 2024-2026. We are looking for individuals (or, in special cases, organisations*) to assist WIN as experts with the planning and/or implementation of WIN’s projects and programmes in Bangladesh, in particular: WASH Experts – Public policy, Good Governance ( tools, frameworks ) Water Resources Management with an integrity angle Water Pollution with an integrity angle Integrity & Anti-corruption ( Integrity Tools, Integrity Management Practices ) Water-related Climate Change Adaptation with a focus on integrity Integrity in city-wide inclusive sanitation Water and Sanitation Financing Gender and Social Inclusion (GESI) in Water and Sanitation WIN is committed to fostering good governance in water management. However, we do not support projects involving physical infrastructure development or maintenance. Prospective applicants are encouraged to align their applications and inquiries with WIN's core mission of advancing integrity in water and sanitation through strategic interventions in governance and system improvement. OVERVIEW OF THE ROLE The expert will support WIN in realising WIN’s country strategy goals. By leveraging their extensive experience in the field, they bring valuable connections and possess the acumen to identify the most suitable stakeholders, ensuring the successful implementation of projects. An individual can possess expertise in one particular field or a combination of expertise from the above-mentioned areas.   Tasks may include: pinpointing areas where integrity projects can make a meaningful impact in Bangladesh strategically identifying key stakeholders collecting, interpreting, and presenting evidence on the impact of poor/strong integrity in the form of surveys, research projects, policy briefs, integrity assessments, case studies, blog posts. conducting research on integrity in the thematic areas mentioned above implementing integrity tools with a variety of water and sanitation stakeholders contributing to fundraising efforts ELIGIBLE PROFILES We are looking for experts with a high level of expertise and professional experience in one or more of the fields of WIN’s work in Bangladesh that meet the following criteria: Relevant post-graduate degree and 4 years of experience in international or national development programmes of the thematic area being applied Specific experience in water governance/system strengthening or in the anti-corruption field At least 2 years of experience working in Bangladesh, having developed a network of relevant contacts and being able to show a track record of achievements Experience with NGO advocacy A good understanding of key stakeholders and having an extensive network of contacts with these stakeholders. A sound understanding of the policy and regulatory frameworks and the integrity implications in the chosen area of expertise. A clear interest and drive towards working on the topic of integrity in water and sanitation Experience in working with multiple and relevant stakeholders like CSOs, government agencies, and/or water/sanitation service providers Experience in facilitation of events and workshops, giving trainings and public speaking in both English and or Bengali Fluency in English (Bengali is a strong advantage) Excellent communication, writing, and organsational skills The call for interest is also open to non-Bangladeshi citizens. EXCLUSION Persons who are in one of the following exclusion situations that bar them from receiving WIN funds CANNOT work as experts: bankruptcy, winding up, court-ordered administration, arrangement with creditors, suspension of business activities or similar procedures − in breach of social security or tax obligations − guilty of grave professional misconduct committed fraud, corruption, links to a criminal organisation, money laundering, terrorism-related crimes (including terrorism financing), child labour or human trafficking shown significant deficiencies in complying with main obligations under a previous procurement contract, grant agreement, prize, expert contract, or similar have created an entity under a different jurisdiction with the intent to circumvent fiscal, social or other legal obligations in the country of origin. Experts will also be refused if it turns out that: during the contract award procedure they misrepresented information required as a condition for participating or failed to supply that information they are in a conflict of interest. OTHER DETAILS ABOUT THE ROLE Being accepted to WIN’s Bangladesh Experts Database does not automatically mean that you will be contracted for task assignments. This will depend on our business needs and fulfilment of certain formal requirements. If you are contacted for a task assignment, you will need to sign a WIN Expert Contract. If you are selected, we will sign a contract with the details relating to your assignment (e.g. tasks and working arrangements, remuneration and payment arrangements). Role:  Consultant Contract:  Not fixed, based on need. Contracts are made based on the needs and a consultancy agreement Location:  Work from Bangladesh / remote work, depending on the assignment. No compensation for working environment will be provided like laptop, internet charges etc. If any travel is necessary, travel expenses can be covered as per WIN’s travel policy. Starting date: Can be considered for work from Quarter 1 of 2024   Remuneration:  Daily rate, to be fixed depending on experience Download Call for Expressions of Interest as pdf: TO APPLY We invite qualified candidates to submit via email a cover letter, expressing their motivation and qualifications, and a full CV, including references to: Recruitment@win-s.org The length of the application must not exceed 5 A4 pages. In your cover letter, please clearly indicate your experience and skills in relation to the mentioned requirements and clearly state your motivation and your expertise areas from the list provided above. Further, indicate your daily rates and VAT status, as applicable. *Organizations applying to this call should submit at least one or more CVs of individuals relevant to the expertise advertised. Otherwise, applications will not be considered. Applications will be treated as strictly confidential. Applications are open on a rolling basis until 15 June 2024 , however, we would like to receive applications as soon as possible. If you are interested, please do not wait to apply. Please note that only shortlisted candidates will be contacted. WIN e.V. is an equal opportunity employer.

WEAKENED PUBLIC GOVERNANCE ENABLES ABUSE AND CORRUPTION TO FLOURISH IN SOUTH AFRICA'S WATER SECTOR Corruption in the water and sanitation sector in South Africa has put the water security of businesses and households, and indeed the entire country, at risk. The impacts are severe. On March 12, 2020, Corruption Watch and the Water Integrity Network released an important report, Money Down the Drain: Corruption in South Africa's Water Sector, which examines the extent and drivers of corruption in the water and sanitation sector and makes recommendations on actions to be taken to address such corruption and maladministration. Full report (pdf, EN) Summary (pdf, EN) The report highlights the extent to which corruption has become systemic, involving all levels of society, and rife in both the public and private sectors. So while formal rules, policies and laws appear to be in place, in reality, informal rules prevail. The report describes a number of cases which reveal the involvement of a vast array of players, from plumbers, tanker drivers and senior officials, to mayors to ministers, and the many private businesses that benefited richly from corruption, and in some cases, actively promoted it. Although the behaviour of public sector officials and politicians comes under particular scrutiny, the report also makes clear how the actions of private individuals and businesses, who deliberately exploit weaknesses in the public sector, have an acute impact on water security and on the human right to water. Some companies have actively created conditions which serve their own ends, and in which corruption flourishes. FROM CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT AND POLICY, TO INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL The three broad areas of corruption are characterized in the report. Manipulating procurement and operational processes. Influencing policy and regulatory decisions Taking control of key institutions. The report suggests that the much-lamented lack of institutional capacity in many water sector institutions is the result of deliberate institutional weakening in order to facilitate corruption. It is notable that between 2009 and 2015 the average term of office of the director-general in the Department of Water and Sanitation was only 11 months. Coupled with this are deliberate attempts to weaken mechanisms for oversight of institutional performance, thus clearing the way for the removal of constraints on illicit behaviour. A WICKED PROBLEM, BUT ONE WE CAN ACT ON The report presents a set of recommendations that encompass an overarching strategic approach, and drill down into more specific interventions. These include: Designating the water sector as an ‘island of integrity’; Ending impunity and instilling a culture of consequences; Ensuring the appointment of honest, ethical and committed leaders to run key institutions; Improving and strengthening procurement systems and practices, as outlined in the National Development Plan, including integrity pacts, e-procurement, open contracting data standards, and red flag monitoring; Facilitating transparency in regulatory decisions; Addressing broader environmental factors; and supporting the media and civil society to uncover corrupt activities and pursue them until appropriate remedial action is taken. Download full report (pdf, EN): Executive summary (pdf, EN): Featured image: Clanwiliam Dam, Winfried Bruenken (Amrum) / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5)

Read the statement and sign the petition on Change.org here . We have seen water being increasingly weaponised in conflict situations, including, most recently, in Ukraine and Gaza. These are, however, by no means the only situations in which water infrastructure, or the electricity infrastructure that is critical to the supply of water, has been deliberately attacked or abused by parties in a conflict. Iraq, Syria, Yemen and others have also seen attacks on water infrastructure. We believe that every individual, regardless of their location, religion, ethnicity, gender, or other difference, deserves access to clean and safe water at all times, in accordance with the human right to water. As signatories to this statement, we express our commitment to the principles of justice, equality, non-discrimination and respect for human rights. Destruction of infrastructure or stopping of water supplies results in significant harm and is a form of collective punishment, illegal under the Geneva Conventions. Diseases like cholera and diarrhoea spread fast, with high levels of fatalities due to the lack of clean water to treat those affected. Hospitals are unable to provide treatment. Malnutrition and wasting increase. Children, the elderly and the ill are most affected, and most particularly those in poor communities. Women and children who are forced to search for water are exposed to increased risks of sexual harm and violence. Reconstruction of water infrastructure, which requires large budgets to be spent swiftly, is vulnerable to corruption and mismanagement, particularly in conflict or post-conflict situations, leading to further violations of the human right to water. International law, including the Geneva Conventions, stipulates the obligations of all parties involved in conflicts to ensure the well-being of civilians and protect their access to basic needs, including water. ‘The Geneva List of Principles on the Protection of Water Infrastructure’ reiterates the obligations of parties to a conflict as the related to water specifically. As per principle 4, parties to a conflict should refrain from using water infrastructure and water-related infrastructure as a means of warfare. Principle 6 makes it clear that infrastructure related to water is assumed to be a civilian object and as such cannot be attacked or damaged unless it is being used for military purposes. In the light of the above, we call for an immediate cessation of the weaponisation of water in all and any conflict. We call on all nations to abide by International Law and uphold the Geneva Principles on the Protection of Water Infrastructure at all times . We call for the United Nations to develop a process for economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation to be imposed on any country that uses water as a weapon of war and the establishment of an international body to monitor and investigate cases of water weaponisation. Read the statement and sign the petition on Change.org here .