an assessment of the local service delivery of potable water in … · 2012-09-17 · of drinking...

An Assessment of the Local Service Delivery of Potable Water in Dumaguete City and Selected Areas of Agusan del Sur Province

daniLo c. iSraeL1

AbStrACtThis paper assessed the local service delivery (LSD) of potable water in Dumaguete City and selected areas of Agusan del Sur. It is based on a recent study conducted by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). The results and findings of the study indicated, among others, that Dumaguete City had met national and Millennium Development Goals (MDG) related to potable water delivery while some of the covered municipalities of Agusan del Sur were far from achieving them. Findings also showed that LSD in the two sites faces numerous problems—many of which were institutional in nature—that need to be addressed if national and international goals are to be realized. Some recommendations, including those on the institutional and other related aspects, were put forward for the further development of the LSD of potable water in the two sites as well as in similarly situated areas in the country.

INtrODUCtIONPotable or drinking water is a critical requirement of human life. Its provision in adequate quantity and quality is a primary national and international concern

1 Senior Research Fellow, Philippine Institute for Development Studies. E-mail for correspondence: [email protected].

Philippine Journal of DevelopmentNumber 67, Second Semester 2009

Volume XXXVI, No. 2

98 PhiliPPine Journal of DeveloPment 2009

across the globe. In particular, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) target that 86.6 percent of the population would have adequate access to safe drinking water by 2015 (NEDA 2007). For its part, the Philippine government aims that 92 to 96 percent of its citizens would have sufficient water supply by 2010 (NEDA 2004).

The performance of the Philippines in meeting national and international objectives related to potable water needs to be assessed since 2015 is not too far ahead. Evaluating where the country is at present will determine if its objectives are attainable. It will also show if there is a need to finetune the government’s approaches for achieving its goals or if it should fasttrack its efforts within the limited time available.

In late 2008 and early 2009, the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) jointly conducted a study on the delivery of education, health, and potable water services in the case study sites in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities of Agusan del Sur. In the case of potable water, the study looked into the current situation of service delivery in the sites, determined its performance relative to national and MDG targets, and identified key problems and potential solutions related to local potable water service delivery.

This paper summarizes the important results and findings of the aforementioned study on service delivery of potable water in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities of Agusan del Sur. Earlier versions of the paper are found in PIDS-UNICEF (2009) and Israel (2009).

MEtHODS Local institutions play an indispensable role in the delivery of basic services to the people. This is particularly true with potable water. Although a critical daily need, water supply may be inadequate and cannot be fully provided by the relevant agencies of government.

Realizing the indispensability of potable water, UNICEF as funding institution and PIDS as implementing agency conducted the study on the local potable water service delivery. This study was part of a larger research undertaking entitled “Improving Local Service Delivery for the MDGs in Asia: The Case of the Philippines,” which was also conducted by the same institutions.

The aforementioned PIDS-UNICEF study on potable water used a framework of analysis which posited that local service delivery (LSD) is better understood if viewed from three intertwining components, namely, policy, institutions, and finance (PIDS-UNICEF 2009). It also stressed that institutional actors at the local level, including the local government units (LGUs), water districts (WDs), private sector, and other local potable water service providers

99iSrael

(WSPs), are key players in the delivery of potable water. This is based on the assumption that these institutions therefore, are at the forefront of potable water service provision on the ground and, can deliver more effectively the needed innovative practices and exercise the political will, if necessary.

Because of the framework’s emphasis on local institutions, the PIDS-UNICEF study had to be done in local sites. The eventual sites selected—where UNICEF had done extensive work—were Dumaguete City in the Province of Negros Oriental and the municipalities of Bayugan, Prosperidad, and Sibagat in the Province of Agusan del Sur. Another criterion was that urbanized Dumaguete City and the generally rural municipalities of Agusan del Sur would serve contrasting settings for a more inclusive study. Accessibility, security, and other standard factors were also considered in choosing these areas for the study.

The study utilized data and information generated through different means. Firstly, it used the relevant published literature to review the potable water situation at the national level. Data obtained from these secondary sources centered on institutional factors, which were also the focus of the study framework. Secondly, for the site analysis, the study also used secondary data from published and unpublished literature available in the study sites. Data gathered revolved around the site background, the potable water sector of the sites, and other useful information.

For the site analysis, the study conducted a household survey comprising personal interviews with the heads of selected and randomly chosen households or their representatives in the sites. The survey sought to ascertain the nature of the use of potable water by households as the primary users and generate some indications of the price, quality, and accessibility of water. It covered a total of 183 households in Dumaguete City and 158 households in Agusan del Sur.

The study also conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) in the study sites, particularly among households that were nonusers of certain local potable water services. The household respondents were randomly selected from the subgroup of nonusers among the sample groups. In Dumaguete City and Agusan del Sur, 11 and 20 household heads (or their representatives) participated in the FGDs, respectively. Data gathered focused on the nonuse of specific sources of potable water among households and the rationale behind their choices of potable water source. Information were also obtained on household perception of the problems and issues in service delivery of potable water and their potential solutions.

The study also included key informant interviews with representatives of WSPs in the case study sites, including those representing LGUs, WDs,


and other WSPs. These interviews generated valuable information on the perception of the service providers on the problems and issues confronting them and those affecting the potable water sector in their areas.

Key informant interviews were also conducted with LGU representatives in the study sites, namely, governors, mayors, and barangay captains as well as members of provincial, municipal, and barangay committees tasked to ensure the efficient supply of potable water. These interviews generated information on the perception of these informants on the problems confronting their respective LGUs related to potable water delivery as well as their potential solutions.

The perceptions of the aforementioned key informants on the problems and potential solutions relating to potable water service delivery in the sites were considered since they were the most reliable and quick sources of such information on the ground. The limited time and resources available to the study precluded a more intensive identification and verification of the problems and their potential solutions.

rEVIEW OF rELAtED LItErAtUrEThere have been economic studies on the potable water situation in the Philippines. On the supply side, a study indicated that water service in Metro Manila was inadequate (David and Inocencio 1996). Two studies (Arellano 1994, David 2000) on the privatization of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage Sytem (MWSS) showed that unless some adjustments were made, the water shortage problem in Metro Manila would persist. Other studies showed that much of the surface and groundwater in Metro Manila and the country was already contaminated (Ebarvia 1994, The World Bank Group 2003). Another study (Inocencio and David 2001) suggested that the provision of water for the poor and poor communities could be a potent tool for alleviating poverty as it could significantly impact health, income and consumption, as well as gender and social inclusion.

One study (Magtibay 2004) indicated that a portion of the population of the Philippines had shifted its preference from traditional to alternative sources of drinking water such as water refilling stations. Other studies (Greenpeace 2007, World Bank 2005a) stated that 1 out of 5 Filipinos did not get water from formal sources. Still another study (Madrazo 2002) pointed out that those without household connections could only access water from wells, springs, communal faucets, and/or from small-scale informal providers.

Based on another study (ADB 2006) focusing on water supply as a development goal, by 2015 the Philippines would have rural water supply for only 77 percent of the rural population. In 2004 overall water supply coverage for the Philippines was only 85 percent (ADB 2007).

101iSrael

On potable water demand and consumption, two studies (Largo et al. 1998, David et al. 2000) revealed that water pricing significantly affected water demand in the country. Based on another study (Inocencio et al. 1999) a family of six in the Philippines usually depended on the potable water lifeline or minimum consumption block measuring about 10 cubic meters. This implies a substantial water demand, particularly when viewed against an increasing population.

Where the importance of institutions to the provision of potable water is concerned, one study (Water and Sanitation Program 2004) suggested that rural water supply projects with significant investments in capacity and institution building produced the most sustainable rural water supply. Another study (Singh 2006) suggested that policymakers in the Philippines should give due attention to institutional transformation or the creation of appropriate and new institutions as the country moves toward decentralization. Still another study (Johnson et al. 1996) explored innovative ways to finance water districts in the country, particularly where the support of financial donors could be tapped.

In summary, the foregoing findings from various studies highlighted the following about the potable water situation in the Philippines:

The country has been faced with inadequate potable water resulting from water scarcity and water contamination;

This problem is exacerbated by increasing water demand brought about by a high level of consumption and an increasing population;

National and MDG goals on potable water supply may not be achievable based on past performance and projections;

Innovative solutions are urgently needed to address the potable water problems and achieve the national and MDG objectives;

One potent solution could be significant investments in capacity and institution building to make rural water supply projects sustainable; and

Local institutions could play an important role in potable water service delivery with decentralization.

INStItUtIONAL rEVIEW rELAtED tO POtAbLE WAtEr Government institutions, roles, and responsibilities Table 1 lists down the local and national government agencies involved in local water service delivery in the Philippines and their respective roles and responsibilities. While the various institutions affect local water service delivery in varying degrees, the institutions of interest to the study are the WSPs and the LGUs, because they are the ones actually involved in the provision of potable water locally.


Table 1. Key water supply institutions in the Philippines and their roles and responsibilitiesAgency/Legal Basis Roles and Responsibilities

Water service providers (WSPs)

Presidential Decree (PD) 198 or the Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973 established water districts in the country.

Management and operation of water supply systems

Local government units (LGUs)

The 1991 Local Government Code (LGC) mandated the sharing of responsibility of providing local potable water service among local government units.

Planning and implementation of water supply and sanitation programs Preparation of water and sanitation master plans Monitoring of local water and sanitation coverage

and updating of sector profile Provision of support to water service providers

namely, rural water supply associations, barangay water supply associations, and cooperatives, including funding from Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA)

Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA)

PD 198 of 1973 created the LWUA.

EO 738 of 2008 transferred jurisdiction of the LWUA from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to the Department of Health (DOH).

Capacity building support to WSPs Provision of technical advisory services and

financial assistance to water districts Provision of technical and institutional support to

LGUs and WSPs Setting design standards for water supplies

operated by WDs and other WSPs

Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)In 1990, reorganization was undertaken which established the current DILG by virtue of Republic Act No. 6975.

Capacity building support to LGUs Provision of capacity building training to LGUs Coordination of LGU masterplan preparation Provision of information to LGUs on available sec-

tor programs and financing

National Water Resources Board (NWRB)

PD 424 of 1974 created the National Water Resources Council, now known as NWRB.

EO 123 of 2002 strengthened the NWRB and mandated it to approve tariffs of local water districts.

Regulation of WSPs, including LGU-managed water utilities Tariff regulation Coverage and service regulation Management of WSP database, including WSP

performance data

National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA)

In 1987, reorganization was undertaken which established the current NEDA by virtue of EO 230.

Coordination of preparation of national development plans and investment programs Formulation of sector policies and strategies Monitoring implementation of policies, programs,

and projects

DPWH

In 1987, reorganization was undertaken which established the current DPWH by virtue of EO 124.

Provision of technical support to LGUs upon request including implementation of Level I and II projects

103iSrael

Source: PIDS-UNICEF (2009)

Agency/Legal Basis Roles and ResponsibilitiesDepartment of Finance/Government Financing Institutions (DOF/GFIs)

In 1987, the DOF was reorganized by virtue of EO 127, 127-A, and 292.

Financing support for the water supply sector DOF oversees performance of GFIs like

Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), and LWUA. These GFIs provide funding for the water supply sector.

National Anti-Poverty Commission(NAPC)-Water Supply Coordinating Office

The NAPC was created by the Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act of 1998 or RA 8425.

Coordination of the P3W (President’s Priority Program on Water) water supply projects for 432 municipalities outside Metro Manila where people’s access to water supply is below 50 percent, 210 communities within Metro Manila, and 201 municipalities in conflict zones covered by peace agreements with various rebel groups.

National strategies and programs The strategies and programs implemented by the national government to attain MDG and national objectives related to potable water supply in the Philippines are summarized in Table 2. Although all the strategies and programs, in one way or another, impact LSD of potable water, of special interest to the study are: strategy (c) that uses institutional strengthening as an approach for WSP improvement; and strategy (e), which aims to promote innovative schemes to finance LGUs in the conduct of their functions related to potable water provision. In the case of the programs, (a) is relevant to the study as it aims to provide potable water to local areas, including all barangays in the country, and 633 “waterless” communities outside Metro Manila, which could include some barangays located in the study sites.

Institutional problems Although the Philippines already has numerous laws, agencies, strategies, and programs in place for potable water as indicated above, the system of governance in this area at the national level is deemed weak and inadequate. Among the most important of the institutional problems being faced are listed below (PIDS-UNICEF 2009). It would be interesting to know based on the results and findings of the study if the national problems and issues also exist at the study sites and what potential solutions can be considered to address them.

Multiplicity of institutions. The water supply sector is highly fragmented due to unclear duties among institutions, overlapping functions, and poor coordination in planning and monitoring.

Uncertainty in law implementation. There is a high degree of uncertainty on how to implement the laws, particularly Executive

Table 1 continued


Order 279 of 2004 which instituted reforms in the financing policies for the water supply and sewerage sector and for WSPs. This is because the required institutional capacities of the corresponding institutions to carry out the functions mandated in the law were insufficient.

Weak regulatory framework. The water supply sector lacks coherent and robust regulatory framework due to: i) fragmented regulatory oversight by different line agencies; ii) lack of capacities to perform

Table 2. Key strategies and programs related to potable water supply in the PhilippinesStrategy a) Make potable water available nationwide by 2010 through the P3W, with priority given to

at least 200 “waterless” barangays in Metro Manila and 200 “waterless” municipalities in conflict zones outside of Metro Manila through private sector or public investment.

b) Ensure that the LGUs provided with water supply services will also have sanitation facili-ties.

c) Continue to provide capacity building programs and technical assistance to WSPs on water and sanitation planning, management, and project implementation.

d) Develop and manage technology options for water supply such as solar desalination for isolated islands, windmill technology, and others.

e) Promote private–public partnerships (PPPs) for increased investment in water provision to waterless LGUs, especially remote barangays and municipalities.

f) Conduct an assessment of the groundwater resources and vulnerability for the 310 prior-ity LGUs.

g) Monitor potable water supply through the Tap Watch Program.h) Complete the groundwater resource inventory/assessment in major urban areas and

surface water in rural areas, controlling the extraction of groundwater through moratorium and/or stringent requirements in the grant of water permits in water-deficient areas, and through complete registration of all water pumps, metering of water pumps, etc.

Program a) In focusing on waterless areas, the government is implementing the P3W. This is in line with President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s Ten-Point Agenda formulated and announced in 2004, which includes the “provision of power and water supply to all barangays.” Priority areas are the 212 “waterless” areas in Metro Manila and 633 “waterless” municipalities outside Metro Manila.

b) In establishing groundwater monitoring system, the government aims to regulate pumping in areas where piezometric heads (which measure the level of the water table above sea level) are declining, and to assess the state of existing wells in terms of their physical state or the quality of water coming from it.

c) In providing safe drinking water, the government installs low-cost water supply facilities such as hand pumps, gravity-fed systems, rainwater collection, and shallow wells or deep artesian tube wells. It builds infrastructures for drinking water, especially in rural areas with poor access.

d) In conserving water for sustainable water quality and supply, the government undertakes activities that include: (a) improving the system’s efficiency; (b) improving the metering efficiency and monitoring the unauthorized use of water; (c) encouraging the use of sav-ing devices, application of new technologies, and recycling; and (d) conducting intensive public information, education, and communication programs on water conservation.

e) In addressing the downward trend in sanitation coverage, the government has adopted, developed, and constructed low-cost sanitation facilities such as “engineered reed bed treatment system” for low construction cost and maintenance cost, and ventilated improved pit privy (VIP) and other latrines.

Source: NEDA (2007, 2004)

105iSrael

Table 3. Water service providers in the Philippines, as of 2005Type of Provider Estimated Number % to Total

Water districts 580* 9.2 LGU utilities 1,000 15.9 RWSAs 500 8.0 BWSAs 3,100 49.4 Cooperatives 200 3.2 Private firms 900 14.3

Total 6,280 100.0

* 127 were considered nonoperational due to nonviability and lack of Board as of 2003–2004Source: World Bank (2005b)

regulatory functions; and iii) lack of transparency in sector performance that impedes effective regulation.

OVErVIEW OF POtAbLE WAtEr SErVICE DELIVErYIN tHE PHILIPPINESThis section provides a background of the potable water service delivery in the Philippines concentrating on the traditional service providers and the access of the national population to potable water.

Water service providers (WSPs)The traditional WSPs include WDs, LGU facilities, rural water supply associations (RWSAs), barangay water supply associations (BWSAs), cooperatives, and private firms. There are also household self-providers who put up their own water supply systems as well as refilling stations, and bottled water providers who sell processed water. The number and percentage of WSPs in the country as of 2005 are shown in Table 3. In addition to these, an unaccounted number of household self-providers, refilling stations, and bottled water producers exist in the country. The number and percentage of the national population served by the WSPs as of 2007 are presented in Table 4.

In terms of number of units, therefore, BWSAs were the largest WSPs in the Philippines, followed by private firms, LGU utilities, WDs, RWSAs, and cooperatives. On the other hand, in terms of people served, WDs were the largest providers followed by LGU utilities, RWSAs/BWSAs, private/NGOs, cooperatives, and the MWSS.Access to safe drinking waterThe available data on access to safe drinking water in the Philippines have been inconsistent (World Bank 2005). As earlier mentioned, ADB (2007) stated


that in 2004 overall water supply coverage in the Philippines was 85 percent. But surveys of the National Statistics Office (NSO) indicated only a slight improvement in access to safe drinking water, that is, from 80.0 percent in 2002 to 80.2 percent in 2004. On the other hand, the Joint Monitoring Program for Water Supply and Sanitation of UNICEF and the World Health Organization (WHO) showed a declining trend from 87 percent in 1990 to 85 percent in 2004 (PIDS-UNICEF 2009).

It thus appears that the MDG target of 86.6 percent of the population with adequate access to safe drinking water by 2015 may be achievable nationally. On the other hand, the Philippine government’s target of 92 to 96 percent of its citizens having adequate water supply by 2010 may not be attained.

Furthermore, data indicate a large, albeit decreasing urban-rural disparity in access to drinking water nationally (PIDS-UNICEF 2009). For instance, in 1990, the percentage of the population in urban areas with access to safe drinking water was 92 percent while that for rural areas was 75 percent. In 2004, the percentage of the population with access to safe drinking water increased to 96 percent in the urban areas while those in the rural areas rose to 88 percent. Thus, access to safe drinking water in both urban and rural areas increased while the disparity in access between the areas had narrowed down but remained substantial.

The available data also indicate that there is disparity in access to safe drinking water between regions in the Philippines (NEDA 2009). Furthermore, while nationally, the MDG targets for achieving sufficiency in access to safe drinking water may be achievable, as mentioned above, there remain waterless areas at the local level that need to be taken into account. Such a situation was in fact the rationale for the implementation of P3W by the government. A review, however, indicates that the gains of the P3W have been modest

Table 4. National population served by water supply providers, as of 2007Type of Provider Population Served % to Total

Water districts 6,851,487 75.6 LGU utilities 1,511,680 16.7 RWSA/BWSA 296,886 3.3 Cooperatives 100,216 1.1 MWSS* 15,818 0.2 Private/NGO 286,007 3.2 Total 9,062,094 100.0

* This apparently does not include updated data from the two concessionaires, Maynilad Water Services Inc. (MWSI) and Manila Water Company Inc. (MWCI). As of June 2007, MWSI had 5.9 million customers in 696,805 water connections.Source: DILG

107iSrael

negros orientallUZon

ViSaYaS

mindanao

agusan del Sur

Figure 1. Map of the Philippines highlighting the provinces of Negros Oriental and Agusan del Sur

and more needs to be done to provide water to waterless communities in the country (PIDS-UNICEF 2009).

rESULtS OF CASE StUDIES Site description Dumaguete City is the capital of Negros Oriental, which is located in Region VII, or Central Visayas (Figure 1). This coastal city is located in the southwestern part of the province facing Siquijor and Cebu. It became a city in 1948. The background data on Dumaguete City are presented in Table 5.

The province of Agusan del Sur is in the Caraga Region, which is located in the northeastern part of Mindanao (Figure 1). This province was founded in 1967. Bayugan, the most populated area of the province, became a municipality in 1961 and has since been accorded a first-class status. Prosperidad, also a first-class municipality, is the capital of Agusan del Sur. Sibagat, on the other hand, is a third-class municipality. The background data on the three municipalities are presented in Table 5.

Status of local potable water service deliveryThere are essentially three types of potable water systems in the Philippines. Level I water system includes stand-alone water points such as hand pumps, shallow wells, and rainwater collectors. Level II covers piped water with a communal


Table 5. Background data on the study sitesName of Site Population Land Area (Ha) Population Density

(persons/Ha) Dumaguete City 116,392 (2007) 3,426 33.97

Agusan del Sur Bayugan 141,286 (2008) 50,500 2.80 Prosperidad 70,816 (2000) 59,836 1.18 Sibagat 28,682 (2000) 56,000 0.51

Sources of data: LGUs of Dumaguete City and Agusan del Sur

water point such as a bore well and spring system. Level III water includes piped water supply with a private water point such as a house connection.

Dumaguete CityThe service delivery of Level I water in Dumaguete City is provided by both the private sector and LGUs while Level II water is supplied by the LGUs. Level III water is supplied by the Dumaguete City Water District (DCWD), a government corporation. Records show that in 2007, there were a total of 232 Level I water systems in Dumaguete City as against only two Level II and one Level III water systems. Level I water systems comprised about 99 percent of the water systems in Dumaguete City.

Providing Level I and Level II potable water systems, particularly for the poor in Dumaguete City, has been one of the major programs of the city government in coordination with the barangay governments. The City Engineer’s Office has been specifically tasked to construct and maintain Level I and Level II public water systems in the city. In general, the publicly Level I and Level II water is available for free or at a low cost, since it is a form of public service of the city government.

Aside from the city government, the City Planning and Development Office (CPDO) of Dumaguete City as an LGU arm is involved in potable water management. It monitors and regulates large-scale underground water extraction in the city. For this type of water extraction, the proponent is required to get a permit to operate from the CPDO. Another important function of the CPDO is to maintain a database on water extraction in the city.

As in many other local areas in the country, some households in Dumaguete City self-provide Level I water. The installation of a Level I water system in the household is done by private business establishments, individual contractors, or the household members themselves. In 2007, there were 140 private Level I water systems serving 148 self-providing households in the city.

109iSrael

Table 6. Tariff structure of Dumaguete City Water District, 2005 (in Philippine pesos)

Category Residential/ Government

Semi-Commercial

A

Semi-Commercial

B

Semi-Commercial

C

Commercial

Minimum charge (First 10 cubic meter or less)

120.00 210.00 160.00 150.00 240.00

Commodity charge (Consumption in cubic meter)

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

11–20 13.50 23.60 20.25 16.85 27.0021–30 16.50 28.85 24.75 20.60 33.0031–50 20.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 40.0051 up 24.00 42.00 36.00 30.00 48.00

Source of Data: DCWD

The DCWD, on the other hand, has distribution lines in the entire Dumaguete City that supply level III water. In 2008, it provided water for about 95 percent of households, with the rest getting water from Level I and Level II water systems. In 2006, the DCWD had 29,419 service connections, including those for 17,591 households, 256 public taps, 1,571 commercial establishments, and one unidentified consumer classified as ‘others’. Households, therefore, formed 59.8 percent of the customers of the water district. The tariff structure or water pricing of the DCWD since 2005 are shown in Table 6.

The tariff structure of the DCWD indicates that semicommercial and commercial users pay more than residential and government users at the same consumption levels. The structure, therefore, is a pricing scheme where large commercial users pay more per unit compared to the less consuming but numerous households. The structure is consistent with the socialized pricing scheme used by WDs in general throughout the country.

Key informants at the DCWD indicated that in 2008, the water district generated a net profit of about PHP 9 million. This means that as a government-owned or controlled corporation it was making profit under the existing tariff structure. But FGDs showed that the current tariff and the cost of water connections were considered high by some households. On the positive side, the households in general considered the water from the water district as of acceptable quality and easily accessible. Price, quality, and accessibility, therefore, are important reasons households use water from the water district.

In addition to Levels I, II, and III water, processed water in the forms of bottled water and refilled water are available in Dumaguete City. In 2007, there were 20 water refilling stations. The retailing of bottled water in Dumaguete City was generally conducted by commercial establishments.


Municipality of BayuganJust like in Dumaguete City, Levels I, II, and III water systems exist in Bayugan and the two other selected municipalities of Agusan del Sur. Similarly, the service delivery of Level I water is done by the LGUs and the private sector while Level II water is provided by the LGUs. Level III water is delivered by the water district.

Bottled water and refilled water producers also exist in Bayugan and other municipalities of Agusan del Sur. However, the proportion of the population that uses processed water is low except among higher-income groups. Based on the FGDs, households in Bayugan and the other selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur that do not drink bottled water or refilled water deemed the price of the water high, they could get free or cheaper water elsewhere, and processed water is not always available in their area.

The municipal government provides Level I and Level II water systems to Bayugan with the coordination of the barangay units. The municipal mayor’s office specifically takes charge of potable water provision in coordination with the barangay officials. There are no available data on the total number of water systems provided for by the municipal government. Based on sketchy data available, in 2008 this LGU provided 15 shallow wells to one barangay. There are also BWSAs in Bayugan and the two other selected municipalities. Yet the number of functional BWSAs at present is not known.

The Bayugan Water District (BWD) provides Level III water to Bayugan. The BWD started operating in 2001 with the entire municipality as its coverage. At present, however, the BWD currently services only 9 out of 43 barangays in the municipality, mostly located along the national highway. As of 2008, the water district provided water to 2,325 households, which formed only 13.6 percent of the total in the municipality.

The tariff structure of the BWD is shown in Table 7. Just like in Dumaguete City, the tariff structure is a pricing scheme where large commercial users pay more per unit compared to the numerous households consuming less water. The tariff rates of the BWD are also significantly higher than those of the DCWD notwithstanding the fact that the general population of Bayugan, being a town, is significantly poorer compared to Dumaguete City.

Municipality of ProsperidadAs in Bayugan, the responsibility of providing Level I and Level II water systems in Prosperidad falls on the municipal government. This LGU, however, currently does not have a specific program for the provision of potable water in the municipality. Instead, it only provides short-term soft loans to the Prosperidad Water District (PWD) for the establishment of Level I water systems. In 2008, the

111iSrael

Table 7. Tariff structure of the Bayugan Water District, 2009 (in Philippine pesos)Category Residential/

GovernmentSemi-

Commercial A

Semi-Commercial

B

Semi-Commercial

C

Commercial (Industrial)

Minimum charge (First 10 cubic meter or less)

204.80 358.40 307.20 256.00 409.60

Commodity charge (Consumption in cubic meter)

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

Pesos/cubic meter

11–20 22.40 39.20 33.60 28.00 44.8021–30 24.95 43.65 37.40 31.15 49.9031–50 28.15 49.25 42.20 35.15 56.3051 up 32.00 56.00 48.00 40.00 64.00

Source of Data: BWD

municipal government contributed PHP 300,000 as counterpart fund to the PWS for the establishment of Level I water systems in one barangay.

The PWD, which was founded in 1977 and supplies Level III water to Prosperidad, also covers the entire municipality like the BWD. Likewise, the PWD operates only in 7 out of 32 barangays, including the poblacion and its nearby barangays. It covers only about 17 percent of households.

Table 8 shows the current tariff structure of the PWD. Again, the structure is similar to those of other WDs where residential and government users pay less than what commercial and industrial users do. It is also worth noting that the tariff rates of the PWD are lower than those of the BWD. But they are higher than those of the DCWD even if the general population of Prosperidad is much poorer compared to Dumaguete City.

Municipality of SibagatThe municipal government of Sibagat does not have an established program for providing Level I or Level II water in the town. The municipality also does not have a water district for the provision of Level III water. What it has is a waterworks system that is under the economic enterprise unit of the municipal government. Such a system is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and overall management of the income-earning water services of the municipal government. Key informants indicated that a water district will be established n the town within a few years.

The facilities of the waterworks system currently include shallow wells, deep wells, and spring boxes. Some of the spring boxes are connected to pipes that channel faucet water to households, hence making them Level III water systems.


The system operates four Level III water system units that collectively serve 1,205 households. The current pricing scheme for households using water meters is PHP 80 for the first 10 cubic meters and PHP 7 per cubic meter thereafter. This rate is significantly lower that those imposed by the BWD, PWD, and DCWD for Level III water.

Results of FGDs among Bayugan and Prosperidad households indicated that those without connections to the water district found the cost of connection and tariff rates high, considering that their current water costs were low. Also, these households indicated that their current water sources were accessible and at par with the water district in terms of quality. Water pricing, quality, and accessibility, therefore, are important considerations for households in these localities in their choice of water sources.

In general, then, potable water delivery systems in Dumaguete and Agusan del Sur are carried out through Levels I and II structures of the LGUs and Level III facility of the WDs. Outside of the government, the implementation of the strategies and programs has been enhanced with the active participation of the private sector WSPs and those supported by NGOs and other development actors in the local potable water service delivery sector.

Local potable water service delivery: target access versus actual access Dumaguete CityProvincial and city records showed that in 2007, Dumaguete City had a total of 21,582 households, of which 20,012 households were serviced by Level I, Level II, and Level III water systems. The DCWD served 19,239 households or approximately 96 percent of the total. Level I water systems served about 3 percent of the households while Level II water systems served approximately 1 percent.

Table 8. Tariff structure of the Prosperidad Water District, 2009 (in Philippine pesos)Category Residential/ Government

(½” Pipe)Commercial

(½” Pipe)Minimum Charge(First 10 cubic meter or less)

171.00 342.00

Commodity Charge (Consumption in cubic meter) Peso/cubic meter Peso/cubic meter

11–20 18.25 36.50

21–30 21.75 43.50

31–40 25.90 51.8041–up 30.40 60.80

Source of Data: PWD

113iSrael

With the total of 21,582 households in Dumaguete City and the 20,012 households serviced by Level I, Level II, and Level III water systems, the rate of access to safe drinking water in the city, therefore, was 92.73 percent (Table 9). This figure is way above the target of the MDGs of 86.6 percent and within the range of the Philippine government target of 92 to 96 percent. This may, therefore, mean that Dumaguete city has already met national and MDG targets related to local potable water service delivery.

Notwithstanding Dumaguete City’s relatively good performance in meeting international and national goals of potable water delivery, it still embarked on some improvements in the provision of potable water. In the case of the DCWD, the planned activities and projects up to 2010 included the following: a) construction of a new administrative building; b) professional advancement as well physical and spiritual development of its employees; c) replacement of old and dilapidated equipment; d) acquisition of refilling equipment; e) bringing down of nonrevenue water by 30 percent; f) increase in household connections by 4,000; g) optimization of water production and minimization of downtime; h) increase in number of four-wheeled service vehicles; i) protection of the watershed; j) enhancement of water quality analysis; and k) shortened distances of service lines to concessionaires.

Municipality of BayuganProvincial and municipal records showed that in 2007, Bayugan had 17,012 households, of which 16,086 were serviced by Levels I, II, and III water systems. The rate of access to safe water, therefore, was 94.6 percent (Table 9). Based on the Community-based Monitoring System (CBMS) survey, 16.81 percent of the households in Bayugan had no access to safe water in 2005. The rate of access to safe water of 83.19 percent—which corresponds to the 16.81 percent without

Site (Year) Total Number of Households

Households With Water Systems

Rate of Access to Safe Drinking Water

(%)Dumaguete City (2007) 21,582 20,012 92.73

Agusan del SurBayugan (2007)

(2005)17,012 16,086 94.56

83.19Prosperidad (2007)

(2005)13,064 8,683 66.47

62.03Sibagat (2007)

(2005)5,289 4,794 90.64

54.51

Table 9. Rate of access to safe drinking water by households in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2005 and 2007

Sources of Data: CPDO, Agusan del Sur (2008); PHO, Agusan del Sur (2008); PPDO, Agusan del Sur (2005)


access to safe water—fell below the government target of 92 to 96 percent and the MDG target of 86.8 percent. However, the rate of access to safe drinking water of 94.6 percent in 2007 had met both the national and MDG targets. Based on available data, then, this may mean that Bayugan has already met or is close to meeting national and MDG targets for local potable water service delivery.

Municipality of ProsperidadProvincial and municipal records indicated that in 2007, Prosperidad had 13,064 households of which 8,683 households were serviced by Levels I, II, and III water systems. Therefore, 66.5 percent of the households in the municipality had access to safe drinking water (Table 9). According to the CBMS survey, of the households in Prosperidad, 37.97 percent had no access to safe drinking water in 2005. The rate of access to safe water of 62.03 percent (the reverse of 37.97%) in 2005 and 66.5 percent in 2007 in Prosperidad is way below the national government and MDG targets. Thus, more efforts in water service delivery may need to be undertaken in the municipality.

Municipality of SibagatProvincial and municipal records showed that in 2007, Sibagat had 5,289 households, of which 4,794 households were serviced by Levels I, II, and III water systems. Therefore, the access to safe water was 90.6 percent (Table 9). According to the CBMS survey, however, of the households in Sibagat, 45.49 percent had no access to safe drinking water in 2005. The inconsistency and significant difference between the numbers pertaining to 2005 and 2007 suggest data problems related to LSD in potable water in the municipality.

The 54.51 percent (the reverse of 45.49%) rate of access to safe water in Sibagat in 2005 is the lowest compared to Bayugan and Prosperidad. Therefore, based on this figure, maximum effort must be exerted in the municipality to improve its potable water service delivery. On the other hand, the rate of access of safe drinking water in Sibagat in 2007 of 90.6 percent has already met MDG targets and is close to meeting national targets.

Household use of potable waterThe survey of households in Dumaguete City and in selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur further generated some interesting results and findings about the performance of local water service delivery in these areas.

The majority of households surveyed in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur had their primary sources of drinking water located within their neighborhood (Figure 2). Most of these households also had easy access to drinking water, since the sources were located within a short

115iSrael

distance. As such, it can be assumed that the local water service delivery system helped ensure that water was readily available to households.

Although adult males in the households were mainly in charge of getting potable water from its primary sources in Dumaguete City and Agusan del Sur, adult females and children were also involved (Figure 3). In this regard, there may be gender and age dimensions to the activity. It also means that water service delivery was for the most part physically easy, thus facilitating the involvement of women and children in such a task.

Only a minority of households in both Dumaguete City and Agusan del Sur treated their drinking water (Figure 4). This may mean that households were either generally content with the quality of their drinking water, were unwilling to spend for water treatment, or were ignorant of the potential dangers of contaminated water.

Of the households who treated their drinking water, a majority in Dumaguete City and Agusan del Sur used boiling as a form of treatment (Figure 5). This could mean households were willing to pay only a small amount for treatment. Another form of water treatment used by the households was filtering, which could indicate that households were not willing to spend for treatment at all.

The majority of households in Dumaguete and Agusan del Sur considered the quality of their drinking water before treatment good, which explains why they did not see the need for treatment (Figure 6). A number of households described it as excellent while only a minority said the quality of the water was fair or poor.

The majority of households in Dumaguete City and Agusan del Sur were willing to pay a certain amount for the improvement of their drinking water while a substantial number of them were not (Figure 7). Among the former, most would pay PHP 1 or less for the treatment of every liter of water while others were willing to pay more. Since the majority of households were willing to pay only a minimal amount for the improvement of their drinking water, then they may not be able to cover the full cost of such improvement. Other sectors may have to assume the rest of the cost. Furthermore, this result supports the earlier suggestion

020406080

100

Location of source of drinking water is within neighborhood

0 number of minutes to get drinking water

Walking as means of travel to get drinking water

Perc

enta

ge o

f ho

useh

olds

Dumaguete CityAgusan del SurAll

Figure 2. Water accessibility in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2008

Source: LSD Household Survey, 2009


that most households used only boiling and filtering as forms of water treatment, because at most they could only pay a small amount for water treatment.

Under normal conditions, those who were willing to pay only PHP 1 or less per liter of water for its improvement may not be willing to pay for the price of bottled or processed water, which cost many times more than PHP 1 per liter. This may explain why bottled water is not a popular water source among households, particularly the poor.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Drinking water treated Drinking water not treated

Perc

enta

ge o

f ho

useh

olds


Figure 3. Household members who fetched drinking water from primary source, by gender and age, in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2008


0

20

40

60

80

100

Drinking water treated Drinking water not treated

Perc

enta

ge o

f ho

useh

olds


Figure 4. Households that treated their drinking water in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2008


020406080

Boiling Filtering Others

Perc

enta

ge o

f ho

useh

olds


Figure 5. Type of treatment households used in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2008

Note: Others include mineralizing, purifying by water dispenser/purifiers and water ozonizers.Source: LSD Household Survey, 2009

117iSrael

Figure 6. Quality of drinking water before treatment in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2008

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Perc

enta

ge o

f hou

seho

lds

Dumaguete City

Agusan del Sur

All


0102030405060708090

100

0.00 1.00 or less More than 1.00

Perc

enta

ge o

f ho

useh

olds

Pesos per liter


Figure 7. Maximum amounts that households were willing to pay for the improvement of drinking water in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur, 2008


Key issues affecting potable water service delivery in the sitesBased on the FGDs in Dumaguete City and the three municipalities of Agusan del Sur, the following emerged as the important issues surrounding local potable water service delivery in these sites (Table 10). As these key issues were raised by the local stakeholders, they may need further verification and study.

Many of the foregoing key issues identified by local stakeholders are institutional in nature. Even if other issues are not, they still have some institutional underpinnings such as denuded watersheds and water contamination; disparities in potable water service delivery systems across barangays; poor personnel pay; and lack of emphasis on water sanitation. The institutional problems are therefore among the most important issues confronting local potable water service delivery in the two sites covered by the study.


Table 10. Key issues facing potable water service delivery in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities in Agusan del Sur

Key Issues Dumaguete City Bayugan Prosperidad Sibagat1. Entire sector Institutional issues Low levels of technical qualifications of the

manpower involved in local water service delivery;

Lack of integrated planning and ineffective implementation by the relevant institutions;

Lack of government regulations, particularly on small-scale groundwater extraction by the private sector; and

Limited public and private sector participa-tion in local water service delivery.

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Financial issuesLow levels of financial and other related

investments in water delivery systems.x x x

Other issues Denuded watersheds and water con-

tamination that endanger both surface and underground water sources in the two sites;

Disparities in potable water service delivery between the different barangays; and

Existence of waterless barangays that have no or limited local water service delivery.

x x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

2. Water districts Institutional issues Poor coordination with LGUs, resulting in

the latter becoming competitors instead of partners in local water service delivery

x x x

Financial issuesDifficulty in paying outstanding loans by

some water districts due to low or negative financial profitability; and

High exchange rate of the peso to the dollar, which prevents the WDs from purchasing imported equipment.

x

x

x

x

x

Price, quality, and accessibility issues From the perspective of the poor house-

holds, high rates of water connection and water tariffs which discourage them from getting a water connection;

From the perspective of some WDs low rates of water connection and water tariffs that do not allow them to recover costs and earn profits;

Perceived poor quality of water from WDs due to water turbidity; and

Limited coverage, expansion and acces-sibility of WDs.

x x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

119iSrael

Table 10 continued

Key Issues Dumaguete City Bayugan Prosperidad SibagatOperational issuesLow water pressure, high downtime, high

percentage of non-revenue water, and related operational problems.

x x x

3. LGUs Institutional issuesGraft and corruption, which significantly lim-

its public resources for local water service delivery;

Weak and fragmented organizational structures, resulting in inefficient local water service delivery;

Gender- and age-insensitive planning and implementation in local potable water service delivery;

Limited overall support for the BWSAs and similar rural potable water providers; and

Limited tie-ups and partnerships with the pri-vate sector, NGOs, and other stakeholders.

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Financial issuesLimited financial resources, resulting in

poor local water service delivery; andLow compensations and incentives in

government, resulting in low personnel motivation.

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Other issuesLack of emphasis on sanitation as an im-

portant public function related to local water service delivery.

x x x x

recommendations The following emerged as stakeholders’ recommendations to improve local water service delivery in the areas covered by the study. These need further verification and study.

Recommendations to address key issues on potable water service delivery in the study sitesInstitutional issues

High standards must govern personnel selection in local water service delivery. These must be based on merits and qualifications and not on political connections to improve institutional capacity. Furthermore, relevant institutions should conduct trainings and seminars to improve personnel competence;


Local institutions must invest in database and overall knowledge management. Full computerization of their activities and networking and coordination with other institutions are needed to build up the knowledge base for integrated planning and implementation;

Local legislation should be enacted to regulate certain aspects of local water service delivery, particularly the small-scale extraction of groundwater. Such piece of legislation should reinforce the national law; and

The private sector and other stakeholders in local potable water service delivery such as nongovernment organizations (NGOs) must be tapped not only in the financial aspects but also in overall management and development,

Monitoring and enforcement must be strengthened by local governments, for instance through deputization of the appropriate stakeholders to address illegal logging, water contamination, and other related management concerns;

Financial issues The private sector must be seriously considered as fund sources for local

potable water service delivery alongside other nontraditional sources such as development lending institutions, donor agencies, and NGOs.

Other issues Distribution of local resources for water services delivery must be

based on equity and fairness to reduce the disparity between areas. This must be institutionalized through local legislation, if necessary; and

Workable approaches in providing water services delivery to waterless barangays must be developed. The potential of BWSAs and other small-scale water providers must be considered and tapped.

Recommendations to address key issues facing WDs in the sitesFor institutional issues

The WDs should improve coordination with LGUs in local water service delivery. Regular consultations and meetings with the relevant LGU units and personnel will help reduce the incidence of service redundancy.

Financial issues The WDs that face difficulty in paying their loans may request loan

restructuring from LWUA or other creditors. They may also seek

121iSrael

counterpart funding from LGUs. They should also seek sources of financing outside of LWUA and the government; and

The WDs should develop cost-effective and indigenous technologies and innovations to reduce dependence on imported technology and lower the negative impacts of a high exchange rate.

Price, quality, and accessibility issues Since socialized pricing appears to be widely practiced by WDs, these

WDs, with the approval of LWUA, should consider lowering the tariff rates of low-income households vis-à-vis other users. Another alternative is to set up more public taps in poor communities;

The WDs, also upon approval of LWUA, should consider increasing the rates of higher-income households and the commercial and industrial users who have better capabilities to pay. This will help improve cost recovery;

Proper management of water sources and regular maintenance of facilities should improve the quality of water produced by WDs. These districts should invest more in the repair and maintenance of distribution lines and other related facilities; and

The WDs can help increase coverage by improving overall customer service in their areas of operation. Community service activities to promote goodwill in the service areas will also help.

Operational issues The management and technical aspects of operations of WDs must

be improved to increase water pressure, reduce downtime, lower nonrevenue water, and solve related problems.

Recommendations to address key issues facing LGUs in the sitesInstitutional issues

LGUs must develop a local moral recovery program and an effective check and balance system that will penalize offending and corrupt public officials and employees;

LGUs must reorganize themselves so that, structurally, they can better plan and implement projects as well as coordinate potable water service delivery in their areas.

Gender and age issues must be considered in the planning and implementation of water service delivery projects. Local water systems must be user-friendly to women and children;


BWSAs and other small-scale water providers must be strongly supported. LGUs can help by settling disputes among members and even providing moral support; and

Tie-ups and partnerships must be established. Joint local water service delivery projects should be explored to lessen individual costs to partners and increase total benefits.

Financial issues LGUs should provide more of its own funding and prioritize local

water service delivery. Provision of water in areas where it is lacking or absent should be a public function; and

LGUs must offer incentives to their personnel to help ensure greater efficiency. A fair and merit-based promotion system can motivate lowly paid employees to work better.

Other issues Since sanitation is directly related to water provision, it should be

given emphasis by LGUs. It should be an integral concern under their program of local water services delivery.

CONCLUSIONS AND rECOMMENDAtIONS Among the most important conclusions derived from the analysis of potable water service delivery in Dumaguete City and selected municipalities of Agusan del Sur done here are the following:

Dumaguete City has met national and MDG objectives in terms of access to potable water while Agusan del Sur and at least some of its municipalities appear to have a hard time meeting them;

Price, quality, and accessibility considerations influence water use and water service delivery in the two sites;

Household users at best may be willing to pay only a small amount for the improvement of their potable water;

Institutional problems are among the most important issues constraining service delivery of potable water in the two sites in addition to other concerns; and

Immediate action, therefore, needs to be done to address institutional and other issues if the two sites, as well as similarly situated local sites in the country, are to meet national and MDG targets in local potable water service delivery.

123iSrael

The stakeholders in the two sites are the ones on the ground and are presumed to be more knowledgeable about the problems and potential solutions involving the potable water sector in their areas. The recommendations proposed and presented by these stakeholders should be seriously considered upfront. However, said recommendations need to be further verified and studied. In the future, studies on local potable service delivery in the two sites may focus on how institutional problems could be appropriately addressed and how potable water price, quality, and accessibility could be developed and improved, thus helping ensure the attainment of the relevant local, national, and MDG objectives.

rEFErENCES Arellano, F. 1994. Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage Systems (MWSS):

responding to the water needs of a mega city. Development Research News 12(5):16.

Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2007. Water for all country paper: Philippines. Asian Water Development Outlook 2007:17. Pasig City, Philippines: ADB.

Asian Development Bank (ADB), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), and World Health Organization (WHO). 2006. Asian water watch 2015: are countries in Asia on track to meet target 10 of the millennium development goals? Philippines: Published jointly by the ADB, UNDP, UNESCAP, WHO:54.

David, C.C. 2000. MWSS privatization: implications on the price of water, the poor, and the environment. PIDS Discussion Paper Series No. 2000-14. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

David, C.C., A.B. Inocencio, R.S. Clemente, R.P. Abracosa, F.M. Largo, G.Q. Tabios, and E.L. Walag. 2000. Urban water pricing: The Metro Manila and Metro Cebu cases. Policy Notes No. 2000-09. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

David, C.C. and A.B. Inocencio. 1996. Understanding household and supply of water: the Metro Manila case. PIDS Policy Notes No. 1990-04. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

Ebarvia, M.C.M. 1994. Outlook of supply and demand: Metro Manila and the Philippine Water! Philippine Institute for Development Studies Development Research News 12(5):16

Greenpeace. 2007. The state of water resources in the Philippines. Quezon City: Greenpeace Southeast Asia.

Inocencio, A.B. and C.C. David. 2001. Public-private-community partnerships in management and delivery of water to urban poor: the case of Metro


Manila. Discussion Paper Series No. 2001-18. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

Inocencio, A.B., J.E. Padilla, and E.P. Javier. 1999. Determination of basic household requirements. Discussion Paper Series No. 1999-02. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

Israel, D.C. 2009. Local service delivery of potable water in the Philippines: national review and case analysis. PIDS Discussion Paper No. 2009-38. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

Johnson, R.W., J. Leigland, and S. Pereira. 1996. Stimulating additional financing: Philippines water and wastewater projects. Final Report. North Carolina, USA: Research Triangle Institute.

Largo, F.M., A.B. Inocencio, and C.C. David. 1998. Understanding household water demand for Metro Cebu. Discussion Paper Series No. 1998-41. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

Madrazo, A. 2002. Water issues in the context of sustainable development. Paper presented during the 2nd World Conference on Green Productivity, 9–11 December. EDSA Shangri-La Hotel, Mandaluyong City, Philippines.

Magtibay, B.B. 2004. Water refilling station: an alternative source of drinking water supply in the Philippines. Paper presented during the 30th WEDC International Conference, Vientiane, Lao PDR.

National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). 2009. Secretariat’s report: Philippine water supply sector roadmap. Pasig City: NEDA.

———. 2007. Philippines midterm progress report on the Millennium Development Goals. Pasig City: NEDA.

———. 2004. Medium-term Philippine development plan 2004–2010. Pasig City: NEDA.

Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS)-United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). 2009. Improving local service delivery for the MDGs in Asia: the case of the Philippines. Final Draft. Makati City: PIDS and UNICEF.

Provincial Planning and Development Office, Agusan del Sur. 2005. Community-based monitoring system Agusan del Sur (core and noncore indicators). Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur.

Singh, S. 2006. Paradigms of decentralization, institutional design, and poverty: drinking water in the Philippines. PIDS Policy Notes No. 2006-19. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

World Bank. 2003. Philippines environment monitor 2003: water quality. Pasig City: WB Country Office.

Water and Sanitation Program. 2004. Lessons learned from rural water supply projects in the Philippines: identifying elements of sustainability. Field

125iSrael

Note 46426. Water and Sanitation Program-East Asia and the Pacific, Jakarta, Indonesia.

World Bank (WB). 2005a. Little green data book 2005. Pasig City: WB Country Office.

———. 2005b. Philippines: meeting infrastructure challenges. East Asia and Pacific Region. The World Bank Infrastructure Sector Department. WB Country Office.

an assessment of the local service delivery of potable water in … · 2012-09-17 · of drinking...

Documents