Search this site

CROSS-SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS LIKE THOSE BASED ON THE WEFE NEXUS APPROACH CAN BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND SUSTAINABLE WITH INTEGRITY “Cooperation is critical to achieving all water-related goals and targets.” This is the first sentence in the latest UN World Water Development Report (WWDR) of March 2023 . The importance of partnerships was also a refrain of the UN 2023 Water Conference. We’ve been hearing for years that water sector stakeholders need to stop working in silos, especially with rising threats from climate change. This is not new. Especially not for those of us managing WRM and IWRM programmes, or developing basin management plans and watershed initiatives, or setting up multi-stakeholder initiatives bringing together public, private, and civil society organisations, like the numerous initiatives already highlighted in the WWDR. The calls for partnerships are indeed crucial. The fact that they are repeated hints at a deeper issue: effective cooperation is far from easy. No one has the secret sauce, especially for multi-stakeholder or cross-sector partners. Indeed, the WWDR summarises rightly that: “each party invariably comes with its own knowledge, perceptions, interests, positions and objectives, such that disagreements on priorities and strategies are commonplace. While partnerships and cooperation, at all levels, overwhelmingly deliver positive outcomes, in rare occasions, they can institutionalize exclusion, distort resource allocations and encourage fragmentation.” What can we do about these challenges? How do we make our own partnerships work better for water resilience? We believe integrity is one key ingredient of the secret sauce. And it deserves more attention for three main reasons: Integrity is a way to build trust and develop common ground among different partners Where governance structures are fractured, complex, or vulnerable to capture by more powerful partners, integrity can contribute to more balanced decision-making and limit accountability gaps There are high integrity risks in water and natural resource management that need to be taken into account directly for partnerships to be effective, serve the public interest, and secure funding. Integrity can be operationalised in partnerships through the principles of Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-corruption. There are guidelines to do this in practice for water stewardship initiatives for example, where public and private interests can clash. Other crucial partnerships where integrity is essential are cross-sector partnerships for water resilience, for example those under the WEFE nexus approach. CROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATION: THE EXAMPLE OF THE WATER – ENERGY – FOOD – ECOSYSTEMS NEXUS It is likely that, as climate change threats continue to impact water and therefore lives, livelihoods and energy security, the calls for collaboration beyond the water sector will grow. The Water Energy Food Ecosystems (WEFE) Nexus approach (or Water Energy Food (WEF) Nexus) is a primary decision-making framework for cross-sector collaboration. Its purpose is to balance the different interests that compete for scarce natural resources, prevent and resolve conflicts over their use and exploitation, and secure their long-term availability (Aboelnga et al., 2018). The WEFE Nexus approach is relevant for partners working in water resource management because it can enable a more integrated and complete appreciation of risks, prevent maladaptation , ensure sufficient leverage for change, and open doors to funding. It is still very much a theoretical framework however. In practice, there are many challenges, and also integrity risks. INTEGRITY GUIDELINES FOR THE WEFE NEXUS: STRONG FOUNDATIONS FOR EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIP “The natural resource sectors, including water, energy, food, land and ecosystems, are highly vulnerable to corruption as a result of the significant revenues associated with their exploitation and commercialisation (OECD, n.d.). Corruption in the natural resource sectors is especially high given the role played by governments in the allocation of exploitation rights to private companies. Economic interests and powerful groups on water, energy and food resources can influence decision-making processes to their benefit and away from public interest. Discretionary powers, opaque decision-making processes, and lack of transparency in lobbying activities further exacerbate the risk of corruption affecting the sustainable governance of water, energy, food, and ecosystems.” – A Guideline to Strengthening Integrity in the Governance of the WEFE Nexus Approach With support from the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ), and in partnership with stakeholders of the Nexus Regional Dialogues and the Bonn Water Network, WIN has been exploring WEFE Nexus growing pains with a focus on integrity. Embedding integrity within WEFE Nexus governance and management structures requires the adoption and implementation of measures that support transparency, participation, accountability and anti-corruption. In new guidelines, we defined ways to strengthen WEFE Nexus initiatives with integrity, in four main governance areas: Institutions: which centres on the integrity elements necessary for a good governance of the WEFE Nexus institutions and structures. Information: which refers to all the necessary measures to support a transparent and evidence-based decision-making process. This includes the production, collection and sharing of good quality data; building capacities of people, institutions and organisations; and ensuring transparency and easy access to all information. Investment: which outlines elements to ensure access to long-term funding for WEFE Nexus projects, and the necessary control mechanisms to ensure that funds are not mismanaged or lost to corruption. Implementation : which details the controls, monitoring and reporting mechanisms to guide activities within the project cycle. It centres on inclusive participation within the planning, decision-making and implementation processes. The guidelines can also support practitioners to abide by the WEF Nexus Principles . Download the guidelines:

Investments in water and sanitation translate into effective services to citizens through public procurement. The open contracting approach shines a light on how investment reaches citizens and whether it responds to their needs. Guest post by Umrbek Allakulov, Georg Neumann, Open Contracting Partnership Open Contracting Partnership (OCP) helps transform procurement from an overlooked, underfunded paper-based chore to a digital, data-driven government service that can be an engine for innovation, sustainability and economic inclusion. The latest Water Integrity Global Outlook  highlights how the global water and sanitation sectors are notoriously opaque and vulnerable to corruption. There are many factors at play: fragmented decision-making, technical complexities, natural monopolies, and weak regulatory oversight. Complex financial structures, involving multiple actors and funding sources, further obscure accountability and enable corruption. Yet water and sanitation investments must triple to address the urgent need for more projects, particularly as climate change-induced weather events add costs and require more resilient infrastructure to ensure safe and reliable access.  A crucial question is how to translate that finance into more effective projects and investments on the ground and prevent leakages against governance risks. We need to know where the money is being spent, on what, when, and with whom.  It’s at the level of national and local governments where, through the often technical and invisible process of public procurement, investments in water and sanitation projects translate into a critical public service to citizens. Think of water pipes, sewage treatment plants, pumping stations, chemicals for water purification, construction and maintenance of infrastructure - all of which must go through public procurement processes to keep systems running smoothly.  At the same time, with calls for resources to adapt and mitigate climate change, we need to ensure the billions that will be committed are spent where they are needed most. Yet, the report highlights that “Procurement is the site of the greatest corruption in public expenditure.” How can the sector ensure the scarce financial resources are put into most effective use through public procurement?  To do so, projects need to be implemented with an open contracting approach  at its core.  Projects should be planned with (and not just for) local decision-makers and communities . They must be powered by open, transparent, comprehensive real-time data on public contracts – from the spending all the way to the implementation . This is critical to identify red flags early to ensure projects are delivered effectively.  And they need to embed local feedback, monitoring and advocacy channels throughout the project development process to learn, adapt, and create systemic change. The following two projects provide an insight into how this can be done successfully: Enabling local accountability through open data on public contracts In Buenos Aires’ informal settlements, known as ‘Villas’, streets had no names, and there were no sewers, storm drains, or clean drinking water systems. Civil society organizations, particularly the Civil Association for Equality and Justice (ACIJ), and residents used access to information and open data as tools to advocate for improved access to public infrastructure services in the villas.  In one example, residents started asking questions about the construction taking place in their villa, including the new water infrastructure. They identified that the work was being carried out shoddily. Residents could then use the official data available on the public works project and their own experience to raise the problems in official forums such as the Participatory Management Council, ultimately leading to the cancellation of the contract.  Building more resilient communities Together with Indian civic tech collective CivicDataLab, OCP is implementing open contracting strategies to improve natural disaster preparedness, response, and relief that will better protect vulnerable residents. Typically, decisions for funding allocations are based on a “first-come, first-served” approach that prioritizes those who ask for funding first.  With OCP support, CivicDataLab worked with Assam authorities to better protect vulnerable communities from extreme weather events by implementing open contracting strategies for better flood-related procurement. Core to the approach was developing a sophisticated data model  to determine the most critical areas of the state needing investment – rating each district for flood proneness, preparedness and losses and combining procurement data with dozens of other datasets. The project required working with Assam’s Finance Department to structure and standardize data on all flood-related procurement from the last five years. Now, an estimated 6.5 million people benefit from improved flood-related spending.  Results from open contracting in other contexts have delivered far-rippling effects, carrying important lessons for the water and sanitation sectors. For example, Prozorro helped reduce healthcare spending by over 18% in Ukraine . Similarly, the  Colombian government achieved savings of estimated 10–15%  in the provision of school meals by implementing an open contracting approach. Implementing these savings and increasing cost-efficiency could be a game changer for the underinvested water and sanitation sectors.  It’s time to dive into open contracting to improve integrity and transparency in water and sanitation sector finance! Disclaimer: At WIN we value honest and open discussion. We are a multi-stakeholder network and our site brings together perspectives from across the board. Not all views expressed here reflect official policies .

Una conversación basada en la publicación Panorama Mundial de la Integridad del Agua 2024 (WIGO 2024) con expertos de América Latina Read this article in English here La integridad es un pilar fundamental para garantizar que los servicios de agua y saneamiento sean accesibles, equitativos y sostenibles. En un contexto donde la corrupción y las fallas de integridad siguen siendo desafíos significativos, contar con herramientas innovadoras que permitan evaluar y mejorar la integridad del sector es clave para su fortalecimiento. En el año 2024, la Red de Integridad de Agua (WIN, Water Integrity Network) genero la publicación Panorama Mundial de la Integridad del Agua 2024 (WIGO 2024) con un enfoque en las finanzas. El objetivo de este informe es proporcionar una visión global sobre los riesgos de corrupción en la financiación del sector, y mostrar soluciones para reducir la brecha de la financiación y mejorar la gestión financiera en el sector del agua y saneamiento. Aquí, las empresas prestadoras tienen un papel importante que jugar. Este es un resumen de la charla sobre integridad financiera, organizada en colaboración con Red de Agua, UNAM y Centro Regional de Seguridad Hídrica bajo los auspicios de UNESCO , 26 de marzo de 2025, en la que se abordaron aspectos importantes sobre la importancia de la integridad financiera en las empresas prestadoras de agua y saneamiento en América Latina. Invitados especiales: Marcello Basani, Especialista Líder de Agua y Saneamiento, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID) Patricia Hernández, Directora Ejecutiva, Asociación Nacional de Entidades de Agua y Saneamiento (ANEAS) Marcelo Rogora, Director de Integridad y Buenas Prácticas, Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos (AySA) Rolando Taquichiri Kussy, Jefe Unidad de Planificación (SeLA Oruro) Eduardo Bohórquez, Director Ejecutivo, Transparencia Mexicana Moderador: Jorge Alberto Arriaga Medina, Coordinador Ejecutivo, Red de Agua, UNAM y Centro Regional de Seguridad Hídrica bajo los auspicios de UNESCO Ver grabación "La promoción de la transparencia y la rendición de cuentas no debe percibirse como una amenaza, sino como una oportunidad para optimizar la gestión y mejorar los servicios."  -Marcello Basani, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID) _____ Desafíos y oportunidades para las empresas prestadoras de agua y saneamiento en América Latina Las empresas prestadoras de servicios de agua y saneamiento en América Latina operan en entornos complejos que presentan tanto retos como oportunidades para fortalecer la integridad y mejorar la prestación de los servicios. Fortalezas Compromiso con la integridad: Varias empresas cuentan con unidades especializadas en integridad, lo que demuestra una creciente voluntad institucional para combatir la corrupción. Cobertura relativamente alta: La región presenta mayores tasas de acceso a agua y saneamiento en comparación con Asia y África. Marco legal sólido: Existen medidas legislativas firmes que garantizan el acceso al agua y saneamiento como un derechos humanos. Sociedad civil activa: Organizaciones de la sociedad civil desempeñan un papel clave en la vigilancia y promoción de la transparencia en el sector. Retos persistentes Desigualdades sociales: La brecha en el acceso a servicios de agua y saneamiento sigue siendo un desafío, especialmente en comunidades rurales y zonas marginales. Inestabilidad institucional: La alta rotación de personal y los nombramientos políticos afectan la continuidad y eficiencia de las empresas prestadoras. Abuso de declaraciones de emergencia: Situaciones como sequías, inundaciones o crisis sanitarias (COVID-19) han sido utilizadas para evadir procesos de contratación transparente. Debilidad en el sistema judicial: La impunidad y la falta de independencia del poder judicial dificultan la sanción de actos de corrupción en el sector. Impacto del cambio climático: Eventos extremos como sequías prolongadas e inundaciones agravan la crisis hídrica y ponen a prueba la resiliencia del sistema. Riesgos para defensores ambientales: El aumento de las amenazas contra activistas y comunidades que defienden el agua y el medio ambiente pone en riesgo los esfuerzos por una gestión más justa y sostenible. _____ Hablemos de integridad Uno de los enfoques más destacados en esta charla fue la necesidad de entender la integridad no solo como un mecanismo de control y sanción, sino como una herramienta clave para fortalecer el sector del agua y saneamiento. "Las empresas prestadoras deben entender la integridad como una herramienta para mejorar, no como mecanismo de castigo. Si bien en algunos casos es necesario llegar a las sanciones, no se trata de castigar por castigar mismo, sino demostrar de que este no es el camino correcto." - Marcelo Rogora, Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos (AySA)   Más allá de castigar la corrupción, las empresas prestadoras deben fomentar una cultura de integridad a través de incentivos y herramientas que promuevan buenas prácticas. Esto implica, por ejemplo: Sensibilización y capacitación en integridad para todos los actores del sector. Uso de tecnologías digitales que faciliten la supervisión y mejorar la transparencia y publicación de datos de calidad. Espacios de participación ciudadana que fortalezcan la rendición de cuentas. Al adoptar este enfoque, la integridad se convierte en un pilar de mejora continua y de credibilidad, asegurando que los recursos se gestionen con eficiencia y en beneficio de la empresa y la sociedad. La transparencia y la rendición de cuentas son esenciales para la confianza pública Los ciudadanos dependen de que los servicios de agua y saneamiento sean administrados de manera justa y eficiente. La falta de transparencia de la información puede erosionar la credibilidad y confianza en las empresas prestadoras y dificultar la participación ciudadana en la supervisión de los servicios. Esto puede ocurrir con mayor intensidad en periodos de emergencia como sequias o inundaciones. Eduardo Bohórquez (Transparencia México): Sin acceso a la información pública, es difícil detectar y prevenir actos de corrupción que afectan la gestión de los recursos hídricos. Además, la rendición de cuentas no debe ser solo un ejercicio formal, sino una práctica efectiva que permita a la ciudadanía y a otros actores supervisar cómo se toman las decisiones y cómo se manejan los fondos. Los datos abiertos y los sistemas de monitoreo en tiempo real pueden ser aliados clave para una gestión más eficiente y transparente del agua. Marcello Basani (BID): En situaciones de emergencia, la transparencia y la rendición de cuentas suelen estar en riesgo. Las normas y los procedimientos habituales, como las prácticas de adquisiciones tienden a flexibilizarse para responder con mayor rapidez. Un ejemplo claro es la contratación directa que, si no se gestiona adecuadamente, puede abrir la puerta a riesgos de corrupción. Por eso, contar con datos transparentes y de calidad sobre lo que se hace es fundamental. Pero esto nos lleva a una pregunta clave: ¿Quién verifica la calidad de esos datos? ¿Es responsabilidad de la ciudadanía o del ente regulador? ¿Y qué sucede en aquellos contextos donde no existe un regulador independiente o eficaz? Estas preguntas no solo son pertinentes, sino que pueden aportar reflexiones valiosas al debate sobre la integridad financiera. La participación ciudadana fortalece la eficiencia de las empresas prestadoras La participación ciudadana en la toma de decisiones, la verificación de datos de calidad y en la supervisión de los servicios es clave para mejorar la integridad financiera en la gestión del agua. Los usuarios deben tener una mayor participación en decisiones relacionadas con las tarifas, presupuestos, planificación y supervisión. Patricia Hernández (ANEAS): Involucrar a la sociedad en la toma de decisiones no solo permite responder mejor a las necesidades reales de las comunidades, sino que también fomenta la confianza en las instituciones encargadas de la gestión del agua y saneamiento. La integridad en el financiamiento del agua garantiza la sostenibilidad del sector Para atraer inversiones y garantizar la sostenibilidad del sector, es fundamental que los fondos destinados al agua y saneamiento sean manejados con integridad y eficiencia. Para ello se necesitan datos de buena calidad, indicadores claros, una buena regulación y el apoyo del agente regulador.   Marcello Basani (BID):  Sin información confiable y actualizada, es difícil tomar decisiones estratégicas que realmente respondan a las necesidades de la población y a los desafíos del sector. La recolección, sistematización y verificación adecuada de datos permiten identificar riesgos de corrupción, mejorar la planificación de inversiones y evaluar el impacto de los proyectos . La transparencia en la gestión de la información no solo fortalece la confianza pública, sino que también atrae inversiones , ya que las instituciones financieras y donantes requieren garantías de que los recursos serán utilizados de manera eficiente.   Al adoptar este enfoque, la integridad se convierte en un pilar de mejora continua, asegurando que los recursos se gestionen con eficiencia y en beneficio de la sociedad. 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 _____ Buenas prácticas de integridad en la gestión del agua y saneamiento en América Latina   Marcello Basani (BID):  La integridad es un pilar fundamental en el Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID), por lo que la hemos integrado como un eje transversal en todos los proyectos de infraestructura.  En colaboración con la Oficina de Integridad Institucional, hemos observado que la inversión en infraestructura debe ir acompañada de políticas sólidas de integridad . Sin estos mecanismos, los riesgos de corrupción pueden socavar los beneficios de los proyectos de agua y saneamiento. Como medida de mitigación, realizamos un análisis de riesgo y activamos acciones de monitoreo y respuesta, asegurando así que los recursos sean utilizados de manera eficiente y transparente. Marcelo Rogora (AySA):  En Argentina, se ha puesto en marcha una iniciativa conjunta entre el sector público y al sector privado para potencializar la integridad dentro de las organizaciones. Se trata del Registro de Integridad y Transparencia para Empresas y Entidades (RITE) , creado por la oficina Anti-corrupción de Argentina. El RITE promueve la adopción de programas de integridad adecuados y accesibles al público en general, fomentando así una cultura organizacional basada en la ética y transparencia. En este contexto, AySA se ha adherido al RITE como parte de su compromiso para fortalecer su área de integridad y reforzar la confianza en la gestión del agua. Este modelo permite a las empresas prestadoras adherirse a estándares éticos y ser evaluadas en función de su compromiso con la transparencia, generando un impacto positivo tanto en su operación interna como en su relación con el público. Rolando Taquichiri Kussy (SeLA Oruro): En Bolivia, el Servicio Local de Acueductos y Alcantarillado (SELA Oruro) ha venido desarrollando estrategias para mejorar su integridad financiera y promover una gestión más transparente y eficiente. Entrelas acciones destacadas se encuentra la implementación de la caja de herramientas de integridad, la realización de auditorías periódicas y la promoción de la participación ciudadana en la toma de decisiones. Así mismo, SELA Oruro ha trabajado en la actualización, aprobación y socialización de su código de ética, con un enfoque particular en el personal operativo y administrativo. Además, la entidad ha invertido en la capacitación de sus funcionarios y en el fortalecimiento de los mecanismos de denuncia, asegurando que cualquier irregularidad pueda ser detectada y abordada de manera oportuna y eficaz. Un enfoque de integridad es importante para las empresas de agua y saneamiento, aunque esta requiere de tiempo, es un trabajo del día y día cuyos efectos se ven en el mediano y largo plazo. - Rolando Taquichiri Kussy, SeLA Oruro Medidas para fortalecer la integridad financiera en las empresas prestadoras de agua y saneamiento Las empresas prestadoras de agua y saneamiento juegan un papel fundamental en liderar los esfuerzos en pro de la integridad para reducir el impacto negativo de la corrupción. Esto requiere adoptar medidas para la integridad, como:   Transparencia en el uso de recursos : Publicar todo los que se hace e implementar procesos claros que permitan hacer seguimiento a la asignación de fondos. Esto incluye la adopción de contratación abierta y el desarrollo de normas de gobierno corporativo que prevengan conflictos de interés. Promover la rendición de cuentas: Explicar de manera clara y efectiva hacia dónde van los recursos. Mayor participación ciudadana:  Fomentar el diálogo con la sociedad civil e involucrar a los ciudadanos en la toma de decisiones sobre tarifas, presupuestos, planificación y supervisión de los servicios. Monitoreo efectivo de riesgos de integridad : Identificar y evaluar riesgos en el ciclo presupuestario, especialmente en situaciones de emergencia, donde las contrataciones directas pueden generar vulnerabilidades a la corrupción. Colaboración con organismos anticorrupción:  Trabajar en conjunto con oficinas anticorrupción y agencias reguladoras para fortalecer mecanismos de supervisión y garantizar el cumplimiento de normas de integridad.  Cultura de integridad dentro de las empresas:  Impulsar un liderazgo comprometido con la transparencia e implementar programas de capacitación en integridad en todos los niveles de la organización, incluyendo alta gerencia, sindicatos, proveedores y operadores.   Estas acciones no solo fortalecen la confianza pública en los servicios de agua y saneamiento, sino que también aseguran que los recursos sean utilizados de manera eficiente y en beneficio de toda la comunidad. Ver grabación

La Water Integrity Network (WIN)  y el Centro de Investigación en Teoría Urbana y Territorial URBES-LAB , en cooperación con la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (INCITU-PUCP)   desarrollaron el curso en línea “ Asentamientos Humanos en Lima: Corrupción, Integridad y Acceso al Agua y Saneamiento », con el apoyo de TU Berlín , DAAD  y SMUS .  El contenido de este blog es el resultado de discusiones, talleres y visitas de campo que se realizaron en forma virtual y presencial, en colaboración con académicos, profesionales del sector del agua y saneamiento y miembros de la sociedad civil entre septiembre 2023 y julio 2024.   Fase 1: Planeación y desarrollo del contenido del curso  --- Tiempo y espacio    El curso en línea fue desarrollado con base a la siguiente pregunta: ¿ Cómo afecta la corrupción y fallas integridad la provisión de los servicios de agua y saneamientos en asentamientos humanos y como estos problemas se manifiestan en el espacio urbano?     Para dar respuesta a esta pregunta, adoptamos una perspectiva histórica y multiescalar:   Perspectiva histórica:  Retroceder en el tiempo fue importante para comprender que la exclusión de los asentamientos humanos de los servicios de agua y saneamiento es un problema histórico con raíces en periodos de migración masiva, especulación de tierras y las luchas históricas por asegurar una oferta de vivienda digna.    Perspectiva multiescalar:   Examinar los problemas desde diferentes escalas (ciudad, el barrio y la vivienda) permitió identificar actos de corrupción y fallas de integridad, así como los beneficios de mejorar las prácticas de integridad y rendición de cuentas a estas escalas.   --- Diversidad de enfoques y métodos   Un aspecto fundamental del curso fue su desarrolló por un equipo disciplinario de geógrafos, abogados, sociólogos, arquitectos y diseñadores gráficos, los cuales representaban a diferentes sectores  (academia, ONG, empresa pública). Desde el inicio sabíamos que trabajar con personas de diferentes disciplinas y perspectivas sería un reto, pero el intercambio constante genero relaciones de confianza y creatividad. Además, fue crucial incluir al equipo de diseño desde el principio, ya que era la primera vez que participaban en un proyecto de esta naturaleza.    Los siguientes métodos  fueron utilizados en el desarrollo del curso:   Reuniones y webinars:  Se organizaron una serie de reuniones quincenales para ajustar los contenidos de los módulos y discutir como ilustrarlo, en colaboración con el equipo de diseño. También se organizó un webinar en septiembre 2023 con las compañías de agua y saneamiento de Buenos Aires, Lima y Medellín para analizar los retos que enfrentan las empresas de agua y saneamiento en América Latina en la prestación de servicios en asentamientos humanos y como la integridad puede mejorar la prestación del servicio.   Taller presencial:  En marzo 2024, se organizó un taller con académicos de la Facultad de Arquitectura de la Universidad Católica del Perú (PCUP) y miembros de la sociedad civil ( Lima Cómo Vamos  y Sanima ) para consolidar el material del curso y discutir los restos y las ventajas de los cursos virtuales como material pedagógico.   Visitas de campo:   Se realizaron dos visitas de campo a asentamientos informales en San Juan de Lurigancho y Pamplina, acompañados por la comunidad local y entidades involucradas, para conocer las realidades de los residentes y sus luchas para asegurar el acceso al agua y saneamiento. arriba - taller para el desarrollo del curso; abajo izquierda - visita a Pamplona con la ONG Sanima; abajo derecha - visita a San Juan de Lurigancho Fase 2: Diseño del curso El diseñado del curso tiene una gran influencia en el aprendizaje de los participantes. Desde el principio, para el equipo fue muy claro que queríamos ir más allá de los formatos tradicionales de enseñanza como las videoconferencias y evaluaciones automatizadas. Optamos por una estructura sencilla, con contenidos breves y objetivos claros, y nos apoyamos fuertemente en un diseño visual que facilitara la comprensión de la narrativa del curso. Fue fundamental exponer al participante a las realidades de Lima, su historia, geografía, clima, condición política y cultural. Además, se priorizó un aprendizaje experimental mediante la interacción de las realidades de los residentes de asentamientos humanos a través de entrevistas que fueron luego convertidas en formato video. Para el diseño, trabajamos con equipo que no solo tuviera habilidades necesarias, sino también empatía con el tema. Contamos con un profesional en geografía y una experta en comunicación visual, lo cual enriqueció el proceso. Estructura del curso El curso fue estructurado en los siguientes cuatro módulos. Cada módulo contiene una serie de tres videos cortos (de 3 a 4 minutos). Estos videos incluyen fotografías históricas, cartografía de la ciudad, iconografías, noticias, y entrevistas que sumergen a los participantes en las realidades cotidianas de los residentes de asentamientos humanos. Además, se incluyeron ejercicios interactivos, quizzes, foros, definiciones clave y lecturas complementarias. Fase 3: Implementación del curso Antes de iniciar el desarrollo y diseño del curso, fue esencial familiarizarnos con la plataforma donde se ofrecerían los contenidos: Cap-Net . Esta plataforma especializada en el sector de agua y saneamiento, ofrece cursos sin ningún costo para el participante. Para fomentar un aprendizaje activo, utilizamos el programa H5P , que nos permitió diseñar contenido interactivo como videos, juegos de memoria, tarjetas (flashcards), y ejercicios de arrastrar y soltar. Este programa también facilitó una mejor interacción en los foros de discusión a través de formulación de preguntas. Flashcards para discutir la pregunta ¿Quién puede estar involucrado en actos de corrupción? Este curso se ofrece de forma gratuita por un periodo específico (aproximadamente 9 meses al año). Ademes, utilizamos plataformas como YouTube para difundir los videos con subtítulos en inglés, lo que amplía el alcance del curso a audiencia más amplia.  Reflexiones Es clave diseñar una estructura del curso con objetivos de aprendizaje claros y definidos. Un cronograma de actividades y una asignación clara de responsabilidades son esenciales para el desarrollo eficiente. Es fundamental permitir que a todas las partes interesadas expresen sus opiniones, ya que varias instituciones están involucradas en el desarrollo de contenido. Involucrar al equipo de diseño al inicio del proyecto es esencial, no solo al final para “decorar” el curso. Aunque lleva mucho tiempo, esta experiencia es sumamente gratificante. ¿Quieres saber más? Si deseas inscribirte en el curso, puedes acceder directamente al enlace de inscripción   aquí .

Identifying red flags in planning processes for water infrastructure, from undue influence, inadequate consultation or feasibility studies, to misuse of budgets. WHEN TO USE IT To improve planning processes by identifying red flags in early-stage decision-making and planning processes for water and sanitation infrastructure. To monitor infrastructure planning and hold authorities accountable. HOW IT WORKS FIIP is a data framework, with indicators and data standards for integrity. It covers early phases of infrastructure projects (Strategic planning, Screening and appraisal including feasibility studies, and Budgeting and approval). It evaluates 7 risk areas: from undue influence in decision-making, to misaligned priorites, or manipulated budget processes. HOW IT WAS DEVELOPED FIIP was developed with CoST – Infrastructure Transparency Initiative with support from the Inter-American Development Bank. It has been piloted in Latin America where it helped highlight possible areas of improvement for procuring entities related to: feasibility studies, use and correlation of data on service levels to aid decision-making, and compliance with procedures. Find out more about results and lessons learned from the pilot: HOW TO USE IT We are currently piloting the framework further and open to collaboration with procuring and implementing agencies. Download Methodology Guide:

An examination of water governance and regulatory challenges in England and Wales related to financialisation in the water and sanitation sectors. Most water companies in England and Wales have transitioned to ownership by private equity funds, sovereign wealth funds, and pension funds. This shift has allowed for complex financial practices and financial extraction. Regulation has been relatively slow to respond. This working paper takes the integrity perspective and looks at transparency, power dynamics, and capacity issues driving the situation. The England and Wales water sector faces an intractable set of problems. Huge investment is needed at a time when interest rates and inflation have increased and some firms are under financial pressure of high debts. People are struggling to pay bills with an ongoing cost-of-living crisis, and public trust in the water companies is at an all-time low. The situation in the water sector in England and Wales is described by economist Dieter Helm as one of “spectacular regulatory failure”, none of which was inevitable (Plimmer, 2023c). It is unclear how this can all be reconciled within the current structure. Share your feedback here. WORKING PAPER By: Kate Bayliss (SOAS) and Mary Galvin (Water Integrity Network) Published: September 2024 DOWNLOAD (pdf)

Just as the world is aligning around a core set of ideas about how to tackle water and sanitation, the Gates foundation has decided to bet the farm on technology. Not only is this pivot wrongheaded, the way it has been implemented is less than respectful of its partners. Over the past decade there has been an emerging consensus that the solution to the water and sanitation crisis lies in the spheres of politics, governance, economics and planning and not solely (or even mostly) technology. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) has been a major contributor to this movement, notably through its support of City-Wide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS). Why then, just as the movement the foundation is part of is gaining traction, has it turned back on itself – doubling down on its commitment to technology and signalling its intention to abandon its more systems-focused work? --- A shift in strategy that ignores best practice and leaves the poor behind Back in February we started to hear rumours about a dismaying message being circulated to the BMGF sanitation grantees. Announcing the departure of longstanding head of the programme, Brian Arbogast, it also signalled a strategic pivot - refocusing the foundation's sanitation portfolio on bringing to market technologies developed in their “reinventing the toilet” work. Nothing particularly wrong with that. But. Since dipping their toes in the water and sanitation world back in 2007, the foundation has come to wield an outsize influence on the sector. In this way it has brought welcome investment to a much-neglected area.Thanks to the Gates Foundation’s efforts, "non-sewered" sanitation is now seen as a viable, environmentally friendly option in many parts of the world, rather than just a temporary step towards sewer systems. The reinvented toilets that BMGF grantees have been working on are an important part of this shift. That said, the pivot has a deeply negative downside in that, even as they double down on technical innovation, the foundation is walking away from work related to sanitation systems , work they played a major role in championing – particularly City-Wide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS). The timing of this decision is also surprising. The world is just coming to accept that, while technology has an important role to play in water and sanitation, water and sanitation are not fundamentally technological sectors. Just then, the foundation decides to focus on technology and bringing technology to market. A market that is, at best, embryonic (indeed an important part of CWIS is market development!). The world is littered with infrastructure that fails to work within a matter of years. This is largely due to institutional and governance failures, as well as lack of participation and inadequate capacity building. Technology alone has been tried before. Now, the strategic move will have severe negative consequences for the organisations that have relied on Gates funding to drive crucial systems work forward. Most worryingly, it will have grave consequences for the recipients of the work, particularly the poorest and most marginalised communities. --- Undermining past progress and future governance work The message announcing the changes made the point that “ innovative technology development and delivery is what originally drew the foundation to the sector ”. This is partly, but only partly true. A decade ago, for the first “landscaping” studies of the foundation, it was clear that technology development was not the only (or main) challenge facing the sector. Indeed, some of the foundation’s biggest early bets (including their generous funding of IRC) were based on “systems” work. What is more, even since the "reinventing the toilet" work started, the foundation has steadily done more and more work on the system side of things (including CWIS), precisely because the demands and markets for the reinvented toilets did not, of themselves, exist. It would appear that part of the thinking is that the foundation can focus on the technical work and others will fund the "softer" stuff. This sends a disturbing message – that one of the biggest and most powerful funders of the sector sees governance and the tough, system, capacity strengthening, and institutional work as being of secondary importance. What does this mean for sanitation policy down the line? --- Abrupt rupture with partners There’s a second part of the decision that is also disturbing: the way it is being implemented. Despite the message announcing the change committing to a “respectful and thoughtful transition” with existing grantees, word on the street is that this is not quite how things are going in practice. Nor did the decision itself come out of dialogue with partners - more like a bolt from the blue. Organisations, like ours, that rely on philanthropy to do our work have no right to expect unending flows. Our donors have a right to change their strategies. Of course. That said, there is a growing body of accepted good practice as to how philanthropies can do this. One that acknowledges the power of their money over their recipients and that puts genuine value behind concepts like dialogue and partnership. Part of that includes communicating strategy shifts clearly and well in advance. This was, sadly, not the case this time. We believe a major organisation like the Gates Foundation can, and should, do better. In the end, it’s the foundation’s money and how they spend it is unarguably their business! Even if how they plan to spend it will undermine the progress they, and the sector, have been making over the last decade. The impact for the 1.5 billion people who still do not have access to a decent sanitation service is dramatic. By Barbara Schreiner, Executive Director, Water Integrity Network Patrick Moriarty, CEO, IRC With: Cántaro Azul DORP End Water Poverty Redes del Agua Latinoamérica Zobair Hasan, Chief REM, DORP Herbert Kashililah, Chair, Shahidi Wa Maji Timothy Kpeh, United Youth, Liberia Sareen Malik, Executive Secretary, ANEW Jane Nabunnya, Country Director, IRC Uganda Dr. Fermín Reygadas Robles Gil, Director General, Cántaro Azul Nathalie Seguin, Global Coordinator, End Water Poverty Photo: Everett Bartels  on Unsplash   Disclaimer: At WIN we value honest and open discussion. We are a multi-stakeholder network and our site brings together perspectives from across the board. Not all views expressed here reflect official policies .

An integrity talk between water and sanitation regulators from Eastern and Southern Africa and Latin America Regulation plays a critical role in ensuring that water and sanitation services are delivered to all in a manner that is equitable, efficient, inclusive, and sustainable. Water and sanitation sector regulators hold service providers accountable and coordinate interactions between policymakers, service providers, and users. They also face a broad range of integrity and corruption-related risks, both internal to their organisations or in the entities that they regulate. A response requires regulation for integrity and regulation with integrity. Regulating for integrity means establishing regulations that ensure honesty, transparency, accountability, participation, and ethical behaviour in regulated entities . Regulating with integrity focuses on how regulatory bodies themselves operate , ensuring they embody the same standards of transparency and accountability that they promote. This is a summary of an Integrity Talk, organised with the Eastern and Southern Africa Water and Sanitation Regulators Association (ESAWAS) on October 23, 2024, looking at these emerging aspects of regulation with a focus on Eastern and Southern Africa and Latin America. With special guests: Robert Gakubia, Supervisory Board Member of WIN and former CEO of WASREB (Kenya) Yvonne Magawa, Executive Secretary of ESAWAS Chola Mbilima, Senior Financial and Commercial Inspector of NWASCO (Zambia) Diego Polanía, former Executive Director CRA (Colombia) José Miguel Kobashikawa Maekawa (Director of Audit Authority, SUNASS (Peru) Moderated by Kelly Acuña, Water Integrity Network (WIN). --- Key takeaways for water and sanitation sector regulators Water and sanitation sector regulators set the tone for integrity : The commitment of regulatory bodies to accountability, transparency and ethical practices directly impacts sector-wide integrity. When regulators lead by example, service providers are more likely to align with integrity standards, fostering trust across the sector. Clear accountability frameworks build public trust : Effective regulatory frameworks require clear responsibilities and well-defined accountability mechanisms: from clear and monitored performance objectives, to enforced measures addressing deviations or ensuring compliance. User engagement ensures equitable service delivery : Involving users in decision-making processes contributes to fairer, more effective services in response to genuine needs. --- A culture of integrity for the sector, for trust and sustainability Robert Gakubia: Accountability frameworks are essential to aligning the interests of service providers with the public good. For example, through clear performance objectives and rigorous monitoring, water and sanitation sector regulators can ensure that the resources dedicated to water and sanitation are used effectively and equitably, rather than lost to inefficiencies or misuse. Beyond these measures, integrity requires proactive engagement and collaboration with both service providers and the communities they serve. By actively engaging communities in the regulatory process, regulators can ensure that the needs of the public are directly represented and addressed. This engagement is key to maintaining accountability, as it encourages providers to act in ways that genuinely reflect community interests and discourages behaviour that could undermine public confidence in the system. Yvonne Magawa : Regulating for integrity in water and sanitation means that we are not just telling providers what to do but ensuring they are equipped and motivated to do so in ways that build public trust. This approach also requires a commitment to engaging users in the regulatory process, providing them with channels for participation and feedback. Ultimately, regulating for integrity fosters a culture of honesty and responsibility that protects essential services from corruption and mismanagement, ensuring they reach those most in need. Regulating with integrity, on the other hand, focuses on how regulatory bodies operate within their own organizations, ensuring they embody the same standards of transparency and accountability they promote. By fostering integrity, we create an environment where water and sanitation service providers and communities alike can rely on the regulatory system. This trust hinges on regulators having the independence and authority to implement and enforce integrity measures that safeguard against corruption and ensure service quality. For instance, by enforcing policies that require clear documentation, transparent data management, and public reporting, regulators can help build an ecosystem where transparency is the norm. “Regulators serve as the foundation upon which trust in the sector is built” -Yvonne Magawa (ESAWAS) José Kobashikawa: Water and sanitation sector egulators must prioritise transparency in our own decision-making processes and ensure accountability to stakeholders, including service providers, policymakers, and the public. It’s all about creating a regulatory culture where integrity is central, not just in policy but in every aspect of operations. This includes clear accountability for regulatory decisions and robust safeguards against conflicts of interest, which not only enhances trust but also ensures that decisions are made in the best interest of the public. Diego Polanía: Regulators must set an example by upholding the highest standards internally, which in turn reinforces their credibility when enforcing integrity in the water and sanitation sectors. “If we, as regulators, do not model integrity, it undermines our authority and the very standards we seek to uphold” –Diego Polanía (CRA) Chola Mbilima: It is important that regulatory frameworks not only address present needs but are adaptable to future challenges. As water and sanitation demands grow, so too must the systems that ensure their equitable and ethical delivery. Regulators have a responsibility to stay ahead of sector changes, developing flexible integrity frameworks that continue to uphold ethical standards even as the sector evolves. --- Examples of regulation for integrity – Kenya, Peru, and Colombia Robert Gakubia: In Kenya, the Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB) has established performance-monitoring systems to hold service providers accountable. Clear performance indicators and public reporting requirements have improved transparency, enabling both the public and regulatory bodies to monitor service quality and resource use. These frameworks align provider incentives with public interests, showing that integrity measures are about compliance and creating value for communities. José Kobashikawa: In Peru, the national sanitation regulator (SUNASS), addresses water affordability and accessibility through community engagement and strict anti-corruption measures. Involving local communities in decision-making has been key to SUNASS’s success. By integrating public consultations and transparency in data sharing, SUNASS has been able to tailor services more effectively to meet community needs while reinforcing trust. “We actively listen to communities, which helps in identifying and addressing integrity risks early on. Meaningful engagement fosters public ownership and reduces risks of corruption” –José Kobashikawa Diego Polanía: The Water and Basic Sanitation Regulatory Commission of Colombia (CRA) has incorporated financial and operational audits. These audits are designed to detect mismanagement and to build a framework for continuous improvement. However, audits do more than ensuring compliance with the law, they also identify areas for improvement to strengthen management. --- Challenges for integrity-focused regulation, and how to address them Chola Mbilima: One of our major challenges is limited resources of regulatory bodies. Many regulators operate with constrained budgets and staff shortages, making it difficult to maintain rigorous oversight. This can hinder implementation and enforcement of integrity measures, especially in regions where the demand for water and sanitation services is rapidly increasing. Partnerships with local and international organisations can alleviate some of these constraints with technical support and expertise, but challenges remain. Yvonne Magawa: Another significant challenge is the resistance to change among service providers and, in some cases, within regulatory organisations themselves. Integrating accountability and transparency measures requires a shift in practices and culture, which can be met with reluctance or even opposition. Nevertheless, there is an opportunity here for education and capacity-building, for example, by providing training sessions on integrity and ethics. This can foster a sense of ownership and responsibility among service providers. Building these skills helps create a culture where all parties are invested in upholding integrity. Robert Gakubia: It is difficult to combat corruption, particularly in regions with a history of governance issues. While this challenge can seem overwhelming, it also presents a critical opportunity for transparency initiatives and community engagement. By establishing mechanisms that allow the public to report issues and access information, regulators can create an environment where corruption is more easily detected and addressed. The public is an invaluable ally in maintaining accountability and accessible reporting channels empower communities to take an active role in ensuring integrity. Diego Polanía: There are many regulators that have implemented adequate internal processes that strength transparency and prevent malpractices. The challenge is that these processes are not visible to the public. Regulators can do more to make information easily accessible to the public by creating platforms and spaces to showcase what regulators are doing and generate trust (e.g, updated websites, periodical reports, public consultations, etc.).

Una conversación entre reguladores de agua y saneamiento de África Oriental y Meridional y América Latina La regulación desempeña un papel crucial para garantizar que los servicios de agua y saneamiento se brinden a todos de manera equitativa, eficiente, inclusiva y sostenible. Los reguladores son responsables de exigir cuentas a los proveedores de servicios y de coordinar las interacciones entre los responsables políticos, los proveedores de servicios y los usuarios. Sin embargo, los reguladores también enfrentan una amplia gama de riesgos relacionados con la integridad y la corrupción, tanto internos en sus organizaciones como en las entidades que regulan. Una respuesta eficaz requiere regular para la integridad y regular con integridad. Regular para la integridad significa establecer normas que garanticen honestidad, transparencia, rendición de cuentas, participación y comportamiento ético en las entidades reguladas. Regular con integridad se centra en el funcionamiento interno de los organismos reguladores , asegurando que ellos mismos encarnen los mismos estándares de transparencia y rendición de cuentas que promueven. Este es un resumen de una Charla de Integridad, organizada en colaboración con la Asociación de Reguladores de Agua y Saneamiento de África Oriental y Meridional (ESAWAS , por sus siglas en inglés), el 23 de octubre de 2024, en la que se abordaron estos aspectos emergentes de la regulación con un enfoque en África Oriental y Meridional y América Latina. Invitados especiales: Robert Gakubia, miembro de la Junta Supervisora de WIN y exdirector ejecutivo de WASREB (Kenya), Yvonne Magawa, Secretaria Ejecutiva de ESAWAS, Chola Mbilima, Inspectora Financiera y Comercial de NWASCO (Zambia), Diego Polanía, exdirector ejecutivo de CRA (Colombia), y José Miguel Kobashikawa Maekawa, Director de la Autoridad de Auditoría de SUNASS (Peru). Moderadora: Kelly Acuña, Red de Integridad del Agua (WIN). --- Conclusiones clave Los reguladores marcan la pauta para la integridad: El compromiso de los organismos reguladores con la rendición de cuentas, la transparencia y las prácticas éticas tiene un impacto directo en la integridad de todo el sector. Cuando los reguladores lideran con el ejemplo, los proveedores de servicios tienden a alinearse con los estándares de integridad, fomentando la confianza en todo el sector. Los marcos claros de rendición de cuentas generan confianza pública : Los marcos regulatorios efectivos requieren responsabilidades claras y mecanismos bien definidos de rendición de cuentas, que incluyan objetivos de desempeño monitoreados y medidas aplicadas para abordar desviaciones o garantizar el cumplimiento. La participación de los usuarios asegura una prestación de servicios equitativa: Involucrar a los usuarios en los procesos de toma de decisiones contribuye a entregar un servicio más justo y efectivo, respondiendo a necesidades reales. --- Una cultura de integridad en el sector para la confianza y la sostenibilidad Robert Gakubia: Contar con un marco de rendición de cuentas es esencial para alinear los intereses de los proveedores de servicios con el bien público. Por ejemplo, mediante objetivos claros de desempeño y un monitoreo riguroso, los reguladores pueden garantizar que los recursos destinados al agua y al saneamiento se utilicen de manera efectiva y equitativa, evitando ineficiencias o mal uso. Más allá de estas medidas, la integridad requiere un compromiso proactivo con los proveedores de servicios y las comunidades a las que sirven. Al involucrar activamente a las comunidades en el proceso regulatorio, los reguladores aseguran que las necesidades de los usuarios sean directamente representadas y atendidas, fomentando la confianza pública y la rendición de cuentas. Yvonne Magawa : Regular para la integridad significa no solo decir a los proveedores qué hacer, sino también asegurarse de que estén capacitados y motivados para actuar de manera que se genere confianza. Esto requiere un compromiso con la participación de los usuarios, proporcionando canales para su involucramiento y retroalimentación. Regular con integridad, por otro lado, se enfoca en el funcionamiento interno de los organismos reguladores, asegurando que cumplan los mismos estándares de transparencia y responsabilidad que promueven. “Los reguladores son la base sobre la cual se construye la confianza en el sector” -Yvonne Magawa (ESAWAS) José Kobashikawa: La transparencia en los procesos de toma de decisiones y la rendición de cuentas hacia las partes interesadas son esenciales. Crear una cultura regulatoria centrada en la integridad no solo mejora la confianza, sino que asegura que las decisiones se tomen en base al interés público. Diego Polanía: Los reguladores deben dar el ejemplo manteniendo internamente los más altos estándares, reforzando así su credibilidad al promover la integridad en los sectores de agua y saneamiento. “Si nosotros, como reguladores, no damos el ejemplo con respecto a la integridad, socavamos nuestra autoridad y los estándares que buscamos defender” –Diego Polanía (CRA) Chola Mbilima: Es importante que los marcos regulatorios no solo respondan a las necesidades actuales, sino que sean adaptables a los desafíos futuros. A medida que aumentan las demandas de agua y saneamiento, también deben crecer los sistemas que aseguren una prestación equitativa y ética de estos servicios. Los reguladores tienen la responsabilidad de anticiparse a los cambios en el sector, desarrollando marcos de integridad flexibles que sigan manteniendo los estándares éticos incluso cuando el sector evoluciona. --- Ejemplos de regulación para la integridad – Kenia, Perú y Colombia Robert Gakubia: En Kenia, el Consejo Regulador de los Servicios de Agua (WASREB) ha establecido sistemas de monitoreo de desempeño para responsabilizar a los proveedores de servicios. Indicadores claros de desempeño y requisitos de informes públicos han mejorado la transparencia, permitiendo tanto al público como a los organismos reguladores supervisar la calidad del servicio y el uso de los recursos. Estos marcos alinean los incentivos de los proveedores con los intereses públicos, demostrando que las medidas de integridad no solo tratan de cumplimiento, sino también de generar valor para las comunidades. José Kobashikawa: En Perú, el regulador nacional de saneamiento (SUNASS) aborda la asequibilidad y accesibilidad del agua mediante la participación comunitaria y estrictas medidas anticorrupción. Involucrar a las comunidades locales en la toma de decisiones ha sido clave para el éxito de SUNASS. Al integrar consultas públicas y promover la transparencia en el intercambio de datos, SUNASS ha podido adaptar los servicios de manera más efectiva para satisfacer las necesidades de las personas mientras refuerza la confianza. “Escuchamos activamente a las comunidades, lo que ayuda a identificar y abordar los riesgos de integridad desde una etapa temprana. Una participación significativa fomenta la apropiación pública y reduce los riesgos de corrupción” –José Kobashikawa Diego Polanía: La Comisión de Regulación de Agua Potable y Saneamiento Básico de Colombia (CRA) ha incorporado auditorías financieras y operativas. Estas auditorías están diseñadas para detectar malos manejos y construir un marco para la mejora continua. Sin embargo, las auditorías no solo garantizan el cumplimiento de la ley, sino que también identifican áreas de mejora para fortalecer la gestión. --- Desafíos para una regulación centrada en la integridad y cómo abordarlos Chola Mbilima: Uno de nuestros principales desafíos son los recursos limitados de los organismos reguladores. Muchos reguladores operan con presupuestos ajustados y escasez de personal, lo que dificulta mantener una supervisión rigurosa. Esto puede obstaculizar la implementación y aplicación de medidas de integridad, especialmente en regiones donde la demanda de servicios de agua y saneamiento está aumentando rápidamente. Las asociaciones con organizaciones locales e internacionales pueden aliviar algunas de estas limitaciones mediante apoyo técnico y experiencia, pero los desafíos persisten. Yvonne Magawa: Otro desafío importante es la resistencia al cambio entre los proveedores de servicios y, en algunos casos, dentro de las propias organizaciones reguladoras. Integrar medidas de rendición de cuentas y transparencia requiere un cambio en las prácticas y la cultura, lo cual puede enfrentarse con reticencia o incluso oposición. Sin embargo, aquí existe una oportunidad para la educación y la capacitación, por ejemplo, ofreciendo sesiones de formación sobre integridad y ética. Esto puede fomentar un sentido de apropiación y responsabilidad entre los proveedores de servicios. Desarrollar estas habilidades ayuda a crear una cultura en la que todas las partes estén comprometidas con mantener la integridad. Robert Gakubia: Es difícil combatir la corrupción, particularmente en regiones con un historial de problemas de gobernanza. Aunque este desafío puede parecer abrumador, también presenta una oportunidad crítica para iniciativas de transparencia y participación comunitaria. Estableciendo mecanismos que permitan a los usuarios informar problemas y acceder a información, los reguladores pueden crear un entorno donde la corrupción sea más fácilmente detectada y abordada. Los usuarios son un aliado invaluable en el mantenimiento de la rendición de cuentas, y los canales accesibles de denuncia empoderan a las personas para tomar un papel activo en asegurar la integridad. Diego Polanía: Muchos reguladores han implementado procesos internos adecuados que fortalecen la transparencia y previenen malas prácticas. El desafío es que estos procesos no son visibles para la gente. Los reguladores pueden hacer más para que la información sea fácilmente accesible, creando plataformas y espacios que muestren lo que están haciendo y generen confianza (por ejemplo, sitios web actualizados, informes periódicos, consultas públicas, etc.).

Water crisis is not just a result of lack of water Photo - VictorHugoGaribay - IStock Photos A long-read by Kelly Acuña and Rebecca Sands, Water Integrity Network - Programme Leads. Greater Mexico City, home to nearly 23 million people, is in the throes of a severe water crisis. 84% of the country’s territory is currently grappling with some degree of drought, with 100% of Mexico City experiencing severe drought as of May 15, 2024 . The prolonged drought and unprecedented temperatures are prompting fears of an impending "Day Zero" scenario. The impact of climate change on water and sanitation service delivery is tremendous and cannot be underestimated. However, a lack of water is not solely to blame for the water crisis in Mexico City . With claims of severe mismanagement and warnings by residents and officials alike that have gone neglected for the better part of a decade, we must examine the degree to which weak integrity is contributing to the dire situation for many. Mismanagement and weak controls: exacerbating the strain on already limited resources Mexico City's historical abundance of rainfall once provided ample water for its residents, but urbanization has transformed its landscape into concrete and steel. Unmanageable growth and the depletion of green areas, needed for replenishing aquifers, is aggravating water scarcity. One important reason for this is the expansion of “ carteles inmobiliarios ”, or real estate cartels, many of whom obtain construction permits from the city government indiscriminately or illegally, leaving behind social and environmental damage. Water provision in Mexico City has necessitated complex and costly engineering solutions. The city now relies heavily on aquifers hundreds of meters underground or water sourced from over 100 kilometers away via the Cutzamala reservoir system . Excessive groundwater extraction is causing the city to sink and Mexico City's approach has become unsustainable, inefficient, and financially burdensome. The issues are compounded by unregulated extraction practices . Even where entities have the permits to drill new wells, there is little to no abstraction control, which often results in water users exceeding the extraction limits. Moreover, mismanagement of water resources and the inadequate maintenance of water infrastructure has led to very high water losses (40%), attributable in part to both deteriorating pipes and illegal connections . Corruption has an intricate relationship with non-revenue water , as it hampers oversight, weakens institutional capacity to address the issue, contributes to poor quality infrastructure, and diverts funds needed for essential maintenance, upgrades and monitoring. Inequality of access, water theft and misappropriation When so many residents of the city already face significant restrictions and water poverty , a 40% loss of water is maddening. The impacts of water stress in Mexico City are highly unequal and particularly severe in low-income, peri-urban neighbourhoods. While wealthier areas of the city seem largely unaffected, water cuts have grown more extreme for the city’s underserved or areas with high level of social marginalization. In some communities, it is not uncommon for residents to go without running water for months –a regular occurrence even before the current crisis began. On top of this, due to poor access or no piped infrastructure at all, residents living in low-income areas must often resort to different means to secure just enough water to get by: a community faucet, a well, the purchasing of bottled water, or water truck delivery. Water quality is often suboptimal, the daily search -often assigned to women or female heads-of households- is time consuming and exhausting, and the costs are high. Water truck delivery is up to 14 times more expensive than regular water service from the public network. “Poor water management in the city has increased burdens on women who are heads of households, thus reducing their financial and time resources to access equal job, educational, and social opportunities. Additionally, the unreliability of water services has disproportionately affected historically marginalized communities, turning the water crisis into a social issue.” -Tamara Luengo, Aqueducto Water theft is also a major issue There are thieves that tap pipelines and illegally sell back water to vulnerable water users for an inflated cost. Stealing water to sell illegally, or ‘huachicoleo’, is increasingly profitable  as the city’s delivery system becomes more unreliable. The current concession system appears to give preferential treatment to private companies who use billions of litres of water per year -often exceeding what is allowed with impunity. There is often inaccurate data on water use and payment and continued commercialization of water sourced from non-complying water permits. All this, while wealthy Mexicans allegedly continue to fill artificial lakes for aesthetic purposes and high-end tourist resorts use the resource at alarming rates . And it is not just Mexico City’s residents who are suffering. Communities outside of the city who once had plentiful lakes to fish in and source their daily water have seen these disappear. Today, on the shores of their dry lakebeds, wells are being installed to extract groundwater and pump it all the way to the capital . Lack of transparency Another major issue highlighted by residents and experts alike is the lack of transparency about the real situation of the Cutzamala system. In early 2024, the National Institute of Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (INAI) requested the National Water Commission (CONAGUA) to report on the hydraulic infrastructure that currently connects the country's dams with towns, cities, municipalities, states or any other destination. CONAGUA allegedly did not forward the request for information to all of its competent administrative units and there is uncertainty whether CONAGUA provided all the information available. INAI determined that CONAGUA did not comply with the search procedure established by the Federal Law of Transparency and Access to Public Information and called into question CONAGUA’s ability to monitor the exploitation of water resources across the country. Given that CONAGUA itself has often referred to the complexities and deficiencies of water resources across the country, INAI has reaffirmed that access to this information is all the more important in order to understand possible lines of action in the event of shortages . “ The information that is generated around the issue of water is of utmost relevance to decision-making and also to the generation of public policies to guarantee the human right that every person has to access information related to the provision and sanitation of water for personal and domestic consumption, which must be sufficient, healthy, acceptable and affordable ,” warned the INAI through commissioner Josefina Román Vergara (translated from Spanish). There is also lack of transparency on water quality throughout the city, as exemplified by the recent case of water contamination in the district of Benito Juárez. In early April, more than 400 people complained about the quality of their water . After testing water samples, the Mexico City water supplier (SACMEX) initially determined that the water was of good quality. However, they subsequently advised residents of the area not to drink or bathe with it. No information was provided on the source of possible contamination nor potential health risks. Further, on April 29, SACMEX made the decision to keep the laboratory results confidential for the next three years so that they are not “erroneously interpreted”. This appears to be a clear violation of the human right to access information, recognised in the constitution itself. Politicization in the face of low accountability The city's water crisis has arrived alongside a crucial moment: the Mexican general election is slated for June 2, 2024. For voters, the crisis cannot be ignored. In February, for the first time, water scarcity surpassed security as the main concern of Mexico City's residents, with the percentage of voters flagging the issue more than tripling from last May, according to the research firm Aragon . An activist protests Mexico's water legislation outside the National Water Commission offices in Mexico City on World Water Day, March 23, 2023. Her sign reads: "It's not drought, it's plunder. No to the privatization of water." Cody Copeland for Courthouse News For Raúl Rodríguez Márquez, president of the Water Advisory Council (a CSO dedicated to convening different stakeholders around water challenges in Mexico), the most serious issue is that the problem is not being adequately recognized. “ They say that to solve a problem the first thing you have to do is recognize it, and we believe that the authorities still do not see this as a serious problem ,” he explained to reporters at CNN . The lack of recognition of the problem and concerns of residents, by relevant authorities and decision-makers, is weakening accountability. In this setting, the crisis is being politicized by incumbents and challengers alike. Despite CONAGUA appearing unable to provide documentation on the country’s water infrastructure and dam connections to inform possible plans of action, it assured BBC Mundo that a potential “Day Zero” date of June 26 is a misinterpretation of different scenarios. In recent months, CONAGUA has since declined multiple interview requests and will not answer specific questions on the prospect of such a scenario. Current officeholders are also downplaying the issue. In a press conference on February 14 , Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said that work was underway to address the water problems. The specifics of such work were not clarified. Meanwhile, Mexico City’s mayor, Martí Batres Guadarrama, said in a recent press conference that reports of day zero were “fake news” , spread by political opponents. Conversely, the opposition is seizing on the crisis to stoke voters’ fears about water security. In early 2024, opposition presidential candidate Xóchitl Gálvez stated in multiple interviews that even in April there could be limited availability to pump water to the city . This prediction has not materialized. Further muddying the waters, José Luis Luege, the former head of CONAGUA, is a part of Gálvez’s campaign team. Lastly, ostracization of the media is obstructing transparency and public scrutiny. On April 11, President López Obrador confronted Telemundo journalist  Vanessa Hauc over water shortages in Mexico. Hauc stated that data from CONAGUA warns that 3 out of every 10 Mexican households do not have access to water, and cited specific information about the state of Chiapas, where vulnerable populations do not have access to water. As a response, President López Obrador accused the media of not being objective or professional. In the face of a potentially grave situation, the absence of accountability for the historic and continued dysfunction of the system, as well as a lack of critical information on the country’s water resources and infrastructure, have allowed politicians to manipulate the narrative. As the election approaches, the politicization of the water crisis continues, leaving residents to grapple with an uncertain future. One-sided solutions? The solutions to the crisis currently being proposed are centred on building mega infrastructure to bring water from areas outside Mexico City. Some of these areas such as Tabasco or Chiapas (suggested by president Obrador), are almost 1,000 miles away. On top of taking water from these communities, such a solution is costly, energy-intensive, and does nothing to solve the problem of the water being wasted once it arrives in the city, nor the issues related to decision-making around allocation . On its website, CONAGUA has announced a three-year project aimed at enhancing water infrastructure to better manage the stress related to reductions from the Cutzamala system. The project includes the installation of new wells and the commissioning of water treatment plants.  Physical improvements to the system are certainly necessary. However, approaches that rely almost exclusively on technological solutions continue to ignore the ways in which poor governance and corruption are contributing to the problem and hampering the development of adequate and effective infrastructure in the first place. Moreover, experts indicate that even if the city had the necessary funds –which it does not– the extensive construction needed for a swift infrastructure overhaul is unfeasible in a city with such a large population and so many daily commuters. In the Mexican press and in the run-up to June’s election, there are debates on whether to involve the private sector more strongly in finding solutions. Opposition figure Santiago Taboada, for example, has proposed public-private models, citing the lack of enough public money to fix the crisis. Such a solution also needs to be examined in light of the specific and underlying integrity risks that can jeopardise its effectiveness and affect service to those most in need . Integirty risks related to PPPs in water and sanitation can include conflicts of interest, flexibility built into long-term contracts that may create space for low accountability, a higher probability of bribery and collusion due to the often very high value of contracts , and challenges for monitoring and regulation brought on by limited transparency in complex financial structures. PPPs are also not immune to questionable electoral campaign dynamics, where companies may work to finance their supporters’ campaigns in exchange for favourable policies. So, what can be done for integrity? Increase transparency Regardless of the upcoming election results, those in power must prioritize transparency, ensuring that everyone has unobstructed access to information about water use (including that of private companies), availability, dam levels, groundwater resources, service levels in underserved areas, water quality, utility budgets, financial capacities, and efforts to reduce non-revenue water. Transparency also goes hand in hand with accountability, which can be supported by civil society organizations and oversight institutions like INAI and InfoCDMX. These organisations currently face threats of reduction or elimination by the government. Their preservation and strengthening must be prioritized. Additionally, the media must be protected and supported so they can play their role in disseminating information and holding politicians accountable. Focus on equity in allocation Leaders need to engage more effectively with communities and civil society to address equity of access and local solutions for water issues. Many low-income communities have long experienced day-zero conditions and continue to feel excluded from decision-making. Strengthening the Consejos de Cuenca , a mechanism that incorporates citizen participation in water resource decisions, and publishing information on their activities and outcomes, is essential. Additionally, reinforcing the human right to water in legal frameworks is crucial, such as through the establishment of water as a national common, where decisions about its use must come from all of Mexico’s people. Amend concessions and implement anti-corruption mechanisms in their enforcement The current system of water concessions results: in a profound lack of information about how much water private companies extract and for what purposes, in the government's inability to collect payments or monitor how water resources are exploited, and in the inequity of distribution. Al Jazeera has reported, that what existing water regulations do exist are poorly enforced and often circumvented by corruption . The effective monitoring of concessions needs to be greatly improved . The system itself probably also needs to be overhauled, likely through a new General Water Law. This law should prioritize the human rights to water and sanitation and the people over profit by restricting water concessions in areas facing shortages or drought and prioritizing personal and domestic water use. Central to a new law should also be robust anti-corruption instruments that mitigate issues such as falsified documents in the obtaining of concessions . Address risk in early-stage decision and planning processes Infrastructure upgrades and technical solutions are likely to remain a priority. It is therefore crucial to strengthen early-stage decision-making, budgeting, and planning processes so that the right infrastructure is built , where it is most needed, and with high standards. These steps are vital for mitigating various integrity risks such as conflict of interest or misuse of public funds. Organizations like WIN and CoST – the Infrastructure Transparency Initiative have developed tools to assist with these processes. Change the norms, make integrity the expectation and priority Promoting and valuing integrity to change social norms and organisational culture can go a long way. Accepting or expecting corruption as the default should no longer be an option. For example, as highlighted in the upcoming Water Integrity Global Outlook on Finance , when presented with information showing that most other people were opposed to corruption, participants in Mexico felt an increase in trust in other people’s views. This information also made them more likely to reject the idea that corruption was an inherent part of Mexican culture and decreased the likelihood of paying a bribe. These findings are hugely important, implying that the correct messaging can significantly affect participation in corrupt activities . Strong, ethical leadership is also crucial, to make sure there is no easy reason and rationalisation for corruption. The upcoming Mexican election presents a timely opportunity for the city and country’s leadership to rise to the occasion. Disclaimer: At WIN we value honest and open discussion. We are a multi-stakeholder network and our site brings together perspectives from across the board. Not all views expressed here reflect official policies .

Robust regulatory mechanisms can play a crucial role in limiting integrity risks. Bangladesh is working on developing an entirely new regulatory system for water and sanitation. This system will have to address fragementation, conflicts of interest, and integrity issues. Guest post by ITN-BUET The primary goal of the International Training Network Centre of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (ITN-BUET) is to achieve an improved human resource base that promotes sustainable development of water supply and sanitation. It strives for expansion of the knowledge base through networking. It acts as a bridge between stakeholders, creating opportunities for the academicians and implementers join a common forum and work hand in hand for the WASH sector. Bangladesh, with its growing population and urbanisation, faces significant challenges in ensuring adequate water supply and sanitation services. According to the latest Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene (JMP) report [1], the national coverage rates for safely managed water supply and sanitation are 59% and 31% respectively. A lack of transparency and low accountability in service delivery enable common malpractice, compounding the service challenges further. Unethical practices, illegal activities, and fraud hinder fair and sustainable water and sanitation services. Establishing robust regulatory mechanisms is a vital policy intervention to address these challenges, promote sector goals in the public interest, and balance the competing interests of various stakeholders. Evidence suggests that having a formal regulatory body can lead to more consistent application of regulatory functions .[2] Currently, in Bangladesh the WASH regulatory mandate is fragmented. Multiple entities are involved, including Water Supply and Sewerage Authorities (WASAs) and Local Government Institutions (LGIs), which often act as both service providers and regulators. This overlap creates conflicts of interest and leads to various integrity issues that undermine the effectiveness of regulation, and ultimately of service . Bangladesh is following the Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS) framework to achieve SDG 6.2 targets. Faecal Sludge Management (FSM) is prioritised under the approach. To do so, the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) has formulated the Institutional and Regulatory Framework for Faecal Sludge Management (IRF-FSM) . [3] It designates LGIs as the primary service authorities for non-sewered sanitation (NSS). The regulatory roles for FSM services remain ambiguous however, and the development and enforcement of integrity mechanisms remain limited. The Eighth Five Year Plan of the GoB [4] highlights the set-up of a formal WASH regulatory system as a key policy action. The Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development & Co-operatives (MoLGRD&C) is taking this forward with support from the Asian Development Bank (ADB). ITN-BUET, in collaboration with the Institute of Water Modelling (IWM), is providing technical support for this initiative. --- THE NEED FOR EFFECTIVE URBAN SANITATION REGULATION The decision to establish a regulatory system is spurred by sectoral challenges, coordination gaps in policy implementation and limited private sector engagement. Several other factors are also driving this process, including a number related to integrity risks. Integrity risks in financial management and governance In service delivery across the country, there are integrity concerns related to governance, finance, human resources, procurement, project implementation and customer relations. For example, public procurement is prone to mismanagement, corruption, and vendors’ ploys, as it is everywhere. The World Bank's evaluation of Bangladesh  [5] found the procurement process to be highly unsatisfactory, citing problems such as inadequate advertisement, short bidding periods, vague specifications, non-disclosure of selection criteria, one-sided contract terms, unnecessary rebidding, and frequent instances of corruption at the national level. Furthermore, misuse of public funds, discriminatory allocation of resources, and the exploitation of monopoly power by service providers to overcharge customers are major areas of concern. Irregularities in recruitment processes, nepotism in contract awards, and issues related to hiring qualified staff have also been noted. There are cases where bribes are extorted for basic services and the suppression of complaints is common. Undue political interference Unethical or overreaching actions of political leaders can cause major setbacks, hindering the ability to make impactful decisions and deliver services fairly. For example, though WASA boards are meant to operate independently, the involvement of high-level political figures in WASA affairs can create significant challenges and compromise the ability to act in the public rather than personal interests. Similarly, elected representatives of LGIs often fail to exercise the powers granted to them by the LGI Act, prioritising public support for political gain over effective governance. --- THE PATH FORWARD For the definition of a new regulatory system and in light of these factors, two considerations emerge. First there is a need to ensure financial and political autonomy of regulators and service providers both for effective regulation and for the effective implementation of CWIS and the delivery of pro-poor services. Rather than political motivations, clear criteria for equitable and optimised service delivery, should guide sector developments and the selection of water and sanitation service point locations. Second, adequate regulatory attention must be paid to those integrity risks that hold services back. With regard to international best practices and the country’s institutional and financial context, ministerial regulation appears to be suitable for a country like Bangladesh and could be set up to address these considerations. The proposed system should be able to set the roles of water and sanitation service providers, set service standards, manage monitoring and reporting mechanisms, and wield sanctions and incentives, to enable: • Improved service quality, sustainability, and equity, and customer satisfaction • Financial sustainability of water and sanitation service providers There are a number of next steps to take in establishing this regulatory system and make it effective. Firstly, establishing a coordination platform that unites all regulatory and service delivery entities —including the Department of Public Health Engineering (DPHE), WASAs, and LGIs—is essential. This platform will help clarify and streamline the roles and responsibilities of those involved in service delivery and regulation. Secondly, increasing and training staff for all WASH services in these entities will improve monitoring and regulation. Strengthening corporate governance of public utilities also requires targeted training, such as training for boards of directors of WASAs. Thirdly, enabling greater involvement of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) is also vital, as these can help mitigate undue political interference and hold public officials accountable. They can do this by actively participating in open decision-making processes, conducting social audits, and raising voices in public hearing platforms. Fourthly, developing and enforcing clear standards for service provision is a first measure to take —such as with service level requirements, tariff-setting guidelines and adjustment procedures. Finally, ensuring transparency and accountability must be part of the regulator’s responsibilities. This can be done first through standardised monitoring and reporting requirements, with incentives for regularly updating the data and information. Making performance data publicly available through digital tools like e-PMIS and e-GPS will also improve transparency and enable the public to access information on service quality. --- The establishment of a water and sanitation regulatory system is a crucial step towards ensuring sustainable and equitable access to water and sanitation services in Bangladesh. By addressing the challenges faced by the sector and providing a robust regulatory framework, the government can improve the lives of millions of people and contribute to the country's overall development. References: [1] JMP. (2022). Wash Data. Retrieved from: https://washdata.org/data/household [2] ESAWAS. (2022). The Water Supply and Sanitation Regulatory Landscape Across Africa: Continent-Wide Synthesis Report. Retrieved from: http://www.ppa.pt/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Esawas_Report_2022.pdf [3] Policy Support Branch, Ministry of Local Government Rural Development & Cooperatives, GoB. (2017, October). Institutional and Regulatory Framework for Faecal Sludge Management (IRF-FSM). Retrieved from: https://itn.buet.ac.bd/web/resource-category/national-documents/page/2/ [4] Bangladesh Planning Commission, Ministry of Planning, GoB. (2020). 8th Five Year Plan. Retrieved from: https://plancomm.gov.bd/site/files/8ec347dc-4926-4802-a839-7569897e1a7a/8th-Five-Year-Plan  [5] World Bank (2002). Bangladesh Country Procurement Assessment report. Retrieved from: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/812041468743656486/bangladesh-country-procurement-assessment-report Disclaimer: At WIN we value honest and open discussion. We are a multi-stakeholder network and our site brings together perspectives from across the board. Not all views expressed here reflect official policies .

Urban sanitation is critical to human dignity and public health but it is often undermined by poor integrity which results in substandard service delivery, financial losses, and ongoing inequities. A new report offers insight into integrity in the provision of urban sanitation services by focusing on the role of regulators. The reports, based on studies from Tanzania, Rwanda, Zambia, and Bangladesh, examine the current regulatory framework for urban sanitation, and unpack some best practices for the promotion of both Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS) and integrity more broadly.   Photo by Sincerely Media - Unsplash --- Integrity Failures in Urban Sanitation: A Hidden Challenge  CWIS aims to provide safe sanitation services across entire cities, incorporating both sewered and non-sewered systems, and engaging private and informal providers alongside public utilities. CWIS and integrity approaches go hand in hand as they both address issues of inclusion and accountability. However, poor integrity can still compromise CWIS, as it can any urban sanitation.     Corruption, financial mismanagement, undue political interference, unfair labour practices and exploitation of sanitation workers, are all integrity risks that can undermine the delivery of safely managed sanitation in cities. Many integrity risks are driven by weak regulatory environments, where undue political interference and limited regulatory autonomy hamper efforts to hold service providers accountable.  The research from Tanzania, Rwanda, Zambia, and Bangladesh highlights the importance of an integrity approach to urban sanitation regulation and provision.   --- Strengthening Regulation for Urban Sanitation  Regulation is essential for ensuring equitable, sustainable, and inclusive sanitation services. In countries like Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia, broad regulatory mechanisms are already being introduced to regulate non-sewered sanitation. This includes setting standards for monitoring urban sanitation provision including non-sewered sanitation, or expanding performance monitoring of different service providers in Tanzania, or a sanitation surcharge to finance sanitation developments in Zambia.   The studies point out that though much progress has already been made, also thanks to and through the CWIS approach, there is still a long way to go , especially in terms of addressing integrity risks. Comprehensive reform is required, though one challenge is that regulatory mechanisms for integrity are often developed and overseen by different agencies. This makes cooperation across agencies and data sharing a key element of reform.   --- Regulating for Integrity in Sanitation Provision   A comprehensive regulatory framework should include: broad regulatory mechanisms for expanded sanitation access, tailored to different service providers and technologies,   specific regulatory mechanisms to also address integrity risks in different processes, from human resources to procurement and customer relations,   a strengthened regulatory environment, with autonomy and resources for the regulator, as well as transparency and open civic space.   The findings underscore the importance of cross-government collaboration and civil society involvement in preventing corruption. Regulators, government bodies, and civil society organizations must work together to identify and address integrity risks at every stage of the sanitation service chain, from project planning and budget allocation, through procurement, to service delivery.  The Rwanda regulatory agency uses a bribery index report developed by civil society to inform its action. Zambia’s water watch groups are another interesting example that could be expanded to cover sanitation services, where citizens could be involved in reporting issues and monitoring service quality.  --- Moving Forward  Improving urban sanitation is not just about expanding infrastructure—it’s about ensuring that the systems in place are fair, transparent, and sustainable. By focusing on integrity and enhancing the role of regulators, cities can move closer to achieving Citywide Inclusive Sanitation and realising the human right to sanitation.   Regulators should conduct regular assessments of urban sanitation regulation that include identification of key integrity and corruption risks. They can then plan for adaptations through a participatory process.  Read more about WIN's CWIS programme and download the full report on Regulation of Urban Sanitation Stay tuned for individual country reports and more insight on integrity for regulation and integrity for CWIS. Disclaimer: At WIN we value honest and open discussion. We are a multi-stakeholder network and our site brings together perspectives from across the board. Not all views expressed here reflect official policies .