INTEGRITY FOR SMALL WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS IN AFRICA AND LATIN AMERICA: SUCCESSES, LESSONS LEARNED AND CHALLENGES AHEAD Small water supply systems play a key role in providing access to water in rural and peri-urban areas. Many of these systems are outside any centralised water network or state service provision scheme and they work thanks to volunteers and solidarity mechanisms for collective repairs or extensions of the service to unserved groups. As many of these systems are not formally recognised, they receive very little support to access credit or legal contract support services. However, they face significant operational challenges, such as ensuring appropriate water quality and timely maintenance, extending infrastructure, or securing land status. In our Integrity Talk, partners explored different models for small water supply system management in Africa and Latin America and discussed their experiences of working with the Integrity Management Toolbox for Small Water Supply Systems (IMT-SWSS). This tool, initially developed by Caritas Switzerland and WIN for rural water supply systems in Kenya, links small system management committees with local stakeholders and duty-bearers. It puts them in the driving seat to develop a step-by-step plan for service improvements, using governance and compliance tools as stepping stones for more sustainable service provision. With special guests: Peter Njaggah (Water Services Regulatory Board of Kenya, WASREB); Namarome Lukelesia (Water Sector Trust Fund); Elvia Arzate (Controla Tu Gobierno); Girum Girma (Caritas Switzerland). “The theme of integrity generates trust, and trust is what we need to reach the most vulnerable.” – Elvia Arzate, Controla Tu Gobierno KEY TAKEAWAYS Regularisation of small water systems, or at least formal dialogue with local government, can ensure there is at least more data on service levels from small systems, and, importantly, can ensure committees have access to more resources through grants and loans. However such regularisation is only possible when the legal framework recognises water committees and clearly defines responsibilities. It also requires trust from committees in local and national authorities. Building trust and links between stakeholders, especially between committees and local authorities, contractors and duty bearers, is crucial for communities to gain access to formal resources and services and in some cases for communities to accept external interventions. Trust between committees and users is also essential to increase willingness to pay, support water conservation, and motivate for good service. Integrity is the motor for trust through all its pillars: Transparency, Accountability, Participation, Anti-Corruption and Inclusion. Increasing transparency for example - on the funds available and how they are spent, or on water quality and tariffs - limits discretionary service. Acknowledging the contributions and know-how of local communities, especially indigenous communities, is also key. As is ensuring participation from communities, for example by adapting tools for low literacy and taking into account the schedules and time constraints of volunteers, especially women. What is the role of the Water Services Regulatory Board of Kenya (WASREB) and how does it engage with small water supply system managers? Peter Njaggah (WASREB): The Kenyan Constitution recognises the human rights to water and sanitation and these have been translated into national standards. Every citizen of Kenya is entitled without discrimination to water that is affordable, reliable, easily reachable, and of good quality. We also have a very strong water regulatory system providing clear rules and regulations to protect water resources and to control the quality of the service. WASREB has set up a licencing system for any entity providing water services. We work in close cooperation with small system managers to ensure uniform standards, collect data to track the progressive realisation of the right to water, improve cost recovery, ensure that they do not operate in isolation, secure access to credit or resources, and create control systems to protect the right of consumers. In this way, we are able to promote integrity. Why is important to regularise small systems? How do local communities perceive the process of regularisation? Peter Njaggah (WASREB): There are over 7000 small water supply systems in Kenya that serve a large part of the population, but many of their management committees are not registered as legal entities and there is no data. Committees that are not registered generally cannot access credit or resources and this is problematic. For example, the national government created a special fund to help communities with small systems during COVID-19. Many could not get these funds because the water committees are informal. We see it as a form of discrimination. To facilitate regularisation, according to our Water Act of 2016 we offer different licencing models to help small systems depending on their commercial viability. For those systems located in the service provision area of a formal water service provider, we offer four options: The formal water supply provider takes over the system; The formal water supply provider delegates responsibilities to a registered water user association that manages the system; A cluster of small system committees contract a private operator, with a contract with the formal water supply provider; The system committee has sufficient capacity to expand and become a formal water supply provider. For those systems that are not commercially viable and are located outside the service provision area of a formal water provider, we offer two options: The County Government, with linkages to WASREB, establishes a contract with the small water supply system committee; The County Government contracts a private operator, to maintain service delivery standards. “We create awareness to show the benefits of operating in a regularised way. Rather than forcing regularisation and the adoption of a particular option, we recognise the diversity of small systems and allow them to select the model that is better suited to them. In this way we limit resistance.” – Peter Njaggah, WASREB What is the importance of promoting integrity in investment programmes targeting small systems in Kenya? Namarome Lukelesia (Water Sector Trust Fund): The role of the Water Sector Trust Fund is to provide grants to counties to assist the financing and development of water services in underserved areas. We have done the following to promote integrity in the management of our programmes and these grants: applied a project risk management tool, enhanced the capacity of implementing agents, reduced ineligible costs by auditors, and developed a manual for project implementation with clear processes. Strengthening integrity in our operations has ensured continued support from international development partners (e.g., KfW, World Bank, IFAD, EU). What are the main integrity risks you see related to investment programmes for small water supply systems? Namarome Lukelesia (Water Sector Trust Fund): The main integrity risks are conflicts of interest occurring during the identification and implementation phase. In many cases, the identification of the project is politically motivated and in the implementation phase, there are many interested parties. Other issues include the limited capacities of implementing partners, poor compliance with laws and regulations, and activities being implemented outside the contract, leading to increasing costs. To reduce integrity risks, we are investing in capacity building and we have created a project guidance tool with an internal and external audit checklist. We are recruiting officers at the county level, including engineers, and they have played a key role in enhancing accountability. We have also established a mechanism to ensure that grant recipients report back continuously to the Water Sector Trust Fund. With all these measures we aim to secure access to clean water and sanitation to at least 75% of Kenyans by 2030. What are the opportunities related to applications of the integrity management for small water supply systems (IMT-SWSS)? Elvia Arzate (Controla tu Gobierno): In Mexico, there are at least 4000 small water supply systems in communities that have been historically marginalised. They face a lack of infrastructure and poor access to training, technology, or financing. Controla Tu Gobierno has used the Integrity Management Toolbox for Small Water Supply Systems (IMT-SWSS) with partners and WIN since 2020, with seven small system water management committees (known as comités autónomos or comités comunitarios de agua). The benefits for integrity and for the performance of the systems are numerous. For instance, some committees worked to set up differentiated tariffs for residential and commercial users. This facilitated the payment of debts to the Federal Committee of Electricity. Another example is improved communication with the community, which has encouraged community participation, generated trust, and promoted water conservation. Girum Girma (Caritas Switzerland): The Government of Ethiopia has policies and, regulations for water supply in remote areas. One of them is the Ethiopian WaSH Implementation Framework (2013) which puts a clear focus on defining the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, including WASHCOs (community water supply systems in Ethiopia). However, the framework has limitations. Here is where the IMT-SWSS becomes very useful, especially in building the capacity of WASHCOs to manage and operate their water system. The tool, which is visual and didactic, and includes games, clear exercises and hands-on activities, was easy to apply in communities with low literacy levels, allowing for their active participation. The process has had positive results, notably that the IMT-SWSS has helped to create trust between users and management committees. “The IMT-SWSS created favourable conditions to build trust between management committees and users. For example, we saw that people were willing to pay for operation and maintenance services when they were properly informed, trained, and motivated.” – Girum Girma, Caritas Switzerland What are the main integrity challenges small water supply systems face? Elvia Arzate (Controla tu Gobierno): In Mexico, water committees face many problems. First, collective forms of water provision are not recognised in the National Water Law. Second, much of the work of the committees is performed voluntarily. Third, the development of megaprojects (e.g. airports) is preventing local communities from accessing water resources by altering land tenure rights. Fourth, it’s a challenge to carry the responsibility of securing water services in the face of natural phenomena such as water scarcity and erosion. Girum Girma (Caritas Ethiopia): Small water system committees face several challenges. For example, maintenance costs are highly dependent on external finance, there is low state involvement and support for remote systems, and there is no transparency or exchange between committees and water officers or technicians. Building trust requires time. What have we learned from communities for promoting integrity? What can we learn in particular from indigenous and autonomous communities? Elvia Arzate (Controla tu Gobierno): In the beginning, it was not easy to start working with the IMT-SWSS. There was resistance and distrust because the committees did not know the work of WIN and Controla Tu Gobierno. The committees asked, “Why are they giving us something without asking anything in return? Why don’t they ask for money?” Once we got to know each other, we created trust and they recommended our work to other water committees. We have had to adapt to their necessities, timings, and traditions. This is a process of responsibility and mutual learning. We do not teach them, we share knowledge. The committees managing water supply systems in indigenous or autonomous communities have existed for longer than the institutions supplying water at the state level. Autonomous communities have a strong respect for nature and common goods. They also have their own forms of community practices and collective work. This is a good starting point for us to learn about integrity.

A water stewardship initiative (WSI) can be more effective if the partnership is founded on trust and built with concrete measures to address transparency, accountability, participation, and anti-corruption concerns. In a world in which water is increasingly too little, too much, or too polluted to meet our needs, water stewardship initiatives may be part of the solution to managing water better in some contexts. Such initiatives bring together a range of players to form collective action partnerships to address linked water risks. Typically, these multi-stakeholder partnerships include representatives of the private sector, government and affected communities, and they address water risks within a designated catchment area. Like all partnerships, water stewardship initiatives stand or fall on the level of trust between the partners who may have ideological differences, strongly held views, or a long history of mutual distrust. Over the years, a number of frameworks for designing and managing water stewardship initiatives have emerged. Applied correctly, they can help build trust between stakeholders. But they will only be truly effective if integrity is built in as a guiding principle. What defines effective water stewardship? A water stewardship initiative will be seen as effective when the majority of stakeholders feel that the initiative has addressed their needs. This might be improved access to water for downstream communities; the social license to operate, improved reliability of access to water, and reduced reputation and regulatory risks for the private sector; and the achievement of environmental protection and/or restoration programmes. Getting to this point and demonstrating effectiveness requires strong foundations: Trustworthy, credible, and accountable participants; Clear objectives and demonstrable outcomes that advance sustainable and equitable water management; and Inclusive, transparent, and responsive processes and governance that lead to informed and balanced decision-making, and clear communication and disclosure. These are three dimensions of integrity that have been presented in The Guide for Managing Integrity in Water Stewardship Initiatives developed by WIN, the CEO Water Mandate and the Pacific Institute in 2015. The guide also includes descriptions of practical tools to build up each of these dimensions. The power and challenges of collective action In 1997, Davis, Schoorman and Donaldson set out a Stewardship Theory which described the potential of multi-stakeholder collective action in addressing water security challenges, as a response to the more individualistic approaches usually in play. Stewardship Theory assumes that stewards are “motivated to act in the best interests of their principals” and to prioritize “pro-organizational, collectivistic behaviours”. This motivation towards a collective approach for managing water assumes that trust can be built between the relevant stakeholders. The challenge is how to build trust between stakeholders who have not historically worked together, or worse, may have had fractious relationships in the past, and where there are significant imbalances in power between the different partners. This is complicated by the fact that water stewardship initiatives are generally run on a voluntary basis without any legally binding agreements being in place. In the absence of being able to hold stakeholders accountable by legal means for their pledged cash and/or in-kind contributions, a change in mindset is required. Stakeholders need to take a leap of faith when engaging in a water stewardship partnership, trusting that other stakeholders genuinely want to contribute to finding joint solutions to water risks. Integrity: a practical approach to build trust By formally putting integrity measures in place ensuring Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-corruption for the partnership can ensure partners take the leap of faith from a stronger, and more secure base. The Guide for Managing Integrity describes various tools that can be used to support the set up and management of water stewardship initiatives with a focus on integrity. Such tools or processes include for example: processes and structures that ensure balanced and participatory decision-making, processes for disclosure of actions and use of funds, as well as mechanisms for open learning. Specific tools such as stakeholder mapping can also be used to ensure that all stakeholders, whether powerful or not, are involved, and to ensure that their legitimate interests and knowledge are taken into consideration. Lessons learned from case studies The Lusaka Water Security Initiative (LuWSI) in Zambia, through a stakeholder mapping and engagement process, engaged with over 30 international, local and national public, private, and civil society sector actors working towards water security for the residents and businesses of Lusaka. The Initiative also actively included input from 12 of the city’s most vulnerable wards in terms of socio-economic profile and known water security risks. LuWSI also has partnership work plans with a detailed monitoring and evaluation framework. It publically share information about performance and expenditure and thus has the ability to publicly demonstrate balanced decision-making that seeks public benefit, equity, and sustainability, building trust both within and outside the WSI. The Foundation Water Fund for Life and Sustainability, a WSI with an environmental and social focus on the sugarcane sector in the upper Cauca River Valley in Colombia, is another good example. Partners commit financial and human resources for joint actions aimed at the protection and conservation of watersheds that drain into the Cauca River, the main water source for sugar production in the area. Projects are designed using local knowledge of communities and indigenous groups. There are also joint project planning and implementation processes, based on agreed objectives and outcomes. The report Building Effective Water Stewardship Initiatives: The Case for Integrity highlights the most important integrity measures needed in water stewardship initiatives based on lessons from these two cases and others. Download Building Effective Water Stewardship Initiatives: The Case for Integrity: Download the Integrity Framework for Water Stewardship Initiatives Integrity, trust and the way forward Integrity in governance of water stewardship initiatives is built on the four pillars of transparency, accountability, participation and anti-corruption measures. High levels of integrity lead to trust building between partners. Greater levels of trust lead to stronger and more sustainable outcomes from water stewardship initiatives. It is a win-win situation.

How can we assess and address issues of exclusion and marginalisation in informal settlements from a water integrity perspective? How can different stakeholders use integrity and support the realisation of the human rights to water and sanitation in informal settlements? What has changed with the COVID-19 pandemic? The Water Integrity Network advocates for safely managed water and sanitation services in informal settlements by working with regulators, utility companies and small water supply system operators in Africa, Asia and Latin America. We see the exclusion of people living in informal settlements from access to decent water and sanitation services as a failure of integrity. This Integrity Talk highlights the experiences of utility companies, community-led initiatives, and international organisations in addressing this failure. With special guests: Alana Potter (End Water Poverty), Sudha Shrestha (UN Habitat), Marcelo Rogora (Aguas y Saneamientos Argentinos, AySA) and Nils Thorup (Grundfos Foundation). Featuring a clip of the film Into Dust, directed by Orlando von Einsiedel. KEY TAKEAWAYS Recognition: Residents of informal settlements deserve recognition as active members of the urban fabric with the same rights as other urban dwellers. Such recognition is fundamental if utilities and the sate are to engage effectively with these communities for the provision of decent water and sanitation services. Affordability: Water and sanitation services must be delivered at an affordable price. Many residents of informal settlements actually pay more than wealthier neighbours for water of dubious quality. This needs to be urgently addressed with policies that recognise the specific needs of people living in informal settlements. Free basic water allocations or sustainable lifeline tariffs are good examples of how to materialise the principle of affordability of the rights to water and sanitation for those living in poverty. Responsibility: There is a close link between land tenure and water provision. Many people living in settlements around the world are excluded from formal water and sanitation supply because their land tenure status is not recognised. However, there is still a responsibility to deliver services. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that even in times of crisis, utility companies can undertake immediate action, regardless of land ownership, to expand service provision. Pro-poor anti-corruption: the failure to provide decent water and sanitation services in informal settlements leaves the door open for corrupt, discriminatory, and discretionary service, which can put health and lives at risk. Residents may be forced into informal arrangements with water mafias, which in a number of cases are given free rein by authorities. Such arrangements leave no room for accountability and are likely to leave behind the most vulnerable. Water Integrity for Informal Settlements during COVID-19 What are the main conditions that hinder the provision of water and sanitation services in informal settlements? Alana Potter (End Water Poverty): More than one billion people worldwide live in informal settlements and they are usually not recognised as legitimate citizens, participants and rights-holders. Informality is commonalty associated with lawlessness and criminality. However, many informal settlements do not exist by accident; they are historically rooted and can be traced back even to colonial times. They provide land for accommodation, and affordable housing near transportation and economic centres of activity. They persist because of state and market failures to provide poor residents with affordable accommodation in well-located areas. Stigma, discrimination, poor integrity are beneath the reluctance to provide decent services in informal settlements. The results is that residents generally pay more for water and sanitation of uncertain or inadequate quality and do not enjoy the human rights to water and sanitation even when these are constitutionally recognised. During the COVID-19 pandemic, residents of informal settlements have been severely affected because of higher population densities, stagnant water, narrow pathways that reduced mobility and emergency response access. When residents find ways to claim their rights, these are often criminalised or rejected by authorities. It is critical that we change the mindset and recognise residents of informal settlements as actors and counterparts to engage with. In some settlements in South Africa, for example, residents organise their own residential and economic land uses, provision of water, sanitation, electricity and solid waste collection services. They defend themselves against evictions and organise local representation and leadership, engaging actively with the state through informal participation processes, in protests, and in the courts. “People are the ones who claim their rights. Having the right to water and sanitation in the law is nothing until people claim it.” - Alana Potter, End Water Poverty What measures did UN-Habitat put in place to support the provision of WASH services in informal settlements in the COVID-19 crisis? Sudha Shrestha (UN Habitat): In Nepal, in the first stage, UN-Habitat mobilised local partners to distribute masks, hand sanitiser and coverall suits due to the shortage in the market. We also launched a community close-watch using mobile phones to collect information on COVID-19 related issues, health, handwashing and sanitation, hygiene and cleanliness, and water. This information filled a database to assist municipalities in the formulation of policies and strategies. We also used social media to spread news related to COVID-19 measures and created a WASH cluster in the border region between India and Nepal to facilitate migration in and out of the country. We also provided temporary handwashing facilities in healthcare facilities, schools, quarantine centres, public spaces (e.g., markets), and informal settlements while supporting food distribution in vulnerable areas. What efforts were undertaken by the water utility of Buenos Aires (AySA) to ensure water access in informal settlements during the COVID-19 pandemic? Marcelo Rogora (Aguas y Saneamientos Argentinos, AySA): AySA provides water and sanitation services to 14.5 million inhabitants in the city of Buenos Aires. We have developed concrete actions to strengthen participatory actions and accountability. In 2021, for example, we incorporated a digital platform called aysa.DATA into our website. This platform provides communication channels and open data to inform the public about concessions while also giving the opportunity to file complaints. In informal settlements, AySA implemented two programmes: “Agua más Trabajo” (Water more work) and “Cloaca más Trabajo” (Sewer more work). Both programmes aim at expanding networked services in vulnerable areas though close cooperation with municipalities and local cooperatives. The benefits of these programs are numerous: first, they supported employment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, our workers are 50 percent women who are engaged in management tasks as well as technical work. This is important to us, as AySA supports gender equity. AySA covers the costs of both programmes and provides training to local cooperatives. Municipalities also play a key role in managing the financial resources provided by AySA and in hiring local residents. For us, these actions are associated with not only anti-corruption but also with integrity. “When we talk about integrity we focus not only on measures to prevent corruption but also inclusion, participation, gender equality and respect for human rights such as universal access to potable water and sanitation.” - Marcelo Rogora, AySA What kind of legal mechanisms are available for residents in informal settlements to hold governments and service providers accountable? Alana Potter: When people are delegitimised as formal participants they often turn to inventive forms of participation. I think multiple strategies are needed on multiple fronts. In South Africa, for example, the use of the Housing Act and the Expropriation Act have strengthened service delivery. In the housing sector, the Anti-Eviction Law, in particular, has helped people to secure land tenure so that they are in a position where the settlement can be upgraded and they can receive services. In some cases, the use of the law and litigation is more strategic than direct. In the Marikana informal settlement, it was impossible to relocate 60 000 residents, so the court ordered the city of Cape Town to purchase the land where the settlement was located. “Even if you do not have the direct right to water and sanitation in the legislation, there are creative ways to use other rights.” - Alana Potter, End Water Poverty What advice would you have for other utilities that are struggling to navigate legal challenges to secure water and sanitation services in informal settlements? And has the COVID-19 crisis made these challenges easier or more difficult to overcome, and why? Marcelo Rogora: What is important is the cooperation and coordination between different actors involved in water supply provision such as the government, utility companies, the community, as well as regulators. Otherwise, I see it as very difficult to achieve positive results, particularly when there are legal obstacles against extending the network into informal areas. In Buenos Aires, we have all been working together to make laws and regulation more flexible and to adjust technical guidelines to secure universal access to water and sanitation in marginalised areas. AySA has faced serious challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, like in many other countries. But we acted quickly to respond to water demands. In a period of one month, we launched an emergency plan to intervene in vulnerable areas, despite complete isolation in Argentina. We equipped local cooperatives with basic instruments to guarantee safe working conditions (e.g. masks, disinfectant). We also focused our efforts on providing support to workers that were on the front lines during the crisis. When somebody got infected and could not work, their economic situation was severely affected. We created a plan to assist workers facing financial difficulties to protect their health and the health of the community. Why did the Grundfos Foundation decide to support the creation of the “Into Dust” Film, which focuses on the work of Perween Rahman, mapping water mafias in Karachi? Niels Thorup (Grundfos Foundation): At the Grundfos Foundation we primarily work in refugee camps and rural communities and we supply water pumps globally. We supported this film to raise awareness about water issues globally. As a foundation working with a close link to the private sector it is very important that we raise awareness about real issues such as corruption and that we address real problems. Water will be a huge issue in the future due to climate change and we need to address the problems directly instead of just talking about the good solutions that we see today. There is the tendency to equate the human right to water with the idea that water should be provided for free. How does this discussion help us to understand possible ways to guarantee the right to water to poor residents without threatening the financial sustainability of providers? Barbara Schreiner (Water Integrity Network, WIN): Currently, residents of informal settlements often pay much higher prices for poorer quality of water services than those in wealthier areas. This is a profound issue of integrity because the system is penalising the people that are living in poverty. Obviously, when providing sustainable water services, funding has to come from somewhere. And we need to ask where the money comes from. How much time and money should be put into collecting small amounts of money from poor people? When should tax-based schemes be mobilised to subsidise tariffs, or cross-subsidisation? There are a number of ways to cover financial costs from different sources rather than sqeezing revenue out of poor residents. In South Africa, a Free Basic Water policy was introduced to ensure that nobody was denied access to water because they could not afford to pay. More resources INTO DUST is a documentary that tells the story of Perween Rahman, an activist who decided to uncover the exploitative strategies of water cartels in Karachi informal settlements. She fought against water injustices and for accountability, exposing the perverse effects of water corruption in marginalised areas. (Director: Orlando von Einsiedel, Country: Pakistan, Year: 2021) Human Rights and Water Integrity in Informal Settlements Water Integrity Global Outlook 2021: Urban water and sanitation

What is the role of regulators in securing access to water and sanitation services? How can they promote transparency, accountability and participation, and which challenges do they face in doing this? The Water Integrity Network (WIN) works in close cooperation with regulators in Latin America and Africa to promote integrity in the water and sanitation sectors. For this Integrity Talk, WIN partner organisations shared their experiences and reflected on their work driving integrity, not only inside their own organisations, but also in relation to governments, water service providers, and consumers. With special guests: Pilar Avello (SIWI); Corinne Cathala (Inter-American Development Bank, IDB); Giovanni Espinal (Water and Sanitation Services Regulatory Entity ERSAPS, Honduras); Robert Gakubia (former head of the Water Services Regulatory Board WASREB, Kenya); and Chola Mbilima (Eastern and Southern Africa Water and Sanitation Regulators Association, ESAWAS). KEY TAKEAWAYS Integrity starts from within: it is important to implement integrity measures also within a regulatory institution and then with water and sanitation providers and consumers. There are no fixed formulas for regulators to drive integrity in the water and sanitation sectors. Each regulator has its own individual mechanisms for approaching integrity according to the context where it is operating. Integrity assessment tools or indicators can help better target and adapt interventions. No real change will take place at the regulatory level without the cooperation of governments and respective ministries, or without the engagement of stakeholders and users. Working with vulnerable or marginalised communities and water supply committees in rural areas is an essential element of the integrity work of regulators. Regulators can play an important role in promoting integrity by making budget allocations clear and by informing consumers about how resources are used to improve coverage and quality of water services. Regulators and their functions Regulators are essential in the provision of adequate, affordable and reliable water and sanitation services. They set up rules and standards for utility companies, ensure adequate tariffs, monitor and report on quality of service, ensure effectiveness of investment and sustainability, and secure citizen involvement (WIN, 2021). They are crucial in balancing the interests of governments, consumers and utilities, while also limiting harmful behaviour (Twyman and Simbeye, 2017). In contexts where corruption and integrity failures compromise the performance of water and sanitation service providers, appropriate regulatory frameworks can promote transparency, accountability and participation and support the realisation of the human rights to water and sanitation. To build integrity in the water and sanitation sectors and boost service delivery, the Water Integrity Global Outlook WIGO (2021) recommends these actions for regulators: Regulate for equity, providing incentives or standards for pro-poor services. Regulate for integrity, setting standards and specifically monitoring procurement and corporate governance in utilities. Regulate with integrity, in a transparent and accountable manner, giving voice to residents. Regulate non-utility service provision. Regulators and their role in promoting integrity What kinds of tools are available to regulators to support their work in promoting integrity in the water and sanitation sectors? Pilar Avello (SIWI): The Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), WIN and cewas have developed tools to support regulators in promoting integrity. The Integrity Management Toolbox for Regulators addresses how regulators can be accountable to policy-makers, service providers and consumers. Following the WASHREG approach, we selected six regulatory areas (what regulators regulate): tariff setting, service quality regulations, competition regulation, consumer protection, environmental regulation and public health regulation, and key activities performed by regulators (how regulators regulate): enforcement, definition of rules and approval of licences as well as monitoring and information. For these areas and activities, we identified a set of integrity risks that could occur and the tools that could be used to mitigate them. The ultimate goal is for regulators to develop roadmaps to improve integrity within their own organisation. In the long-term, we are planning to implement this toolbox in Paraguay, Honduras and Ecuador between 2021 and 2023. How can regulators put integrity into pracitce in the water and sanitation sectors? Robert Gakubia (former head of the Water Services Regulatory Board WASREB, Kenya): We do not perceive regulators as anti-corruption fighters but as key players in identifying violations on integrity in order to ensure that people have access to sustainable water services. The role of regulators is to provide an environment that facilitates efficiency, effectiveness and equity in the provision of water and sanitation services, while addressing the sustainability of the service. WASREB looks at the whole water service chain from governance all the way to the consumers. We look at governance by addressing different aspects: how service providers organise their services in terms of provision, how they do their financial management and develop their human resources, how commercial aspects are connected to consumer services, how they engage and inform consumers, how they prioritise investments. All these issues are connected to integrity. Giovanni Espinal (Water and Sanitation Services Regulatory Entity ERSAPS, Honduras): The benefits of integrity are connected to the principle of transparency. Regulators are obliged by law to enforce transparency by providing all information to service providers and consumers in terms of water quality and investment plans to improve coverage rates and achieve universal access. To secure accountability, we organise consumer assemblies, and team up with local supervision and control units (unidades de supervición y control local) to make information available. We also promote “consumer forums” to inform a wider public about their rights and responsibilities and the quality of water they receive. Our work with integrity was initiated with the implementation of an Integrity Management Toolbox. The Toolbox has been very useful to identify new indicators that have helped us to promote integrity. In particular, it has helped us to guide water providers on how to use their own resources and manage bidding for tenders. These aspects are very important, because in Honduras resources are limited and if they are used in an inefficient or illegal way, water provision will be negatively impacted. As a regulator, I suggest looking at what integrity means, how it manifests itself. It is important to understand that we do not operate in isolation. Integrity can help us to make sustainable use of our resources in order to solve the problem of lack of water and sanitation. “One of the main challenges for regulators is to promote integrity within their own organisation before engaging with water providers and consumers. We are constantly facing complex questions such as: what is integrity for us, how do we manage our own resources, and how do we take decisions.” - Giovanni Espinal, ERSAPS How do you establish commonality about integrity issues across the region you work in? Chola Mbilima (Eastern and Southern Africa Water and Sanitation Regulators Association, ESAWAS): Currently our organisation has 10 members. We approach regulation from different perspectives. First, we provide a framework for the discussion of regulatory issues and by doing so, we promote good governance as a way to achieve integrity. It is very important to define clear responsibilities in order to promote accountability and transparency. Second, we develop instruments and tools that guide regulators in performing their functions. In particular, we have designed guidelines for regulators with implications for integrity. I will give an example: we have developed a guideline for tariff setting for the entire region to assist regulators. This relates to a lot of issues of corruption, exclusion, and accountability. The guideline articulates how consumers can participate in tariff setting and raise their voice. We try to make information clear so consumers are aware about how tariffs are set up and what people can do to get a new connection. We try to help each other in the region. As regulators, I have noticed that, in the region, corruption primarily emerges from lack of information and unclear rules. We try to establish clear regulations and share information as much as possible. We have also done regional benchmarking to share information. We agree to set standards as a region and we make information available to a wider public. By doing this, we try to promote transparency, however, member countries also have their own individual ways of approaching integrity. “For regulators, information and data management are key aspects to fight corruption and promote integrity. Most of the time we are hit with lack of data and this becomes a problem because it is a recipe for corruption. If people do not have information they won’t be able to know what road to take and that can bring issues of corruption.” - Chola Mbilima, ESAWAS From a financier’s perspective, what is your motivation to invest in promoting integrity within regulators and what do you see as the direct benefit to your financed projects? Corinne Cathala (Inter-American Development Bank, IDB): The IDB has worked in close cooperation with WIN, cewas and SIWI to assist regulators in the management of their information management systems. This has brought transparency to the way they handle information and accountability to the consumers. We are currently working with 22 regulators in 14 countries. We also aim at strengthening frameworks among regulators as well as supporting partnership and creating a collaborative environment with governments and all water sector stakeholders. The IADB also backs the AquaRating initiative, a performance rating system for water and sanitation utilities. In collaboration with WIN, we have developed a focus analysis targeting integrity and transparency and it has been applied in several water and sanitation utilities. Although this tool was originally designed for utilities, several regulators from Ecuador, Bolivia and Colombia have approached to us to also use these indicators. How do you provide opportunities to marginalised communities in Honduras to hold regulators and utility companies accountable? Giovanni Espinal (ERSAPS): The majority of water providers in Honduras supply rural areas and they work on a voluntary basis. Integrity is part of their heritage as they operate through participatory schemes. They do not receive any economic benefit from tariffs and they represent a true example of what constitutes integrity in the provision of water services. However, they are rural communities and we have to make an effort to make their work visible and to support them to make wise use of the few resources they obtain, especially to reinvest in the improvement of the water service and resources. As regulators, we should avoid any distortion of the system of integrity and volunteer commitment, and recognise their contribution to collective forms of water service provision. While promoting integrity within the work of regulators, how does the IDB articulate the human right to water compared to issues of economic efficiency? Corinne Cathala (IDB): This is tricky question. The UN resolution on the human rights to water and sanitation is oriented to incorporate elements such as effective availability of water, minimum levels of consumption, quality and access to water. These are very important aspects that we are working on with regulators. But we also look at economic efficiency to foster rational use of water resources without undue political interference. However, these aspects should be part of a long-term view that incorporates mechanisms of subsidies to help the most vulnerable population. Many countries, for example, have adopted a scheme of gradual adjustment of tariffs in order to subsidise families that have payment capacity problems. There is lots of work not only at the regulatory level but also at the public policy level with ministries. How do you encourage a regulator to start to work with the concept of integrity? Chola Mbilima (ESAWAS): A key strategy to motivate regulators is to invite them to visit places where things are working. We support regulators that supposedly are not doing so well to visit regulators that do things better. They have the opportunity to ask questions and they appreciate how the system works. We also encourage them to visit regulators, policy-makers and service providers to get ideas about how to make their own internal changes. In ESAWAS, we do not force people, but we expose them to institutions that work well. It’s a strategy to push regulators to implement integrity. References Twyman, B. And Simbeye, I. 2017. Regulating Lusaka’s Urban Sanitation Sector. The Importance of Promoting Integrity and Reducing Corruption. Berlin: Water Integrity Network (WIN) and Aguaconsult. Water Integrity Network (WIN). 2021. Water Integrity Global Outlook 2021. Water Integrity in Urban Water and Sanitation. Berlin: Water Integrity Network.

With Sanitation and Water for All Integrity Talks are interactive discussions with WIN partners about their challenges and lessons for advancing integrity in the water and sanitation sectors. This is an edited summary of our fourth session on tariffs and inflation. How do water providers and regulators deal with tariffs in times of high inflation? Inflation is the rate of increase in prices over a given period of time. When acute, as is the case today in many regions, it has significant impact on the cost of living and of basic services, including water and sanitation. This is often felt most sharply by the poor, who are led to make drastic choices to secure essential services. Water and sanitation service providers must cover costs and deal with rising prices of operations and maintenance, while maintaining affordable service for all. This has its challenges. In this Integrity Talk, panellists discussed the impact of inflation in the water and sanitation sectors with a focus on tariff setting, the ways to make water and sanitation services affordable to low-income groups, and the role of integrity in realising the human rights to water and sanitation. With special guests: Dick van Ginhoven (WIN), Virginia Roaf (Sanitation and Water for All, SWA) James Cleto Mumbere (Uganda Water and Sanitation NGO Network, UWASNET), Rajesh K. Advani, (World Bank), Katia Ochoa Trucios (Servicio de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado de Lima, SEDAPAL). KEY TAKEAWAYS The human rights to water and sanitation obligate States to use the maximum available resources for realising human rights. There is pressure to increase water tariffs to cover mounting costs of operations and maintenance. Low tariffs drive a vicious cycle: insufficient financing leads to poor services; poor services exacerbate low levels of payment; this further undermines the financial health of the utility and leads to lack of investment in maintenance in particular. There are significant integrity risks in the tariff-setting process: from capture to insufficient transparency or participation. High inflation has sharpened the focus on these. States and local authorities need to engage with communities to understand their needs and ability to pay. Involving the community in designing and understanding tariff structures can improve transparency and accountability and help reduce petty corruption. How does high inflation affect the provision of water and sanitation services? Dick van Ginhoven (WIN Supervisory Board): Some economists attribute the current inflation surge to product shortages resulting from global supply chain problems, largely caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. On top of that, the war in Ukraine has increased energy prices worldwide. There are also other fundamental mechanisms triggering inflation and depreciation of local currencies. Inflation can occur when prices rise due to increases in production costs, such as raw materials and wages, or a surge in demand can cause inflation as consumers have/are willing to pay more for products. This might drive increases in, for example, the cost of energy, chemicals, housing upgrades, investment, and water. Rajesh Advani (World Bank): Inflation in the water and sanitation sectors can be heightened by poorly allocated funding. Governments are spending $320 billion per year on water and sanitation service subsidies. From that, 56% is captured by the wealthiest populations and only 6% reaches the poorest 20%. In utility operations, there is a financing gap when costs are higher than funding. In other words, investment, maintenance and operating costs are higher than the available funding which is obtained through tariffs, taxes, and transfers. In periods of high inflation, utilities have to spend more resources to cover the costs of electricity, staff and chemicals, which, in combination with a reduction of public funds, increases the gap. What is the impact of low tariffs on the financing gap? Rajesh Advani (World Bank): Low tariffs drive a vicious cycle where the higher the financing gap, the higher the requirement for additional financing. As public funds are usually insufficient, maintenance is neglected, worsening the technical performance of the utility. When water service provision is deficient, customers are not willing to pay, weakening financial performance and requiring more capital to restore the system, increasing again the financing gap. Katia Ochoa Trucios (SEDAPAL): Peru has one of the lowest tariffs in Latin America. It is not high enough to cover maintenance costs and extend infrastructure coverage. “When maintenance costs are not covered, water is not delivered properly, affecting directly people’s supply.” – Katia Ochoa Trucios (SEDAPAL) How do the human rights to water and sanitation fit in to the discussion on tariffs and inflation? Virgina Roaf (SWA): While tariffs should be sufficient to cover costs for delivering water and sanitation, human rights require that these services be ‘affordable’ for people with low or no incomes. This also means that services must sometimes be available for free, with the costs covered by the State or through cross-subsidisation. Nevertheless, just having a human right to water doesn’t mean that water is immediately available and that it is available for free. States need to make sure people understand this. Human rights impose obligations on States to carefully consider how they prioritise their available resources and to demonstrate that they are making adequate plans and committing adequate funds to ensure that everyone is able to enjoy all their human rights, including water and sanitation. Local governments need to know what aspects of the human right to water they still need to work on, for example: participation, transparency, and how to address corruption. Also, local authorities need to engage with the local community. Inequalities are deepened through poorly managed tariffs and through inflation, as the poorest are least able to withstand the accompanying financial shocks, sending them into deeper poverty. Integrating human rights principles into financial thinking will ultimately improve the lives of the poorest people on this planet. “The challenge is no longer whether the human rights to water and sanitation exist, but how they are to be implemented.” – Virginia Roaf (SWA) What key factors should be considered for better tariff setting? James Cleto Mumbere (UWASNET): In Uganda, there is a legal framework where the tariff system is guided by the Constitution. Several policies clearly outline the key stakeholders in water tariff determination. For example, water utilities make proposals using statutory instruments. Then the responsible minister approves them. The current tariff structure is still hampered by two critical factors: service fees, and VAT (Valued Added Tax), which increase the tariff by about 2% and 18% respectively. Service fees and VAT should be removed from all water tariffs, especially for the poor. Furthermore, it would be important to include pro-poor performance indicators for the utilities at all levels. “For any effective tariff guideline, collection, and payment modalities, it is important to involve the poor in tariff settings to clearly understand their challenges in accessing water.” – James Cleto Mumbere, Uganda Water and Sanitation NGO Network (UWASNET) Katia Ochoa (SEDAPAL): In the city of Lima, Peru, there is a differentiated tariff according to the types of use (social, domestic, industrial, and state use). The domestic tariff is further differentiated between “beneficiary” and “non-beneficiary”. Lower-income residents are under the beneficiary category and they pay according to their income. This allows for differentiated payment and benefits poor households. The tariff is established by the regulator with the intention of providing sustainable services, which means, covering the operations and maintenance costs, service delivery, and investment in projects to expand coverage. The regulator establishes the tariff with the objective of limiting negative impact on the population. Nevertheless, challenges remain in tariff setting, mainly because the price set by the regulator does not cover the full operating costs, increasing the financing gap. How does financing, and especially loans, affect tariffs? Dick van Ginhoven (WIN Supervisory Board): There is a need for a clear financial position of utilities and governments. In Kenya, for example, around 50% of the water budget is spent on debt servicing, which is increasing because of depreciation. This is never going to be sustainable. We need to look at local markets to finance investment and link that investment with the regulation of tariff indexing. I suggest that existing debt may have to be restructured into local debt. How does corruption affect tariffs? Rajesh Advani (World Bank): Corruption happens on two levels. The first one is petty corruption causing issues both in society and utilities. Some initiatives implemented to fight corruption include using technologies, for example, payment by phone. In Nairobi, there are multiple issues with endemic corruption but they have little tolerance for it. Utilities use technologies and engage with people by holding meetings and conferences in local areas. By encouraging communication with local stakeholders they have had success in increasing access to water and sanitation in informal settlements. There is a need to involve the community to build social capital and weaken corruption. On the other side, there is grand corruption. When there are corrupt practices in investment planning and contracting, there is a huge impact on both the operational and financial viability of utilities. Even though there are very strict requirements regarding the procurement of all contracts in multilateral agreements, the main question we face is, what are governments doing? What is the track record of investigating and then of prosecution? What challenges remain in tariff setting? What are the big priorities? Virginia Roaf (SWA): Tariffs are still too low for people who can afford to pay more. People who can access the service are paying less than people who don’t have access to the service, for example, residents of informal settlements. Katia Ochoa (SEDAPAL): Lima faces constant population growth caused mainly by migration of poor or extremely poor people to the city. These people generally benefit from a differentiated tariff and this category has seen an increase of 50% in the number of residents. There is still a deficiency in the methodology for identification of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the differentiated tariff: it is sometimes inexact and very subjective. We may be supporting people who are not in need, while the provision of water services must be as efficient as possible to be able to provide affordable prices. James Cleto Mumbere (UWASNET): I fully support the idea of more local currency financing. But I think for that to happen, utilities need to improve and build creditworthiness to make them attractive targets for the financial sector. Otherwise, banks will not be interested in lending to companies that will not repay their loans. A legal framework that allows more access to private finances is very important, as is the role of regulation. MOVING FORWARD Inflation has increased the costs of water and sanitation provision and maintenance. In response, a number of water and sanitation service providers have significantly raised tariffs where possible, but not always in a transparent and accountable manner. The urban poor are more likely to suffer the effects of inflation than higher-income households as they tend to spend a higher share of their income on water and sanitation. With this in mind, a number of water providers and regulators have undertaken significant efforts to mitigate the impact of inflation and secure affordable tariffs. This Integrity Talk highlighted a number of integrity measures used to mitigate inflation and make tariffs affordable: cross-subsidisation, differentiated tariffs, and mobilisation of the human rights to water and sanitation to oblige States to use the maximum available resources for realising human rights. There is still room for improvement in many regions. This Integrity Talk also underscored the need to take into account depreciation. Many States have taken foreign loans to improve water and sanitation services. With inflation, the debt burden has increased due to local currency depreciation. Debt relief and restructuring, as well as local currency financing are important instruments to consider better support service improvements and ensure adequate and affordable access to water and sanitation for all.

The water sector faces a complex web of challenges that cannot be solved solely through financial investments in physical infrastructure. At the Water Integrity Network , we strongly believe that success, quality service delivery, and sustainable water resource management depend on operators’ ability to invest in systems that prioritise human engagement and build on proactive plans for clean and sustainable governance. We call this process Integrity Management (IM). IM facilitates the development of more robust systems to overcome pervasive challenges in the water sector, including wasted resources, ageing and unsustainable infrastructure, as well as poor: Ethical standards Transparency Accountability Risk mitigation systems Regulatory compliance How does Integrity Management work? IM emphasises the importance of building organisational capacity , and of identifying and responding to integrity risks. IM focuses on: Proactive and regular risk assessment Efficient operations and streamlined administration through integrity Informed and unbiased decision-making Trust building Inclusivity and stakeholder participation Sustainability and resilience The outcome of Integrity Management : a valued organisational culture of integrity aligned with the greater good of communities, key stakeholders, and the environment. Integrity Management is essential The fact that the world is facing unprecedented water challenges cannot be overstated. Water sustainability and delivery is strained across the globe due to an array of factors related to population growth , climate change , increasing water demand , and the degradation of water sources. Water utilities know the threats to infrastructure and sustainability of service. It’s now crucial that they also delve into the underlying dynamics that weaken their response . Increasing professionalism and trust Professionalism is key in developing a skilled workforce capable of managing resources, delivering quality services, and implementing best practices. Adhering to standards, codes of conduct, and industry guidelines enhances the sector's overall performance. Emboldening trust among stakeholders, including the public, government entities, NGOs, funders or investors, and private sector partners, is paramount. Transparent communication, honest engagement, ethical values, and a commitment to the common good are essential. Upholding the mandate to deliver: safeguarding water resources amid ongoing climate disruption Climate disruption underscores the need for IM methods. As climate disruption escalates, vulnerable communities worldwide face disproportionate challenges such as disrupted rainfall patterns, droughts, and rapid flooding events. The major risk, and tendency, in such times of crisis, is that services become discretionary instead of universal as they should be per SDG commitments . To withstand, adapt, and respond to these growing challenges, Water utilities must build organisational resilience, optimise resource management, address inefficiencies, and put controls in place to ensure equitable service delivery. InWASH is a practical Integrity Management toolbox to empower water utilities InWASH is the only dedicated Integrity Management tool for Water Utilities. It distils a transformative approach to addressing the root causes of water delivery issues. The Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-Corruption (TAPA) framework is its foundation. Transparency is vital as it demonstrates to users how their water is managed and delivered, and showcases creditworthiness to financiers – a precondition for investment Accountability clarifies roles and holds stakeholders responsible for their actions Participation engages stakeholders for inclusive decision-making Anti-corruption measures mitigate corrupt practices that drain resources The tool includes an Integrity Assessment, a streamlined, indicator-based assessment tool, aligned with the Aquarating Utility Benchmarking Standard , to guide an organisation through the Integrity Management process. By supporting operators in identifying and addressing underestimated risks such as corruption, operational inefficiencies, and customer service challenges, as well as effective integrity practices, InWASH provides a platform for enhanced service delivery. Harnessing Integrity Management to create solutions InWASH's success stories and challenges encountered, along with key learnings from case studies, offer valuable insights. By leveraging InWASH, generates momentum and ownership within water utilities for reform and performance enhancements. Integrity Management offers valuable solutions to the challenges faced by Water Utilities: Helps identify key risks and priorities. Encourages collective ownership and participation for solutions. Improves user relations and utility reputation Ensures transparent communication about service improvement. Contributes to financial stability and creditworthiness. Navigating unprecedented challenges such as rapid population growth, urbanisation, rising energy costs, and climate disruption requires the holistic approach of IM . Integrating water integrity into an organisation's values is paramount for Water utilities to ensure sustainable service delivery. IM addresses multifaceted challenges within the water sector, ensuring alignment with the greater good of communities and the environment. For more information about InWASH and how it can be utilised to bolster water sector integrity, please contact us.

Practical resources for managing committees of small water supply systems or community-based systems to develop a plan for better, more sustainable water services through integrity and compliance, while building relationships with local duty bearers. WHEN TO USE IT When responsibilities for the management and maintenance of a small supply system are unclear. When long-term water services delivery in rural and marginalised areas needs improvement or is hampered by integrity problems. To support efforts towards building capacity and ensuring compliance with local regulation HOW IT WORKS Poor O&M of small water supply systems is often linked not to hardware issues but to poor management, poor governance and lack of integrity. More technical trainings on O&M will not solve the root causes of the problem but the IMT-SWSS can. It is a coached process to examing integrity problems and develop a targeted action plan with support from local duty bearers. With the IMT-SWSS, management committees of community-based or small water supply systems are in the driving seat. The tool includes accessible resources and templates, meant to enable users to carry out their own assessment of problems and compliance status, select tools and agree on a plan of action focusing on integrity and its building blocks: Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-Corruption. IMT-SWSS creates a platform for customers, committee and local government to discuss problems and improve the quality of services, in some cases enabling longer-term fundraising and institutionalised support. WHO CAN USE IT NGOs and institutions, including local authorities, municipalities and regulators, supporting small water supply systems in rural, underserved, or remote areas NGOs or institutions supporting community-based water supply, HOW IT WAS DEVELOPED The Integrity Management Toolbox for Small Water Supply Systems was first developed by Caritas Switzerland, the Kenya Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB) and WIN with the financial support of the Swiss Agency for Development Cooporation (SDC). It was devised as an innovative approach to support community groups operating outside the country’s regulatory framework and accountability mechanisms. The current toolbox is the result of three years of consultation with sector stakeholders and a clearly defined testing/piloting/scaling up strategy in Kenya as well as adpatations and pilot applications with partners Controla Tu Gobierno and Cantaro Azul in Mexico (since 2019) and with Caritas Switzerland in Ethiopia. HOW TO USE IT Download the detailed overview of the methdology. WIN provides a full facilitation kit (free), including descriptions of recurrent problems and integrity measures, templates and illustrations for communities where literacy may be a challenge. We also support adaptation and implementation in different contexts.

Quick assessment of the integrity situation for a region or sub-sector, through a non-confrontational, participatory workshop, during which stakeholders score and discuss key risk areas. WHEN TO USE IT In preliminary phases of a reform process or integrity change programme, to raise awareness, map potential corruption risks, and identify priority areas for action, at programme, regional, or sector level. When different stakeholders need to develop a common understanding of the integrity situation in a region or specific sub-sector KEY FEATURES Leads to commonly agreed picture of integrity risks and priorities Participatory, non-confrontational, straightforward Simple definitions and criteria for Transparency, Accountability, and Participations Newly added specific criteria for Inclusion Specific adaptations available for WASH in schools HOW IT WORKS AWIS is a 1-day workshop during which stakeholders score and discuss key aspects of Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Inclusion in key water and sanitaiton sector risk areas. HOW TO USE IT Download the AWIS manual Download the basic AWIS factsheet and facilitation checklist To receive the full faciltiation kit (free) or for AWIS facilitation training and general support:

Brief By Birke Otto and Jean-Philippe Venot Published in 2012 with IWMI Small reservoirs are known to have great benefits for the communities surrounding and managing them. They are particularly useful for soil and water conservation, drought-proofing,community-based irrigation, livestock rearing, … Small reservoirs can enhance rural incomes and contribute to food security,helping to limit migration from rural areas. However, they are often criticized for their high costs, too region-specific design, poor-quality construction and low performance. IWMI researchers examined specific examples of small reservoirs in Ghana and concluded from their analysis that “many of the shortcomings relating to high costs and mismanagement could have been prevented if closer attention had been paid to the varying motivations, interests and dynamics of all the actors involved.” Based on this assessment, the brief explores key integrity, corruption and mismanagement risks faced by the planners of small reservoirs in rural Sub-Saharan Africa. All in all, it is believe that water integrity is an overlooked element of small reservoir planning that could reduce risks and improve overall reservoir performance. The brief closes with a series of recommendations to improve the planning process with more integrity, including Acknowledging the complexity of the planning and construction process. Creating an environment in which it is possible to learn and talk about corruption, as a first step towards preventing it. Allocating more time for the planning and negotiation phases, in order to build trust among all project participants. Organisational processes must ensure user participation in the design, decision-making,inspection and monitoring of small reservoir construction, to ensure accountability. Using innovative, small-scale, context-specific approaches to plan small reservoir construction. Encouraging more research on the daily lives and working conditions of actors involved in the planning and implementation of small reservoirs. Download: In English In Spanish: In French:

A risk management framework build trust and ensure effectiveness of water stewardship initiatives through integrity. WHEN TO USE IT To gain a more complete and reliable understanding of the risks water stewardship partners face, by ensuring adequate and inclusive participation in decision-making; To safeguard funds and reputations, by preventing corruption, limiting risk of whitewashing / greenwashing, and enabling open exchange and disclosure of information among partners; To mitigate conflict and be more effective and sustainable, by building inaccountable and clear governance structures for the water stewardship initiative, standards of conduct, and frameworks for monitoring and evaluation. HOW IT WORKS The Integrity Framework for Water Stewardship Initiatives includes key guiding questions to assess risks, descriptions of major water integrity risks and descriptions of measures that can be implemented to mitigate risk and strenghten governane of a water stewarwship initiative throughout its lifecycle, from inception to dissolution or renewal. HOW IT WAS DEVELOPED The Integrity Framework for Water Stewardship was developed with support from GIZ in partnership with the CEO Water Mandate and a consortium including the Pacific Institute, Water Witness International, Partnerships in Practice, Pegasys, and IWASP. HOW TO USE IT Download the guide: View case studies on the benefits of integrity for water stewarship initiatives: Contact WIN for integrity support or training

By Almas Haider [1] Migration to Delhi from neighbouring states is changing the social dimensions of the city. Economically and socially marginalized communities often live in unauthorized or illegal colonies and slums, where the provision of basic services, especially water, is irregular, inadequate, and of unacceptable quality. Communities living in legally sanctioned colonies tend to be wealthier, to be more powerful socially, and enjoy better services. In this asymmetric scenario, underprivileged and marginalized people struggle daily to obtain water for their needs, sometimes succumbing to corruption and other illegal means to survive. This WIN brief explores the plight of these people, reflecting on the situation in many urban cities today. According to the UN, about half of the world’s population will live in cities by the year 2030. Inequality and corruption are likely to blight the water sector in these cities as it does in Delhi. Understanding the risks better and exploring the dynamics of integrity in urban water today are essential steps to achieving equitable and effective service for all. Download as pdf: Urban divisions of Delhi Delhi, officially known as the National Capital Territory (NCT), is the capital of India. It is the world’s second-largest megacity, after Tokyo, with an agglomeration of 25 million inhabitants and growth predicted to reach 36 million by 2030 (United Nations, 2014). Delhi is also among the top 40 cities in terms of wealth-making worldwide, with a per capita income of more than 3,000 US$[2] in the year 2012-13 (Delhi Human Development Report, 2013). Also called the city of migrants, Delhi welcomes an estimated 78,000 migrants annually, people searching for education and employment opportunities and for a better quality of life (Delhi Human Development Report, 2013). Nevertheless, some 10 per cent of Delhi’s population lives below the poverty line, according to the standard prescribed by the former Planning Commission (Economic Survey of Delhi, 2014–15). Delhi houses the rich, the middle class, and the poor. There are eight types of housing settlements for the residents, of which only one is termed ‘planned’ and the other seven are ‘unplanned’ colonies. As the population of Delhi has grown, the number of ‘unauthorized’ colonies has also increased from 110 in 1962 to 1,639 in June 2014—largely occupied by lower-middle class and poor residents of the city.[3] Unequal water supply Planned and unplanned settlements as well as socio-economic status play key roles in Delhi’s housing. Some of the settlements, mostly planned, house the higher-income groups; the lower-income groups—consisting of poor, low-income migrants, especially those from the rural belt and minority groups—tend to reside more in the unplanned or unauthorized colonies. This in turn has an impact on access to water, where the planned high-income colonies receive more water than the poorer low-income colonies. For example, some areas in Delhi have 24 hours of sufficient water supply while others struggle to fill their buckets every day (Mahendra Dev and Yedla, 2015: 162). Localities like Mehrauli and Narela received only 29 litres per capita per day (lpcd) of water whereas upmarket Cantonment Board received over 500 lpcd of water (the highest amount in the city) and Karol Bagh received 337 lpcd (Narain, et. al, 2012). This imbalance is typical of water distribution in Delhi. Although water is a basic human right (United Nations, 2010), about half of the population of Delhi is living in unauthorized colonies where most of the population lives in abject poverty, with unacceptable standards of water supply and quality (Agrawal, 2013). These colonies are not officially connected to the network of water pipelines. Residents wake up early and spend hours fetching water every day. Given the intermittent water supply and the difficulty of meeting demand via the piped network, water tankers cross the city to fill the gap. These tankers get their water either from the water utility, Delhi Jal Board, or from private borewells. In the unauthorized South Delhi colony of Sangam Vihar, for example, almost all of its 400,000 residents (World Health Organization, 2011) depend on private water suppliers. Low-income areas in other colonies in the south of the city—including both authorized and unauthorized ones, such as Okhla, East of Kailash, and Greater Kailash—also depend on private water suppliers when their pipes go dry (Bansal, 2012). The National Commission on Urbanization confirms that the water supply system in India is highly biased in favour of the rich, the powerful, and the influential, with the poor suffering an artificial water scarcity (Panickar, 2007). This is particularly true in Delhi’s case. - CC0: Dinesh Bareja via Flickr Political and social boundaries Delhi’s urban water management is influenced by cultural values, societal patterns, and politics. Caste, religion, and political dynamics influence water management significantly and deepen critical integrity issues of inequality and discrimination. These political and social boundaries are associated with a high rate of migration of diverse ethnic groups. This migration affects the city’s social and political structure, which is fragmented into groups reflecting different ethnicities, nationalities, castes, sub-castes, religions, and languages. Among all these fragments, the caste system appears strongly in water distribution, because the caste system relies upon discrimination against those at the bottom of the social hierarchy (Sarkin and Koenig, 2010). There are numerous reports that the untouchable castes have been denied water or faced violence in trying to access water. While the class has taken over from caste, these concepts remain somewhat important to Delhi’s current water supply distribution and access. Poor people are mostly associated with the lower class category and are more likely to face difficulty in accessing water. Just as social schism shapes access to water, politics also plays an important role. Water is a highly political issue in India, where politicians and councillors decide water distribution and pricing (Ramamohan, et al., 2014) and caste politics is a key issue here. Political leaders tend to give preferences to people of a similar background—whether caste, religion, language, or region. Factors inhibiting equity in Delhi’s water governance Issues of equity and access are key integrity concerns. The access issue - having a voice in decision-making - is closely linked to the existence of transparency, accountability, and participation (TAP) mechanisms. Strengthening TAP can help in addressing equity challenges in Delhi’s water governance and management. In Delhi, securing water for all, especially for the most vulnerable, is not just a question of better infrastructure or greater investment, it is equally a matter of good governance. Decision-making processes as well as stakeholder involvement and capacity building can alter the situation. Water governance in Delhi is weak in several aspects of TAP: Transparency concerns “Most of the population is not aware of the decisions of the authorities, having never been informed. The authorities do not really want people to know too much, otherwise they may create problems in the government’s decision-making, because awareness means demands.”[4] (Haider, to be published 2016) Government transparency has been on the agenda since India gained independence and has taken shape since the enactment of the Right to Information Act in 2005. Still, information is patchy and not easily available to the general public. Information on water demand, transmission losses, the location of leakages, and where the lost water goes is not forthcoming.[5] According to the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, information is unavailable on the population size in each part of the city on how much water should be supplied to various parts of the city. CAG adds that distribution is generally based on assumptions; bulk water meters are absent across the distribution network and the amount of water entering the network cannot be tracked (Comptroller and Auditor General of India, 2013). This kind of environment—in which information is not recorded, and the legal framework of Delhi’s water system is unclear—makes the whole system vulnerable to corruption (Panickar, 2007). This affects equity because without transparent information water can be distributed based on powerful influencers or bribes. The poor, marginalized, and minority residents cannot afford to lobby or pay a bribe. Accountability concerns “Whenever we have a problem of water supply in our home, we try to register our complaint with the municipality, but it is very difficult to get a hearing without an agent.”[6] (Haider, to be published 2016) Accountability refers to the clear responsibilities of institutions and individuals, who must be answerable for their actions. It reflects a citizen’s right to question service providers over poor performance and to demand better service. Delhi’s current institutional framework does not allow for the separation of roles and duties of service delivery, sanctioning regulations, and financing, resulting in obscured accountability (Odugbemi 2008). Citizens do not directly question the water authorities. Instead, in jurisdictions across the country, the people elect a representative to mediate with the water authorities for their needs, demands, and concerns regarding the water authorities’ standards (Water and Sanitation Program, 2005). Where political intermediaries cater to certain audiences, many others (especially the marginalized) can be deprived of access to services. Participation concerns Participation implies that all stakeholders, including marginalized and resource-poor groups, are meaningfully involved in deciding how water is used, protected, managed, or allocated. In Delhi, Social Welfare Associations (SWAs) allow participating residents in planned neighbourhoods to meet and actively share their views on the water issues affecting them. These community groups play an important role in spreading information and awareness. However, SWAs, which are formally recognized by the authorities, cannot be established in illegal colonies. The result: people bracketed as lower caste or class and minority groups are excluded from decision-making processes and influence. Moreover, most citizens of low-income households are poorly educated, which undermines their comprehension of the bureaucratic processes of water management. This impends their ability to understand information and to participate. They stage protests, write to the press, or seek help from NGOs. This may solve some problems but does little to improve the system. - CC0: Koshy Koshy via Flickr Impact on poor and marginalized communities The twin problems of inequality and lack of access to water provoke people to violate rules and use illegal ways to get water. In such an environment, people and groups with vested interests step in, leading to an artificial scarcity of resources (Panickar, 2007). This combination of inequitable distribution of water, lack of adequate TAP processes, and corruption is a serious problem for consumers. In the slums and unauthorized colonies of Delhi, people spend hours waiting in queues at water stand posts. The limited duration and untimely supply of water also increase social tension among citizens, which results in frequent disputes in the streets, sometimes violent. On 26 September 2015, the India Express reported the first death to be caused by violence over water. It occurred at a public utility tap on a street called Peepal Wali Gali, which is barely five kilometres from Civil Lines, where Delhi’s lieutenant governor and several cabinet ministers live (Angad, 2015). Water tankers, both private and from the water utility, fill demand-supply gaps across Delhi. Many private tankers sell water without the permission of the water utility; households buy from these private suppliers. This is a highly profitable business. There is a lack of adequate control over their access to water and these private tankers have no shortage of water sources and can include groundwater too. (Bansal, 2012: 11). Recently it was reported that private tanker operators fill their tankers from the utility booster pumping stations and that is not possible without the assistance of staff or officials (Bansal, 2012: 12). The government water subsidy scheme is intended for poor and marginalized residents. However, only residents, especially in the middle to high-income group with metered water consumption benefit from it, thus contributing to inequality. Women and girls bear most of the burden of water shortages and suffer its negative effects on their health, education, and employment (Kher, et al., 2015). There are health implications as well: many unauthorized colonies and slums are in low-lying areas that lack proper sanitation facilities. The key reasons that people pay bribes include obtaining a water tanker from a water utility, installation of a piped water supply, and repair of a water pipeline. Such additional payments for water not only affect a family’s financial stability but can be measured in terms of lost working days, human development, and lives. In Delhi in 2014, the average household paid around 20 US$ as a bribe, from a minimum payment of 5 US$ for a water tanker to a maximum payment of 75 US$ to bring down a water bill—significant amounts for low-income families in India. (CMS Transparency, 2015). The lack of integrity in policies, project design, procurement, and construction has a major impact on the provision of quality services for all. In Delhi, several infrastructure projects are designed and huge investments are made without benefiting the public. In April 2015, for example, The Hindu reported that three engineers from the water utility had been arrested and charged with fraud for awarding construction contracts at a higher rate for so-called urgent projects. Later government enquiry revealed that, in fact, the work was neither necessary nor undertaken (Staff reporter, 2015). Equity is affected by policies too. In Delhi’s case, the ‘right to water’ is not recognized by the Constitution, rather it is derived through judicial interpretation (Cullet, 2013). Water is an everyday need and the day-to-day life of an individual is not organized by judicial decisions. It is comparatively easier for a resident to pay a bribe to get access to water rather than to go to court for the same. This is what people in Delhi do. Ongoing positive developments The statement that the ‘water crisis is a crisis of governance’ is a matter of opinion, but one sufficiently accepted by the majority of the population in Delhi and also reflected in the rise of a new political party, Aam Admi Party (AAP), which won elections in February 2015 on an anti-corruption plank. It promised to deal with the water problem of the city and had several agendas associated with water listed in its manifesto for the Delhi Assembly Election 2015, including: Ensuring 20 kilolitres of water per month to every household in Delhi without any fee. Bringing piped water supply and sewage network to all in Delhi irrespective of their legal status. Upgrading the water infrastructure to reduce water losses. The government has placed emphasis on equal distribution of water to all, recognizing water as a human right. Under its government, the water utility is being revamped and several new projects are being launched. The water utility is connecting 237 unauthorized Delhi colonies to the water pipeline network; the work is expected to be completed by the summer of 2016 (Team MP, 2015). It also will expand the water supply in unauthorized colonies by installing 280 water kiosks, where water will be provided at 0.015 US$ per litre. The new government also intends to make the water utility more transparent and corruption-free. One of the efforts undertaken in this respect is fitting GPS systems to water tankers, so that location, schedule, and time-to-destination information can be made available online. This could help in lowering corruption by countering tanker mafia attempts to divert tankers from their routes (TNN, 2015). Conclusions Lack of equity is a key problem for Delhi’s water supply sector. The new government seems to have a better perception of the root causes of the problem and has implemented a strategy for equity in water distribution. It is too early to draw conclusions about the sustainability of this approach. In order to minimize corruption risks and improve equity, diverse efforts—including participatory approaches and transparent availability of information—are needed. Footnotes, bibliography, and credits For a complete bibliography, download Inequalities in Water Service Delivery in Delhi (PDF). Download full brief (pdf, EN) Almas Haider holds a degree in civil engineering and is an environmental engineer. She is currently a doctoral candidate at the Environmental Policy Research Centre in Berlin. Her dissertation examines the role of informal institutions in the performance of water governance in Delhi. Email: almashaider@gmail.com. The author acknowledges the support of her supervisor, Prof. Miranda Schreurs, who reviewed the brief. 1 US$ = Rs 66.15 (November 2015). There are eight different kinds of settlements in Delhi: clusters, slum-designated areas, unauthorized colonies, resettlement colonies, regularized unauthorized colonies, rural villages, urban villages, and planned colonies. An anonymous resident of Delhi in an interview with the author, July 2014. When approached by the author with queries on Delhi’s water management, the responsible institutions did not reply. Anonymous resident of Delhi in an interview with the author, May 2013. Editorial review by Tammi L. Coles and Binayak Das, WIN. PDF print design by Philip Kieckbusch, diehingucker.de. Creative Commons image credits: “Floating rag picker” (2007) by Koshy Koshy via Flickr; “Water break !” (2011) by Dinesh Bareja via Flickr; “India 207” (2013) by Edmund Gall via Flickr.

Water Integrity Network partners promote and introduce integrity measures that contribute to improving water and sanitation service provision and management globally. In our interactive Integrity Talks, we discuss their challenges and lessons learned. This is an edited summary of our fifth edition on emerging technologies. Emerging technologies are showing increasing value for anti-corruption. There are more tools and digital platforms for collecting data, monitoring and reporting wrongdoing. They can help improve access to information, strengthen the demand for accountability, and citizen participation, which in turn can improve decision-making effective water and sanitation service provision and management. However, the implementation and use of such new technology remains a challenge, especially in areas where access to internet is poor, where quality of data is insufficient, or where there are few skilled users and developers. And, there is still much to learn about their effectiveness and impact. In water and sanitation and related sectors, there are a number of initiatives to learn from: some opening data up for use and assessment by the public, some using data analytics to identify red flags for corrupt transactions in climate adaptation projects, and others assessing the relevance and efficiency of planned investments. In this Integrity Talk, we brought together experts and pioneer users of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and civic tech or gov tech, to learn about the tools they use, and how they support their work on water integrity. We also focused on the challenges and new integrity risks some of these technologies can pose. With special guests  : Isabelle Adam (Government Transparency Institute); Albert Lihalakha (Green Climate Fund, GCF); Maria da Graça Prado (Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, CoST); Nanda Sihombing (Open Contracting Partnership, OCP) KEY TAKEAWAYS There is no one-size-fits-all solution – local context matters for tech too The water and sanitation sectors, with both complex governance structures and critical requirements for large-scale and long-term capital investments, are vulnerable to corruption and poor integrity. Emerging technologies have the potential to make information more available and traceable, and to strengthen anti-corruption efforts, but they are not a magic bullet. Water and sanitation sector stakeholders exploring tech options, from government or civil society, need to factor in the way technology use is shaped by political and economic circumstances and social norms. They also must consider the possibility of new integrity risks arising. The TAPA framework – looking at Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-corruption – is useful for such an analysis and addresses the key issues speakers discussed in this Integrity Talk. Transparency – We need more open data in the water, sanitation, and climate adaptation sectors on water management, service levels, investment decisions, procurement, and transactions. And we need clear information on how data is collected and used. Standardisation and interoperability are still significant challenges. Accountability – Large volumes of information are difficult to manage and require constant verification. Using such data to hold duty-bearers accountable is difficult, time-consuming, and costly. Information that is provided therefore has to be simple, relevant, and easy to use to ensure the active engagement of citizens. Participation – Citizens have to be empowered to demand and use information. They need to be involved in the development of solutions and need to be technologically equipped and have the skills to use emerging technologies. When applying tools and digital platforms it is important to understand the motivations, capabilities and incentives of users, as well as to consider who might be excluded by the technology being used. Users should be able to track, monitor and report while getting quick and tangible responses from authorities. Anti-corruption – Technology can support anti-corruption efforts, but can create new opportunities for corruption, such as enabling anonymous flows of money, rent-seeking, and use of data for private aims. Implementation should therefore be thought through carefully and accompanied with relevant anti-corruption measures. How can emerging technologies support anti-corruption and integrity? Isabelle Adam (Government Transparency Institute): E-government has become a promising tool in the battle against corruption. There are now tools for the payment of electricity bills and taxes, as well as applications for certificates and personal official identifications (IDs). E-government can be an effective instrument to discourage corrupt acts as it exposes government activities to the public, minimises personal interactions between public officials and citizens, and reduces opportunities for discretionary decisions. However, e-government projects require constant monitoring and revision to avoid being misused by tech-savvy public officials, as tech can also facilitate nefarious use for rent-seeking or issuing fake IDs. Crowd-sourcing and whistle-blowing tools can also be used to improve transparency and reduce corruption. For example, I Paid a Bribe is an application that enables citizens to report bribes. It has been replicated quite broadly as it is relatively easy to use and anonymity is guaranteed. However, the impact varies across regions. While such platforms have been highly successful in India, they seem to have been far less successful in China and Kenya. Blockchain is another new technology, useful for land registries for example, and widely used in India, Georgia, and Ukraine. One benefit of this technology is that it secures records, making them unchangeable because they are decentralised. However, blockchain can be subject to integrity risks as it can also facilitate embezzlement and anonymous flows of money (e.g. money laundering, cryptocurrency transaction). However, blockchain can be subject to integrity risks as it can also facilitate embezzlement and anonymous flows of money (e.g. money laundering, cryptocurrency transaction). Water Integrity Talk 5 – Clip with Isabelle Adam, Lessons learned from reviewing gov tech and civic tech initiatives How can digital technologies help to reduce corruption and build integrity in the development of infrastructure? Maria da Graça Prado (Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, CoST): Infrastructure is known to be a highly corrupt sector. One way to use technology and open data to reduce the risk of corruption is the monitoring and evaluating of infrastructure investments. At CoST, we juxtapose interactive mapping and socioeconomic information. The data and visualisation makes it possible to identify the location of projects that are unjustified, or possibly did not require significant infrastructure investment. It also makes it possible to see which contractors are involved. The aim is to find red flags for integrity failures. Nanda Sihombing (Open Contracting Partnership, OCP): Around 1.47 billion people globally are directly exposed to risk of intense floods. Low-income populations are the most affected by flood events. One way to prevent floods is to invest in infrastructure. Surprisingly however, a number of governments do not have the ability to track investments made on flood relief, response and preparedness. Governments often struggle to monitor where funds are invested and how efforts can best be extended to help adapt to climate change and protect populations at risk. At OCP, we use open contracting to find a solution to this problem. We work with governments, which often lack qualified data scientists, providing capacity building to run an open contracting model to track the investments made on flood relief, response, and preparedness. We also collaborate to collect data and information. Open contracting highly depends on political commitment and cooperation to support its proper implementation. Water Integrity Talk 5 – Clip with Maria De Graca Prado, How data can help accountability What kind of emerging technologies are being used by the GCF-IIU to address corruption issues? Albert Lihalakha (Independent Integrity Unit of the Green Climate Fund, GCF): The Independent Integrity Unit was created to investigate fraud and corruption in GCF-funded activities. We undertake digital forensics by capturing relevant information from different sources such as server data, emails, docs, SMS, WhatsApp, Facebook, browser data, etc. Reviewing all this information manually is overwhelming: there is a lot of data, which makes an investigation process lengthy and the risk of missing key evidence high. As part of our prevention mandate, we therefore developed an “Integrity Due Diligence Platform” to help identify potential risk areas for corruption. Our machine learning has four components: (1) Data Integration from project documents and databases, (2) Integrity Risk Ranking to assess data and inform the selection of projects that will be selected for an integrity review. An integrity review is a process that engages external stakeholders to identify potential gaps in GCF-funded projects and then work collaboratively to address those gaps, with capacity building or technical assistance, (3) Automated and manual Red Flags Detection; and (4) Reporting on the risk mitigation strategy. How do you engage citizens and convince people to use new technologies? Water Integrity Talk 5 – Clip with Nanda Sihombing, Ensuring citizen engagement, a condition for success Can we trust the data used for these analyses? Isabelle Adam: Measurable indicators are very useful to check the quality of data, particularly in public procurement. One of the key benefits of emerging technologies is the ability to quickly identify faulty data. Maria de Graca Prado: Emerging technology can help us to collect and confront information from different sources and identify if the information is inconsistent. Albert Lihalakha: This is a very difficult issue in particular with resource constraints. One of the main challenges is to trace the quality of data and to ensure that civil society organisations or interested parties are inputting the right type of data. These questions need to be answered according to particular contexts as well as with the active engagement of relevant stakeholders where these discussions are taking place. Nanda Sihombing: At the Open Contracting Partnership (OCP) we receive data in different formats, for example, PDFs or Excel sheets. We make it available as open data but in a structured format, this is what we call Open Contracting Data Standards. What are the risks? Water Integrity Talk 5 – Clipwith Albert Lihalakha, Integrity tech risks and what to do about them