“Developing Public/Private Partnerships to Improve Water Interventions in Latin America: Working Model and Outcomes”

AUTHORS

Garza, V., Hurtado C.A., O' Farrill, A.E. - FEMSA Foundation

Rivera S.B. and Zuback, R. - MIOX Corporation

FEMSA Foundation Mission Statement

FEMSA Foundation is a

social investment instrument that

supports the conservation and

sustainable use of water resources

and the improvement of quality of

life in our communities through

applied education, science, and

technology.

WASH Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean

• In the year 2000, 81.5% of Latin America and the Caribbean (LA&C) region had access to water and sanitation compared to the 64.5% and 61% in Asia and Africa, respectively.

• Today in LA&C, 75 million people still live without access to clean water, and an additional 115 million lack adequate sanitation services.

WASH Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean

• The 2.4 million deaths per year worldwide that are attributed to unsafe water supply and sanitation are caused by a combination of factors that range from poor hygiene, inadequate access, unclean storage practices to drainage faults and constant service dropouts.

• On average, two working days are lost for each case of diarrhea diagnosed.

FEMSA Foundation Water Program Objectives

• To introduce a partnership intervention model enabling long termsustainable solutions in the Latin America WASH sector.– Alignin the social and economic interests of multiple stakeholders

Chlorine is EffectiveSupply Chain/Delivery Methods More Complicated

• Proven tack record – widely used• Measurable residual – less re-contamination

Chlorine Gas

Sodium Hypochlorite

• Safety concerns, operational hazards• Delivery difficulty in remote areas

• Degrades over time, even when stabilized

• Effect larger with higher concentration and temperatures

• Transport and accurate dosing difficult

Estimated hypochlorite degradation rate over 30 days, pH 12, 32°C

Reference: Bleach degradation calculator can be found at www.miox.com

12% initial concentration

9% final concentration

Advantages of On-Site Generation

• No hazardous chemicals • Salt is widely available in most countries• Solution can be generated

on-site, on-demand at lower concentrations (<1% = 1000 mg/L)

• Devices may be powered by renewable energy sources

• Easily scalable technology

First Strategic Partnership Initiated 2006

FEMSA Foundation mainly supports

projects dedicated to water resources which focus

on solutions that enable the efficient use of water

resources while protecting the ecosystems of Latin

American communities.

MIOX Corporation is a US based technology

corporation that specializes in the design and manufacture

of on-site hypochlorite-based disinfectant generators that

require only salt, water and power to operate.

Partnership Model Intervention Phase Development

• Community Diagnosis, Strategic Partnership Development, Intervention Design, Execution, and Impact Assessment and Monitoring

Each step of the process was developed based on the experiences gained from a series of interventions performed jointly by FEMSA Foundation and MIOX Corporation between

2008 and 2010, in both Colombia and Nicaragua

• Because water and sanitation needs vary greatly across regions and depend on a wide array of variables such as gender, age distribution, natural resources, climate and culture, a detailed understanding and assessment of the community is required as a pillar for sustainable WASH interventions.

• Another key requirement for sustainable rural development programs*

– Community involvement and participation.

– Contribution in design and implementation.

– Support with related costs and maintenance the community.

*Tod, Parey and Ragubendra, 2005

WASH Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean

Diagram for Phases Intervention

I. Community Diagnosis

II. Strategic Partnership Development

III. Intervention Design

IV. Execution

V. Impact Assessment and Monitoring

Source: Elaborated by authors with field data.

Early Phases of Intervention

I. Community Diagnosis

II. Strategic Partnership Development

• Map local water system from extraction to consumption

• Perform an assessment of the Water and Sanitation levels in the community as well as health risks

• Initiate dialogue and project management with local authorities, social development agencies, water service providers that will focus on developing the joint intervention for the community

Site Diagnostic in Colombia and Nicaragua 2010

Water and Sanitation Project

Safe Water Interventions in Colombia Safe Water Intervention in

Nicaragua

Site name: Argelia, Antoquia Sopo, Cundinamarca

San Francisco de Cuapa, Chontales

Population: 8,911 21,015 6,924Water supply to population:

Regulated piped water-in-house

Regulated piped water-in-house

Regulated piped water-in-house

Average distance between user and source:

0 meters (House Connection)

0 meters(House Connection)

0 meters (House Connection)

Level of sanitation in community:

Simple pit latrine Simple pit latrine Simple pit latrine

Water quality monitoring before intervention:

Not performed Not performed Not performed

Disinfection method before intervention:

Chlorine Gas Chlorine Gas None

Disinfection method after intervention:

OSG Technology OSG Technology OSG Technology

Main waterborne or water washed diseases:

Viral diarrheas, trachoma, conjunctivitis

Viral diarrheas, trachoma, conjunctivitis

Viral diarrheas, skin disease, cholera, trachoma,

conjunctivitis

Source: Elaborated by authors with field data.*lpd = liters per person per day

Diagram for Phases Intervention

I. Community Diagnosis

II. Strategic Partnership Development

III. Intervention Design

IV. Execution

V. Impact Assessment and Monitoring

Source: Elaborated by authors with field data.

Late Phases of InterventionIII. Intervention Design

IV. Execution

V. Impact Assessment and Monitoring

• Engage administration and operation of the local water system • Establish the financing model and cost recovery scheme for the community• Define evaluation metrics and adequate technology selection.

• Build construction room for the system• Finalize logistics and procurement of materials to site• Install and calibrate the system • Perform onsite training for operators and sensibilization for the community

about adequate water management practices.

• Evaluate social impact evaluation in the community derived from the intervention.

Local Community

Local Government

FEMSA Foundation

Social Development

Agency

Academic

Technology Provider (MIOX)

Water Service Provider

üWater System Infrastructure

ü Governance Framework

ü Sensibilizationü Innovation and Technical

Assistance

ü Impact Assessment

üManagement and Financing

Every stakeholder focuses on the main tasks and responsibilities in which they have greater strength and operating capacity.

Through this focus, each stakeholder plays a defined role in the intervention in different phases of the project. Identifying the main stakeholders is the first step in defining roles and responsibilities.

Key to success is local community involvement and their investments of time, energy, and resources

Stakeholder Roles in Nicaragua Intervention

Nicaragua Intervention

Stakeholder Responsibilities

Municipality of Cuapa

Local Government

· Provide land grant for plant· Construction of shelter room for the plant· Strengthen community approach · Site assessment

Local Community Community· Plant maintenance· Pay water fee· Support in building shelter room

Coca Cola FEMSA Private Company · Social environment development

FEMSA Foundation NGO

· Improve quality and access to water· Provide project financing· Catalyze change· Provide governance structure

MIOX Corporation Technology Provider· Subsidize costs (humanitarian prices)· Provide on-site training and advice · Customization of technology for site

ENACAL Water Service Provider

· Site assessment for water and sanitation· Maintenance to water network · Provide access through household connection· Provide input materials (salt, electricity)

Source: Elaborated by authors with field data.

Next Steps

• Implement Phase V- Impact Assessment and Monitoring at current sites in 2011– Currently developing an evaluation methodology for water

interventions to assess the impact in rural communities

– ITESM University and the Water Center for Latin America and the Caribbean are key partners

• Program expansion in Nicaragua and Brazil and Venezuela during 2011

• Develop online tools/capabilities to increase transparency for stakeholders

Conclusions

• The model described in this document establishes the main working framework of multiple stakeholder collaboration with task focusing as key elements for sustainability.

• Through this ongoing learning process, the model presented above will continue to evolve to incorporate new phases and requirements as they are detected in the projects that are currently under development.

• Interventions in the Water and Sanitation sector are complex and demand detailed attention to project design and sustainability. Government and development agencies alone cannot address the issue effectively. Thus the opportunity to join efforts across stakeholders can have major benefits for social and economic value creation and secure the sustainability of the intervention.

• According to the guidelines of Water and Sanitation of the World Bank in Latin America, the partnership model and interventions presented herein have five major areas of impact. These include:– Increased investment in the water and sanitation sector

– Expanded water access and water quality especially to the poor

– Improved service quality

– Redefined the role of the private sector in the service provision.

– Strengthened information systems and impact evaluations.

Conclusions

Thank you.

Let us hear from you, how we can make a better future together.

vidal.garza@femsa.com.mx

ReferencesAdemiluyi, I.A. and Odugbesan, J.A. (2008) Sustainability and Impact of Community Water

Supply and Sanitation Programmes in Nigeria: An Overview. African Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 3 (12), pp. 811-817, December, 2008.

American Water Works Association, (1999) “Water Quality and Treatment: A Handbook of Community Water Supplies” 5th

edition, McGraw Hill Inc. New York. Barthram, J. and Cairncross, S. (2010) “Hygiene, Sanitation, and Water: Forgotten Foundations of Health.” PLOS Mediciene

Journal. November 2010. Volume 7 – Issue 11. United States.Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality. (2008) Third Edition Incorporating the First and Second Addenda. Volume 1

Recommendations. World Health Organization. United StatesHutton, Guy & Haller, Laurence. (2004) “Evaluation of the Costs and Benefits of Water and Sanitation Improvements at the

Global Level” Water, Sanitation and Health Protection of the Human Environment. World Health Organization. Geneva, Switzerland http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2003/WHO_SDE_WSH_03.02.pdf

Howard, Guy & Bartram, Jamie. (2003) “Domestic Water Quantity, Service Level and Health” World Health Organization. Geneva, Switzerland

Lantagne, D. (2008) “Sodium Hypochlorite Dosage for Household and Emergency Water Treatment” Journal AWWA, Vol. 100 Iss. 8, pp. 106-119

Minimum Water Quantity Needed for Domestic Use in Emergencies (2005) World Health Organization – Technical Notes for Emergencies. United StatesProgress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update. (2010) World Health Organization and UNICEF. Geneva, Switzerland.

Salls, M. (2005) “How Organizations Create Social Value” Research and Ideas Harvard Business School. August, 2005. United States.

Tod I., Akihilesh P. and Ragubendra P.S. Yadav. (2003) “How Can We Design Water Resources Interventions to Benefit Poorer Households”. http://www.bradford.ac.uk/acad/bcid/GTP/Todetal.pdf

Venczel, L.V., 1997, “Evaluation and Application of a Mixed Oxidant Disinfection System for Waterborne Disease Prevention”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.