A Comparative Evaluation of Public-Private and Public-Public Partnerships for Urban Water Services in ACP Countries

This study evaluates the comparative advantages of PPPs and PuPs in urban water services. Based on literature analysis and case studies, past performance of PPPs and PuPs is reviewed against several criteria. Lessons are then identified regarding the barriers and enablers which determine the success of partnerships, and the kind of support donors could usefully provide. The study concludes that while the main determinant of performance is not public or private management but policy, institutions, finance and regulation, there are notable differences between what PPPs and PuPs can offer. In the right circumstances the private sector can improve in efficiency and management, but at high costs. PuPs generally have lower costs and greater focus on capacity building and equity, and have the potential to support more holistic approaches to urban services and the water cycle. Partnerships with local actors can also improve services by allowing more flexible approaches to service provision to meet the needs of different households. The involvement of civil society and community groups in particular often helps to improve services for poor households. A key conclusion is that governments should have a choice of different partnership options and the ability to end failing partnerships.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

ABBREVIATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PPPs and PuPs: a brief history
1.2 Defining PPPs and PuPs: a typology of partnerships
1.3 Approach of the study and structure of the report

2 PERFORMANCE OF PPPS AND PUPS: REVIEW OF THE
LITERATURE
2.1 How have PPPs performed in Africa
2.1.1 Investment and expansion
2.1.2 Efficiency and financial performance
2.1.3 Service quality and price
2.1.4 Provision for low-income households
2.1.5 Wider societal impacts: poverty reduction, equity, health and environment
2.2 How do PuPs compare
2.2.1 Prospects for sustainability
2.2.2 Shared goals and low costs
2.2.3 Potential to promote an equitable approach to water services
2.2.4 Potential for an integrated approach to urban services
2.3 Barriers and enablers for successful partnerships
2.3.1 Underlying constraints
2.3.2 Financing and external support to partnerships
2.3.3 The importance of information
2.3.4 Incentives for serving low-income households in commercial partnerships
2.3.5 Involvement of civil society to improve services for poor households

3 CASE STUDY: GHANA
3.1 Context
3.2 The Ghana Water/Aqua Vitens Rand Ltd PPP
3.2.1 Performance of the GWCL / Aqua Vitens Rand Ltd. PPP
EU water policy in developing countries
3.3 The Savelugu Community PuP arrangement
3.3.1 Performance of the Savelugu PuP
3.4 Discussion and lessons

4 CASE STUDY: SOUTH AFRICA
4.1 Context
4.2 The Harrismith PuP with Rand Water
4.2.1 Achievements
4.2.2 Success factors
4.2.3 Barriers and challenges
4.2.4 Subsequent developments and the legacy of the PuP
4.3 The Nelspruit / Mbombela concession
4.3.1 Achievements
4.3.2 Barriers and challenges
4.4 Discussion and lessons

5 CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS
5.1 Comparing PPPs and PuPs
5.2 Broader Lessons
5.3 Past EC development support in water and sanitation: lessons for PPPs and PuPs
5.4 Final remarks

6 BIBLIOGRAPHY
6.1 Interviews conducted

Post Date : 30 Juli 2010