Developing a Sector Wide Approach in Samoa A

Developing a Sector Wide Approach in Samoa : A Before and After Snapshot 1

The before… A situational analysis – a snapshot of the situation before the SWAp within the context of: – Water Supply (SWA and IWS) – Water Resources Management – Sanitation – Water Quality – Sector Orientation

…and after! • The Achievements – Water Supply (SWA & IWS) – Water Resources Management – Sanitation – Water Quality – Sector Orientation

Before… Water Supply – SWA Unreliable water quality, limited access and intermittent water supply Low cost recovery High level of water losses (inefficient infrastructure) Water Supply – IWS Limited capacity to manage schemes; Insufficient water quality; No cost recovery mechanisms; high water usage; not formally recognised therefore difficult to access government assistance Water Resource Management Fragmented control and management of water resources; watershed section (MAF); hydrology (MET); NWRP 2001 (no implementation) Sanitation Weak monitoring and regulation Untreated septage disposal generally Waste water management and sanitation received less priority Water Quality Weak, inefficient monitoring and regulation No independent water quality monitoring

…and after Water Supply – SWA • Developed a Water Services Policy (tba) • Improve performance of SWA to achieve targets relating to water quality and improved efficiency (reduction in water losses) • Strengthen financial performance to ensure long – term economic sustainability of SWA • New tariff policy – eliminates free allowances; increase in tariff levels; and monthly billing Water Supply – IWS • Water Services Policy • Recognises the role of the IWS in meeting the needs of the population not covered by SWA (in particular the rural areas) where the smaller schemes have limited or negative economic potential • Strengthen capacity of IWS to improve the governance of its schemes which includes regular payment of water user fees, transparent management and improved maintenance • 5 schemes are being upgraded under the Wa. SSP project

…and after Water Resources Management Sanitation • Establishment of the Water Resources Division to ensure sustainable management and development of the country’s water resources • Developed a NWRMS 2007 -2017 • Enactment of the WR Management Act 2008 • Introduced a licensing system for water abstraction • Revised the NWRP 2001 which was recently approved by CDC • Development of watershed management plans • Development of Village by-laws • Expansion of surface and groundwater monitoring • Wastewater management and sanitation is a growing priority for Samoa • New treatment septage facilities are being developed under Wa. SSP (Tafaigata-Upolu & Vaiaata – Savaii) soon to be completed • A pressure sewer system and related waste water treatment plant for the central business area of Apia are being completed under the ADB – SSDP • Developed a National sanitation policy which has been endorsed by the Cabinet Development Committee

Water Quality • Independent Water Quality Monitoring • Wa. SSP supported the development of the Water Quality and Sanitation unit under the Public Health division of MOH • Responsible for regular water quality tests covering SWA and IWS • Cabinet approved water quality standards • Responsible for water safety planning and advise on measures to improve water quality • Results of water quality monitoring are included as key performance indicators of the water sector Sector Orientation • Coordinated sector policy development , legislative review and formulation and institutional capacity buidling • NWRMS 2007 – 2017 • Drafting of the WRM ACT • Review of the NWRP 2001 • National Sanitation Policy • Water Services Policy • Community by-law

How did Samoa do it?

Wa. SSP 2005 - 2010 • Development of the key document in the sector – Water for Life Sector Plan – Framework for actio in the sector 2008 – 2012 • SDS – Strategy for the development of Samoa 2008 - 2012 • 4 key objectives: – Strengthen water governance and orientation – Secure sustainable water resources management – Increase access to safe and reliable water

The Challenge • Fragmented sector, no sector orientation • Insufficient water quality, limited access and intermittent supply • Inefficient infrastructure and high level of water losses The Objective “To ensure community access to water of suitable quality and appropriate quantities to meet all reasonable health, environmental and economic development needs” The Approach Integrated sector wide approach to water management and service provision

SECTOR WIDE APPROACH SWAp

Main Elements of a Sector Programme • • • Core elements Sector policy and strategy Sector budget and its medium term perspective Sector coordination framework • • Other elements Institutional Framework and Capacity Development Performance Monitoring System • • Additional elements Macroeconomic Framework Public Finance Management

Elements of a Sector Wide Approach

Sector Policies and Strategies “The water sector in Samoa has reached a stage of development where future progress became a matter of good governance. ” It has become evident that there is a need for a: • Transition of Governments role from service provider to regulator • Integrated approach towards resource management and service delivery • Improved sustainability of the water sector “Transparent policies, independent regulators and operators with incentives to perform are crucial element of good governance in the water sector. ” “Being political, policy development is not necessarily a linear, technicalrational process. ” 14

Sector Policies and Strategies “The water sector in Samoa is governed by a number of different mutually reinforcing documents. ” (1) Sector Plan (2) Water Resource Policy (3) Water Service Policy (4) Sanitation Policy Common Characteristics Policy process is characterized by extensive consultations to reach consensus in addressing the challenges Policies are realistic, result orientated policies and consistent with national and sectoral development objectives Policies explicit address the role of the government and distinguish environmental, economic and public health regulatory from service delivery functions 15

Sector budget and its medium term perspective 1. Water Sector Investment Plan: timeframe 20 years • investments into infrastructure and human resource development • provides the resources allocation for implementing the SWAp • Aligns investments with the objectives of the sector policies and strategies 2. Medium Term Expenditure Framework: timeframe 3 years • Basis for annual budget • Embraces all resources in the sector • Forms part of a coherent national medium term expenditure planning 16

Sector coordination framework Joint Water Sector Steering Committee Water Sector Management Unit Water Services Water Resources Sanitation Drainage 17

Institutional Setting Sector Orientation WSCU Water Supply SWA MWCSD/IWSA Water Resources MNRE - WRD Sanitation MNRE – PUMA MWTI – Building MOH – Sanitation MNRE – DEC Wastewater / Drainage MWTI SWA Water Quality MOH

The Evolution: Past – 8 th EDF: Rural Water Supply Project Rural Water Supply Consolidation Project € 18. 7 million € 1. 7 million 1998 -2003 2004 -2006 “The need for a comprehensive and coherent framework for the development and evolution of the water sector has become evident. ” Present – 9 th EDF: Water Sector Support Programme € 20. 1 million 2005 -2010 “Budget Support will root the water sector in a favourable public finance management and macroeconomic environment. ” Future – 10 th EDF: Water Sector Budget Support € 25. 5 million 2010 -2015

Some benefits up to now Effective regulatory environment has been established resulting in: • National Drinking Water Standards that are enacted and regularly monitored • Improved water shed management and protection • Reduction of political interference with management decisions Introduction of a new water tariff model resulting in: • Increased financial sustainability • Reduced demand • Incentive towards increased consumer orientation of the service provider Restructuring of the Samoan Water Authority resulting in: • Increased efficiency and effectiveness • Incentives to perform • Increased service minded approach 20

BUDGET SUPPORT

Key principles • Funds will be transferred to Treasury for the coming budget year on an annual basis • Conditions for release of all transfers are: 1. Macroeconomic stability (IMF or consultant review) 2. Progress in PFM Reform (Annual Report + review meeting) 3. Progress in Water Sector Policy development and implementation (Annual Report + Review)

Continuation of Budget Support • Based on sector performance in reaching targets in the following performance indicators: 1. SWA improved cost recovery – financial sustainability (Annual revenue against costs) 2. Quality of water provided by SWA treated systems in Apia (Mo. H tests) 3. IWS improved governance – (i) established Committees meeting regularly with female representation; and, (ii) regular collection/ banking of water fees and accountability

The Challenge • First time for budget support in Samoa – no lessons learnt • A learning process • Budget submissions will have to conform to government budget policies • Templates – nature of investments / natural accounts / SOEs submissions • Tendency to treat BS as a project • Overall water sector MTEF to guide spending of the sector

Success factors • Sector orientation promoted coordinated policy development, sector investment planning and capacity building • Supported new government functions (MNRE – WRD/MOH) • Project management within Go. S with long term TA to build capacity and develop systems • Established linkages between IAs through sector planning workshops-promotes team work

Cont’d • Introduction of an annual review process for the sector to report on progress and performance indicators to donors and stakeholders • Transition to budget support gives Go. S full ownership and responsibility of future water sector investments

What Samoa has learnt since the start of Wa. SSP • Initially more focus on water supply and very little on WRM and Sanitation – now receiving more attention with the development and endorsement of the Sanitation Policy and a revised WRM Framework • Greater recognition of the role of IWS and the need to support and investment to improve water quality

Cont’d • Linkages and integration of donor projects • Development of a Water Services Policy – to support the interests of consumers, strengthen the performance of SWA, recognize IWS and establish a framework for constructive dialogue between SWA and IWS • Strategic planning – establishing a multiyear planning framework • Participants become motivated and enjoy the collaboration process

Some remaining challenges Implementing the policies: • Implementing contract between service provider and government • Maintaining the partnership between government and village schemes Enforcing regulatory provision: • Ownership of water sources • Appropriate water tariff revisions • Effective water quality monitoring Completing and updating the policy framework: • Completing and endorsing the Water Services policy • Implementing the National Sanitation policy • Updating the Water for Life Sector plan 30

Looking Ahead…Sector Policies and Strategies / Actions required Implementation of Sanitation Policy n Prepare/approve 3 year MTEF with investment plan and capacity building components n Revise and update the institutional framework post-WASSP n Review and Update Water for Life sector strategy document n Water services policy to be approved and under implementation n

Thank You 32

Questions / comments Was government open to the SWAp approach? • Government identifying the need for improvement in the sector was a key factor from the beginning • Some did not understand the benefits at the start – but as the process got moving and results appeared there was more support. It was found to be all talk and meetings – huge amount of workshop and time not always useful. • Donor supported rather than donor driven • Water quality was an important factor in motivating government

Questions How strong has MDGs influenced government approach and SWAp • Strong government acknowledgement of water sector towards poverty alleviation – incorporated into national development plan and MDGs helped in the SWAp success Origins of the SWAp • As well as government support, EU provided strong finance for the water sector – earlier projects helped to trigger the SWAp • Infrastructure without management of water resources was seen as a mistake

For small countries – a SWAp in each sector might be very difficult – how can it work? • This links to the question of how wide is the sector? For small countries coordination is easier but a heavy process to do in each sector. • To try to tackle everything in one step is lead to failure – step by step approach – has worked in SAMOA • Leadership in government is crucial – in Samoa the acknowledge of water quality challenges was important

It is has been a long process in SAMOA – how long did it take and how much did it cost? There have been catering funds of course • There have been a series of workshops with varying levels of participation – now it is government led, the participation is better • It was important that there was concrete projects to implement – the coordination was activity focused around a real project/ problem • Working groups were formed which helped the process of dialogue • For small islands – the recognition is that nothing is done in isolation but not all things have to be linked from the start – only do it where it is needed. • Process started in 2003 • Design and formulation was very solid (information base was good) • SWAp is not new – it is reflected in cultural practices and government action – it was made compatible with the Samoan culture and perspective

If you were to do this again – what would you do differently? • Some mistakes were done in the design – sanitation was under recognised • Large investment in rural water supply was too engineering orientated and did not take into account social realities – due to lack of national understanding by external TA • An issue around the role of agriculture/energy is ongoing - should it be in the water SWAp or not? • Water for Life sector plan needs to be updated – to revisit functions of each agency and related sectors

How as the lead agency identified? • Initially the lead agency was the water authority but they were the implementer – so the lead went to the ministry which is the policy and regulatory role • A number steering committees were put into place to coordinate policy and implementation – 2 levels of committee (policy and technical) which establish the umbrella and then a number of working groups at implementation level each dealing with their specific topics. • There was a realization that the technical level of coordination was needed during the process of developing the SWAp • Water sector management unit sits in the aid division of the Ministry of Finance – which reveals the initial role of external assistance – leadership is still question that is not fully resolved

How is capacity maintained when the lead is with the ministry? • The capacity building programme helps with this – external assistance is provided by the EU • It is an issue that very relevant and has not received enough attention – there is a turnover of staff • Manuals have been made to retain knowledge and help in transfer – the division have to update the manual • In FIJI, most of the information in manuals is outdated the most important information is with the personnel and they hold on to that. When the consultant goes the momentum goes with it. If the wrong person takes over, the project dies. • Strong systems can help – in Samoa even if all TA left the systems would continue • TA driven progress is not sustainable – ownership is necessary – the approach of providing TA is important