Dirty water deals cheat the poor
Thalif Deen
STOCKHOLM: Expressing concern over the “pervasiveness of corruption”
in the management of water, a coalition of six international
non-governmental organisations has created a new global anti-corruption
watchdog body: the Water Integrity Network (WIN) launched during “World
Water Week” in the Swedish capital. The network vows to root out
unethical behaviour by promoting good governance and transparency in the
water sector.
“At a time when we are talking about increasing investments to expand
water supplies and water resources, we also have indications that about
25 to 30 percent of state budgets on water investments are lost due to
corruption,” Hakan Tropp, WIN’s interim chair, told IPS.
This is only an average figure, he pointed out, but the numbers could
vary from country to country — going lower or higher depending on the
degree of corruption and mismanagement.
The six groups that have joined hands to fight corruption in water
management include the Stockholm International Water Institute,
Transparency International, Swedish Water House, the International Water
and Sanitation Centre, Water and Sanitation Programme- Africa and
AquaFed.
The network’s mandate will include diagnosing problems, proposing
solutions, building capacity and monitoring progress. It will coordinate
with civil society, public and private sectors, and with news, media and
governments.
Asked about the extent of corruption in the water sector, Tropp said
there have been several recent case studies both in Africa and in major
urban centres in India, particularly regarding the unsteady
relationships between consumers and service providers.
At the grassroots level, he said, the poor have been forced to pay
bribes to connect to water pipes or to water tankers. But there was also
increased high-level corruption both in procurement and infrastructure
development, resulting in misallocation of scarce economic resources.
Corruption is a two-way street, with a supply side and a demand side.
And it is prevalent both in developing and developed countries, said
Tropp, who is also project director of the Water Governance Facility at
the Stockholm International Water Institute.
“It takes two to tango,” he said, singling out some of the corrupt
practices of multinational corporations seeking investments and
contracts in developing nations through bribery and commissions.
He said the network plans to work through the various chapters of
Transparency International, which is well established in several world
capitals.
According to WIN, corruption not only diverts irrigated water away
from poor villages but also leads to biased decisions about the
allocation and location of water service points, pipe systems and waste
water treatment facilities.
Additionally, corruption also results in falsifying water meter
readings; fosters ill-advised procurement of expensive and poorly
constructed facilities; and buys jobs and promotions.
David Nussbaum, chief executive officer of the Berlin-based
Transparency International, told reporters Tuesday there are two types
of corruption in the water sector: petty corruption and grand
corruption. “Both destroy the supply mechanism,” he said.
In a 37-page report released Tuesday, Janelle Plummer and Piers Cross
of the Water and Sanitation Programme Africa say “petty corruption”
involves a vast number of officials who abuse public office by
extracting small bribes and favours while “grand corruption” involves
the misuse of vast amounts of public sector funds by a relatively small
number of officials.
These corrupt practices take the form of abuse of resources, such as
theft and embezzlement from budgets and revenues; corruption in
procurement resulting in overpayments and failure to enforce quality
standards; administrative corruption in payment systems; and corruption
at the point of delivery.
The study, titled “Tackling Corruption in the Water and Sanitation
Sector in Africa” and released in Stockholm, says corruption involves a
vast range of stakeholders: donor representatives, private companies,
multinational corporations, national and local construction companies,
consultancy firms and suppliers, large and small-scale operators, middle
men, consumers, national and sub-national politicians, and all grades of
civil servants and utility staff.
“Corrupt activities between these partners occur at a range of
institutional levels, with different stakeholders often involved in one
or more types of corruption,” the study notes.
In sub-Saharan Africa, some 6.7 billion dollars is required annually
to meet the U.N’s development goals to halve extreme poverty by 2015.
A 30 percent leakage would drain more than 20 billion dollars over
the next decade, it adds.
In a second study titled “Corruption in the Water Sector: Causes,
Consequences and Potential Reform”, the Swedish Water House says that
corruption affects the governance of water by affecting who gets what
water when, where and how.
“Corruption worsens the world water crisis and evidence suggests that
the costs are disproportionately borne by the poor and by the
environment,” the study says.
But it warns that breaking with corruption in the water sector “will
not be easy.” Fighting corruption should include legal and financial
reforms, reform of public service delivery systems, reform in the
private sector, and public awareness and capacity building.
“Further delays to step up anti-corruption action will deepen the
governance crisis in the water sector, with devastating effects for
millions of people and for the environment,” the study concludes.
(IPS) |