Sustainability of Water Services delivery in Urban Poor Settlements: A case of the NdeebaKisenyi pre-paid water services pilot project-Kampala
Aharikundira, Ma*, Kimwaga, Rb and Mashauri, Dc.
P. O. BOX 35131, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Mobile: +256 752573635
P. O. BOX 35131, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Mobile: +256 752573635
Email: maharikundira@yahoo.com, maharikundira@forest.mak.ac.ug
ABSTRACT
The major aim for this study was to assess the sustainability of water services delivery in urban
poor settlements of Kampala city. Water services delivery projects in the urban poor settlements
of Uganda are not sustainable. Unsustainable water services projects have resulted in inadequate
water services coverage currently at (40%) for urban poor settlements of Kampala city
(NWSC/ESMF report, 2007). This study established issues and challenges to urban water services
delivery and determined the Sustainability index of the pre-paid water services pilot project in
Kampala city. The study used the conceptual framework methodology developed by UNDPWorld Bank program (1999). The framework was adjusted to fit site specific conditions. This was
done through four processes; normalizing, weaving, classification, and reclassification of the data
to determine parameter percentage contribution to project sustainability index. The exercise was
based on user communities. The study found out that, transient nature of the urban population
(26.2%), was the biggest challenge to sustainable community water services management, the
project sustainability index was found to be (31.39), meaning that the project had low
sustainability. This study recommends a community action framework at the community level,
including water user associations and policy or water user bylaws. To increase the sustainability
index of water services, consider water services trends analysis. Therefore, past trends, present
trends and future projections are necessary for sustainable management of water services delivery
for urban water projects.
Key words: Pre-paid meter technology; Sustainability index; urban poor; Water services
delivery.
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background of the study
Water supply and sanitation were first highlighted on the development agenda about 31 years
ago. This was a result of the 1977 United Nations Conference in Mar Del Plata, Argentina that
recommended proclaiming the 1980’s to be the international drinking Water Supply and
sanitation decade with the goal of providing every person with access to water of safe quality and
adequate quantity along with basic Sanitary facilities, by 1990 (world water Assessment
programme, 2003). Until recently, populations in urban poor areas have been underserved with
water services and Sanitation facilities, for reasons like high sunk costs and low cost recovery
(Mosdell et al., 2002). Government and Non Governmental Organisations are investing in urban
poor water supplies, under the pre assumption that water services coverage in these settlements
will increase, and that local communities will be involved in their operation and maintenance.
Water services relate to the whole series of activities from the abstraction of raw water at the
source to the delivery of (treated) water to the consumer and from the consumer back to a water
source as in Annex 1. Sustainability of water services delivery means that water continues to be
available for the period for which it is designed in the same quantity and at the same quality as it
was designed (www.Sustainability.htm), provided that at some time the project is not abandoned
and has to be rehabilitated. The factors affecting sustainability of water services include technical
issues, social factors, financial elements, the natural environment, durable gender equity and
empowerment and institutional arrangements. This report considered technical, social, financial
and institutional arrangements.
In Uganda, urban water services are delivered to consumers by National Water and Sewerage
Cooperation, a semi autonomous body. National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC)
characterizes the urban poor by household incomes of less than 80,000 (USD 40) per month,
clustered settlements with a high crowding index of 0.25-14 people, very low levels of water
consumption of between 0-20 litres per capita per day and customers do not own connections.
(Environment and social Management frame work, 2007). NWSC has shown impressive
improvements over the past years in water service coverage (currently at 62 percent), billed
revenue, Unaccounted for Water (UFW), and percentage of metered accounts (Aldo Baiet et al
2006).
The Ndeeba-Kisenyi urban pro poor Pilot project covers three parishes of Kisenyi 1, 2 and
Ndeeba, all in Rubaga Division, Kampala city council. The total land area in (ha) is 266 and the
total population is 130,000 people. (Source; final design report on Kampala water and Sanitation
programme, phase 1, component 2: water supply and Sanitation 2006.). The project offers stand
point water services level. 340 prepaid meters were installed in the area, serving 100,000
populations, about 76.9 % of the total area population. This project solved the challenges of price,
quantity, and service quality as identified by (Gulyani. et.al., 2005) and (WSP/PPIAF., 2002) as
core challenges in water services delivery. The question was whether the project would allow
scaling up to other urban poor settlements in Kampala without constant wastage of time and
resources on rehabilitations in the project. Fresh water is irreplaceable for human life, especially
for primary uses, such as drinking, food preparation and hygiene. This report established the
sustainability issues and challenges for pro poor urban water services projects, determined level
of sustainability of the project. Sustainability to this study was limited to water services access
and use by communities in the urban poor settlements.
1.2 Problem Statement
Water services delivery projects in the urban poor settlements of Uganda are not sustainable.
While Water Integrity Network report (No.3/2009), blames numerous shoddy construction works
in a number of Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) projects in Kampala city for limited access to
improved water and sanitation services, (Tynan and kingdom 2003),(Klaas, 2006) blame poor
operation and maintenance for low water services coverage and access. Unsustainable water
services projects have resulted in inadequate water services coverage currently at (40%) for urban
poor settlements (NWSC/ESMF report, 2007). This situation is characterized by poor quality of
life and health. Water related diseases like typhoid, cholera, and other diseases from stagnant
water sources like malaria etc due to unsafe water services have claimed lives of the young and
the old in the informal settlements. NWSC has set out to improve the current status for serving
the urban poor through piped schemes in Kampala Water from 40% coverage to between 90%
and 100% at the service level of yard taps and public water points (NWSC/ESMF repot, 2007).
Much effort has been directed towards improvement of urban water services delivery in Uganda,
but sustainability though incorporated as an objective in development projects, has not been given
priority in project executions. This study therefore seeks to investigate the sustainability of water
services delivery projects to urban poor settlements in Kampala with a consideration to the
Ndeeba Kisenyi prepaid water services delivery project.
1.3 Main Objective
To investigate the sustainability of water services delivery to urban poor settlements
Specific Objectives

To establish key issues and challenges affecting sustainability of water service delivery to
urban poor settlements.

To determine the sustainability level of the Ndeeba- Kisenyi pro poor urban water service
delivery project.
2.0 Methodology
The research assessed water system performance for the Ndeeba-Kisenyi urban Pro poor project
in partnership with a conceptual framework provided by PLA (Participatory learning
Assessment), a guide developed by the UNDP- World Bank water and sanitation program (1999).
This research modified the framework to suit the research specific needs. The exercise was based
on user communities and decided to focus on measurements of sustainability indicators at
community level, leaving out factors external to the communities (such as implementing agency
effectiveness and policy environment).
2.1 Development of Sustainability Indicators
Sustainability indicators were developed basing on conceptual framework parameters and a
framework developed by (Tynan and Kingdom, 2003) distinguishing, the following seven
dimensions: ‘operational efficiency’, ‘cost recovery’, ‘commercial performance’, ‘coverage and
access’, ‘asset maintenance’, ‘service quality’, and ‘price and affordability’. In addition, the
indicators captured the key aspects of sustainability; infrastructure functioning and use,
institutional, finance and social aspects. These indicators enabled the measurement of four key
parameters of sustainability, (effective functioning and use of services, demand responsiveness of
services, participation in service management (O&M) and participation in planning, organization
and construction) as identified by the world bank.
The key parameters were further divided into 70 discrete indicators for recording in the field and
subsequent analysis. The 70 indicators captured the key aspects of sustainability as follows:
 Infrastructures functioning and use: quantity, quality, reliability, equitable access and
user perceptions that were progressively being put into operation.
 Institutional: Effectiveness of village level institutions in service delivery and
management.
 Financial: Adequacy of cost recovery for scheme operations and sustenance
 Social: participation in benefits and management by women and socially disadvantaged
groups.
Thereafter, a variable-based questionnaire and a checklist were developed based on the 70
identified indicators of sustainability. The sustainability indicators were phrased as questions in
the questionnaire that served as a framework to measure the sustainability of community water
projects. The sustainability index was thereafter calculated by summing up indices of different
parameters of project sustainability for the project.
2.2 Referencing the Conceptual Framework
Referencing the framework in this report aimed at encapsulating the economic, social and health
and hygiene categories of Sustainability, together with technical criteria, which relate primarily to
the ability of the water system to sustain and enhance the performance of the functions for which
it is designed. Ashly et al., ( 2004), Torres (2006) carry a similar idea when they recommend that
sustainable development must be Environmentally friendly, socially acceptable, and financially
viable. The principles of Agenda21 elaborate on the same argument that public participation is
important and demands individual responsibility in water resources management and that water
should be treated as an economic good. In addition, (Schwartz, 2006) writes about factors
underlying the organization of water services, important to the sustainability of water services
delivery used in this report. Additionally, this report suggests sustainability building blocks;
Effectiveness of services (output), Decentralisation of services and management, Accountability
of services and Operation and maintenance. Therefore, the categories of Sustainability, the
principle of Agenda 21, the factors under laying the organisation of water services and the
sustainability building blocks suggested by this report were used to reference the conceptual
framework developed by the UNDP-world bank water and sanitation programme making it site
and psyche specific.
Cases answered from the field survey formed a basis for this conceptual framework referencing,
where the case values according to the prescribed units were normalized to 100% for each
sustainability category (Annex 4). The normalized questionnaire case values were Weaved with
the four building blocks of sustainability in an integral of economic, social, technical and health
and hygiene categories. This was brought out by considering the degree of importance/strength of
a particular case against each particular building block. (Important=2 unimportant =1)(Annex: 5).
The Building blocks were reclassified with factors underlying the management of water services
delivery to come up with a reclassification matrix of building blocks and factors underlying the
management of water services delivery. This considered the necessity/strength of the building
blocks towards the factors that underlay management of water services delivery the classes used
were (unimportant =1, Necessary=2, strongly Necessary=3), multiplied through by the building
block values from the integral weave (Annex: 8). A second reclassification matrix was developed
comparing the strength of the factors underlying the management of water services against the
sustainability parameters using the range (unimportant =1, Necessary=2, strongly Necessary=3)
multiplying through by the values of the factors underlying the management of water services
delivery obtained in the first reclassification (Annex:9). The second reclassification calculates the
weightage/ degree of strength for respective sustainability parameters towards the Sustainability
of the Ndeeba-Kisenyi Urban pro-poor project.
2.3 Data Analysis
The questionnaire served as a framework to test the challenges to urban poor water services
delivery and the Sustainability of the Ndeeba -Kisenyi urban pro poor project. The analysis of
Data largely used SPSS and Excel computer packages.
Establishing the Issues and Challenges
In order to establish the issues and challenges affecting the sustainability of urban water services
in the urban poor settlements, the information collected from the survey was analyzed using SPSS
and excel computer packages, and descriptive analysis. The analysis methods used, ranked the
information and were able to establish graphs and tables describing the situation and
sustainability aspects in the urban poor settlements.
Determining the project Sustainability Index
In order to determine the project sustainability index, the collected data was analyzed using a
referenced conceptual framework matrix (Table 2.1), to calculate parameter attribute indices,
Excel and SPSS computer packages to draw description tables and graphs.
Table 2.1: Referenced Conceptual Framework
EFFECTIVE
DEMAND
FUNCTIONIN RESPONSIV
G AND USE ENESS
OF
OF SERVICES SERVICE
WEIGHTAG
E
PARTICIPATIO
N IN SERVICE
MANAGEMEN
T
30
22
Functioning
System
25%
Is demand of Economic
users
being participation
met 30%
25%
Effective
(25%)
Use Value
attached
to
service
by
users 40%
Effective
Perception of
Management
cost
25%
Effectiveness
30%
Effective
Financing
25%
23
PARTICIPATION
IN
PLANNING,
ORGANISATION
AND
CONSTRUCTION
25
Participation
in
initiating the project
5%
Management
participation 25%
Extent of informed
choice (20%)
Participation
benefits 15%
in Contribution
in
construction (20%)
Perception
responsibility
10%
of Community
organization
for
managing
services,
formation,
composition,
roles,
legal status, bank
account status (15%)
Accountability
of
implementers
to
community (20%)
Whose capacity built
for what, when, why
and how? (20%)
Source- PLA Methodology Guide. UNDP-World Bank Water and Sanitation Program (1999)
The field checklist data was classified according to the 70 sustainability indicators developed
prior data collection. In order to capture the sustainability characteristics or traits described
previously, for each positive answer (presence of sustainability indicator) the project received one
point, and a mark of zero was ascribed for a negative (absence of a sustainability indicator) while
0.5 was given for intermediate cases. The average value of the sum of all ascribed values under
one variable represented the sustainability index for that particular variable. A second measuring
criterion was used i.e. weight age contribution pre-scribed for each of the parameters of
sustainability (PLA methodology framework Table 3.1). Hence the sustainability indices were
converted into percentage by multiplying through the weightage contribution of respective
parameters to the sustainability of the project.
The partial percentage scores for respective parameters were added and П the degree of
sustainability of the project was obtained as shown in the equation below:
4
   ai
i 1
Where i represents each individual parameter index, a represents each individual parameter
respective contribution to percentage project sustainability, so that ai?
[0-100] represents the score obtained; and 0 = II = 100. In the final analysis, the sustainability of
the project was classified from the following pre- determined sustainability classes; A) 0-25(No
sustainability), b) 25-50 (low sustainability), c) 50-75 (medium sustainability), C) 75-100 (highly
sustainable). The closer the score was to one hundred, the higher the sustainability of the project
and the closer the score was to zero, the lower the sustainability of the project.
3.0 Results and analyses: a clear presentation of experimental results obtained, highlighting
any trends or points of interest.
The survey Interviews used 65 questionnaires to make inference on 340 prepaid meters, and was
carried out on both males and females in a percentage of 35.38% and 64.62% respectively. The
majority of the population used a range of 1 to 6 jerican of water with the majority number of
people using four jericans of water per day. Very few households used 7 and above jericans of
water per day. The households owning the prepaid meter tokens earned an income ranging from
0-150000 Uganda shillings with the majority number of households at an income ranging from 050,000 Uganda shillings.
3.1 Issues and Challenges to Water Services Delivery in Urban Poor Settlements
Transient nature of the urban population (26.2%), low and inconsistent income (20%) and
information flow (13.8%) were the major challenges in urban poor water services delivery. Other
issues in Water services delivery included individual Attitude towards improved water services,
land tenure issues, water logged soils, and urban community dynamics like mind your own
business, high project sunk costs and political interference. To capture this data, both the
questionnaire and key informants were used. The problem of transient nature of the urban
population was the highest ranked and was related to the urban population factors including
income levels, social interactions, and locations of work places. These were major reasons why
the urban population was transient. The situation was challenging to develop coherent groups out
of a transient environment where people never settled permanently as compared with rural
communities. In rural communities, all factors seemed to be in ideal. People are knit together in
their activities. Solving the problem of transient nature would solve the information flow
problem. The organisation of water user groups would form a framework for water user
institutions to participate in planning, decision making and implementation of the project at all
levels. The water users would be able to think together to identify their own needs or gaps
affecting their communities. The water user action frame work would improve demand driven
approach in water service provision as opposed to supply driven water services. To solve this
problem, majority of water users (32.3%) of the interviewed group suggested that using prepaid
meter stands as a centre of interaction and (20%) suggested already existing groups developed by
other development organisations in the same area to assist develop water user associations and
hence hold the community together in coherent groups of a common goal
Proposed Water User Action
Framework
WUA-Water User Association
Direction of information flow
WUG-Water User Group
Coordinated
by the
landlord
H-Household
Figure 3.1: The Water User Action Framework Structure Using Landlord as Prepaid Meter
Cordinator or Water User Group Cordinator
Effective water collection point maintenance systems lead to rapid responses to localized
problems, less down time due to simple repairs, a greater sense of ownership of water collection
points, better water point collection hygiene, and in many cases lower tariffs for house holds as
the cost of localized O&M is not included in the overall water tariff.
The table below compares the best two options as identified by water users for the organisation of
community members into water user groups.
Table 3.1: Advantages and Disadvantages of the Proposed Best Options for Water User
Organisation
USING WATER POINTS TO ORGANISE WATER USERS
Advantages
Disadvantages
 concentrated goal, involving all people
 Dynamics
of
the
urban
settlements
e.g
mind
your
 entry point for water development activities
business or get a life
 Entry point
for
other
poverty alleviation
organizations(funding will be put to a common cause,  Limited time for commitment
(the poor have very little time to
instead of each organization introducing its groups and
spare for things that are not
its own funding)
short term)
 Improved community/group coherence since everyone
 Other funders will have a
will need water.
completely
different
entry
 Promotes working together as a new introduction in the
points
community
Using Already Existing groups




Already have own generated group principles,
Already demonstrated the ability of working together
Have capacity in some areas like savings and credit
Best knowledge of each other
 Not everyone is involved
 Different groups belong to
different organisations
 Based on a completely diverse
goals other than sustainability of
water services
3.2 Water Project Sustainability Index
The willingness to pay for improved water services for the Ndeeba-Kisenyi water project was
found to be 93.8% while affordability to pay for the services was found to be at 80% according to
the study. This had a positive implication on sustainability of the project if all other factors
remained constant. Affordability of water services was calculated according to the method
described by Tynan and kingdom 2003; as a percentage of the price of one jerican of water to
household percapita GDP. From literature, willingness to pay depends on the value each
household attaches to a particular service level, affected by local conditions and there fore not
similar household (income, number of people in households etc) have a similar response and
affordability depends on willingness to pay.
To measure the project sustainability index, the methodology combined social technical, financial
and health and hygiene categories of sustainability in a referenced conceptual framework.
Sustainability indicators were used to calculate the sub parameter indices
Calculation of level of sustainability of the project
According to the referenced conceptual framework provided by PLA (Participatory Learning
Assessment), each of the four parameters contributed a respective weight age to the project:
effective functioning and use of services (30%), demand responsiveness of service (22%),
participation in service management (23%) and participation in planning organization and
construction (25%).
Therefore the percentage indicator for the Ndeeba Kisenyi pro poor urban water services project
was calculated by multiplying the parameter index by respective parameter weight age as shown
below.
Table 3.2: Table for Sustainability Indices, Weight Age and Percentage Indices
Effective
Demand
Participation Participation
in
Parameter
functioning & use responsiveness in
service planning, organisation
of services
of service
management
and construction
WEIGHTAGE 30
22
23
25
Indices
0.637
0.570
0.038
0.053
Percentage
19.11
12.54
0.874
1.325
indices
The level of sustainability of pro poor urban water services project was therefore calculated :
4
   ai Where a; is the parameter weight age, and i; is the respective parameter index.
i 1
Therefore;   19.11  12.54  0.874  1.325  31.39
From the preset classes of Sustainability A) 0-25(No sustainability), b) 25-50 (low sustainability),
c) 50-75 (medium sustainability), C) 75-100 (highly sustainable) therefore, the level of
sustainability of the pro poor urban water services project was found to be low sustainability
Pre-paid meters made water an individualised marketed commodity thus eroding further the
already social relations between households. The community action framework was not in
existence. Cost recovery from urban poor settlement had been extremely a challenge for NWSC
and to me it seemed like prepaid water services were installed to enhance cost recovery without
considering the sustainability principles. Most especially that pre-paid meter spare parts were not
available in local markets, and even if available, they were expensive for urban poor settlements.
Considering the low and inconsistent income of the urban settlements, the pre paid meter
squeezed money out of the communities without improvising for sustainable income options.
The community was not being capacitated on how to make money or on how to manage finances
for a sustainable income if improved water services were to be availed continuously. The fact that
there was no lifeline water supply; there would be a trade-off between water services, food,
education and health services. Organising water users was a big challenge to the urban pro poor
unit for the implementation of the PHAST methodology as was suggested in the utility work plan.
3.3 Water systems community ownership
Water users identifying their own needs, and solving there own problems was a way to increase
water project sustainability and ownership of the project through enabled decentralized operation
and maintenance and working together. This would unlock the potential of communities to own
their own projects.
On an individual basis, Measures used to sustain water point services included not allowing
children to play on the water points, cleaning the meter area, one person operating the meter.
These were being implemented for sustainable access of water and were applied by water users to
ensure sustainability at water point level (Table 3.3). The measures used to ensure the
sustainability of water services were not dependable, as there was no base and were of no origin
or were not bound by bylaws. Project bylaws should be formulated to increase project
sustainability.
Table 3.3: Showing the Measures of Sustainability used by Household to maintain the
Water Point
Sustainability measures
Frequency %age
Cleaning the meter area
13
20.0
Not allowing children to play on the meter
27
41.5
One person operates the meter
19
29.2
Don’t know
6
9.2
65
100.0
From the table majority of water users ensured sustainability by not allowing children to play on
the meter area. Some of the water users may not even have been aware of there action or what
they meant when they stopped the children from playing on the water point because they had seen
the neighbour doing the same. There was more lacking in the methodologies to sustain ably
maintain water points. To realise bottom up approach as opposed to top down approach where
decisions were made from top management offices and water users were only informed or not
informed at all, including organising water user groups from household up to water user
associations and setting the administration bylaws for project implementation guidelines.
4.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author of this paper Aharikundira Margaret, would like to express her gratitude to, Dr.
Richard Kimwaga, Professor Alfred Mwanuzi and Damas Mashauri for their time and valuable
insight in this study, without which it could have been a non-starter.
5.0 Discussion and conclusions: a brief explanation of the significance and implications of
the work reported
This research investigated the sustainability of water services delivery in urban poor settlements
of Kampala city in order to establish its sustainability in terms of 3 dimensions of sustainabilty
namely Financial, social and Institutional (Structural) sustainability. From the findings of this
research it was concluded that:
From the field survey, Lacking in the Ndeeba-Kisenyi water services delivery system was the
social structure and administration/bylaws of the water services at community level for water use
and the sustainability of the services. Transient nature of the urban population (26.2%), low and
inconsistent nature of income (20%) were the biggest challenges to urban poor water services
delivery.
The project had low sustainability as concluded from sustainability index of (31.39), which
according to pre determined classes of sustainability was low sustainability. Willingness to pay
and decision making were the major determinants of sustainable approach in water services
delivery. Willingness to pay affecting affordability of services and decision making affecting
participation and management.
6.0 Recommendations
The Development project is bringing fish to the community, but not capacitating the community to
catch fish”. Water user institutional development and Empowerment, Water as an entry point to
community economic development will lead to sustainable urban poor water projects and hence
poverty alleviation the dream of most development projects.
 National water and sewerage cooperation should change their focus from development of
infrastructure to better utilizing and management of existing water infrastructure, then to
improving regulation of water use.

Changing patterns of the informal settlements for example area economic development,
improved living standards, and increased demands, require adaptive institutions for
sustainable, equitable, and productive management of water services delivery.

Appropriate water service levels in urban poor service projects.

Concerning water services trends, past trends, present trends and future projections are
necessary for sustainable management of water services delivery of water projects.

Operation and maintenance should be decentralized with private sector participation to build
the water user capacity to use and manage the water services.

Involvement of community members from the beginning, in awareness-raising and planning,
through to implementation and monitoring, is a key supporting factor in the success and
sustainability of the project.

To realize bottom up approach as opposed to top down approach where decisions are made
from top management offices , would include organising water user groups from household
up to water user associations and
setting the administration bylaws for project
implementation.
7.0 References
Ahyankar, and lyer. (1999), Sustainability Monitoring, the VIP way a ground level sexercise
UNDP World Bank water and Sanitation program-South Asia
Aldo, B. et al (2006), characteristics of well performing public water utilities, Water supply and
Sanitation Working notes
EMSF Report. National Water and sewerage Corporation Kampala Water. GPOBA funded
Kampala water connections for the poor projects
Environmental and Social Management framework, (2007)
ESIA (2008): Environmental and social impact Assessment Summary(ESIA):Kampala sernitaion
programme-191
Gulyani, Sumila. (2001), “The Demand Side Approach to Planning Water Supply.” In M. Freire
and R. Stren, eds. The Challenge of Urban Government. World Bank,Washington, D.C.
Kenya, Government of. 1999. Second Report on Poverty in Kenya. Ministry of Finance and
Planning, Kenya.
Schouten, M and Schwartz, K., (2005) Towards a WSM Research and Education Strategy:
ADiscussion Document, Unpublished Discussion Document, Delft: UNESCO-IHE.
Kayaga . S., (2002). Sustainable environmental Sanitation and water services;Is urban water
sector reform in Uganda Pro-poor
Netshiswinzhe, B. (2000), South Africa. “Sustainability of water supply projects” Water
Sanitation and Hygiene: Challenges of the millennium strengthening.
Osborne, D and Gaebler, T. (1992), Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial spirit is
transforming the public sector; Addison-Wesley.
Water Integreted Network (No.3/2009.)Uganda: Citizens Action for Accountable WATSAN
Services in the Slums of Kawempe – Kampala City
Water Utility Partnership for Capacity Building in Africa and the Water and Sanitation Program.
(2003). “Better Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor: Good Practice from Sub-Saharan
Africa.” Washington, DC: WUP and WSP.
World Bank (2003a), Private Participation in Infrastructure: Trends in Developing Countries in
1990 – 2001, Washington D.C.: World Bank.
World Bank Water Demand Research Team. (1993), “The Demand for Water in Rural Areas:
Determinants and Policy Implications.” The World Bank Research Observer 8 (1
[January]):47–70.
World Health Organisation (WHO), and United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2000.
Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report. New York: WHO/UNICEF.
World Water Assessment programme (2003), Report
WSP/PPIAF. (2002), “New Designs for Water and Sanitation Transactions: Making Private
Sector Participation Work for the Poor.” Washington, DC: Water and Sanitation Program
and Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility