Germany: Water and Sanitation | ||
---|---|---|
Data | ||
Water coverage (broad definition) | 100% | |
Sanitation coverage (broad definition) | 100% | |
100% | ||
Average urban water use (liter/capita/day) | 121 (2010) [1] | |
Average urban domestic water and sewer bill | €32/month [2] | |
Share of household metering | 100% | |
Non-revenue water | 7% (2001) | |
Share of collected wastewater treated | 100% | |
Annual investment in water supply and sanitation | €100/capita | |
Share of self-financing by utilities | 100% | |
Share of tax-financing | 0% | |
Share of external financing | 0% | |
Institutions | ||
Decentralization to municipalities | Full | |
National water and sanitation company | None | |
Water and sanitation regulator | None | |
Responsibility for policy setting | Not clearly defined | |
Sector law | None | |
Number of service providers | about 6,000 |
Public water supply and sanitation in Germany is universal and of good quality. Some salient features of the sector compared to other developed countries are its very low per capita water use, the high share of advanced wastewater treatment and very low distribution losses. Responsibility for water supply and sanitation provision lies with municipalities, which are regulated by the states. Professional associations and utility associations play an important role in the sector. As in other EU countries, most of the standards applicable to the sector are set in Brussels (see EU water policy). Recent developments include a trend to create commercial public utilities under private law and an effort to modernize the sector, including through more systematic benchmarking.
Urban (88% of the population) | Rural (12% of the population) | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Water | Broad definition | 100% | 100% | 100% |
House connections | 100% | 97% | 100% | |
Sanitation | Broad definition | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Sewerage | 94 | 93% | 93% |
Source: Joint Monitoring Program WHO/UNICEF(JMP/2006). Data for water and sanitation based on Health for All database, WHO Regional Office for Europe (1990).
Access to safe water and adequate sanitation in Germany is universal. More than 99 percent of users are connected to a public water supply system. The remainder is served by private wells. 93 percent of users are connected to sewers. The remainder is connected to various types of on-site sanitation systems. [3]
About 80 percent of public water use is accounted for by residential and small commercial users. The remainder is accounted for by industries supplied from public water systems (14 percent) and other users (6 percent). [4]
Residential and small commercial water use is the second lowest among 14 European countries [5] and only a fraction of what it is in North America. Despite forecasts about increasing per capita water use, use actually declined from 145 liter/capita/day in 1990 to only 121 liter/capita/day in 2010. [1]
Low water consumption has had some negative operational, health and even environmental impacts. On the operational side, sewers have to be flushed occasionally with injected drinking water in order to prevent stagnation of raw sewage. On the health side, there are concerns about potable water contamination due to low flows. On the environmental side, in some cities such as Berlin water tables are rising and cause damage to the foundations of buildings because of decreased pumping of groundwater by utilities. [6]
Water is not scarce in Germany, except for occasional localized droughts. Public water utilities extract only 3 percent of total renewable water resources in Germany, or 5.4 billion cubic metres out of 182 billion cubic metres annually. [7]
The sources of public water supply are as follows:
Water supply in Germany is continuous, at good pressure, and drinking water quality is excellent, as evidenced by the universal compliance with the EU drinking water directive. Wastewater treatment is universal. 94 percent of municipal wastewater is treated according to the highest EU standards including nutrient elimination, a much higher percentage than in France (36 percent) or in England and Wales (39 percent). [9]
According to a 2007 national survey for the business association BDEW [10] (BDEW customer barometer) 92% of customers were satisfied or very satisfied with the quality of their drinking water. 82% were satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by their drinking water provider. 79% were satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by their wastewater utility. The survey also showed that customers significantly overestimate the price of water and wastewater services compared to the actual price. [11]
It is estimated that the total number of those directly employed in German water and sanitation utilities is far more than 100,000. [12]
The length of the drinking water network in Germany is estimated to be more than 500,000 km. The length of the sewer network in 2004 was estimated by the Federal Statistical Office to be 515,000 km, divided as follows:
There were 9,994 wastewater treatment plants in Germany in 2004. [13]
Public water supply and sanitation in Germany are responsibilities of municipalities, of which there were more than 12,000 in 2008. Smaller municipalities often associate in municipal associations to provide water and/or sanitation services. Municipalities or municipal associations in turn can delegate these responsibilities to municipal companies, private companies or public-private partnerships.
There are about 6,400 public water service providers and about 6,900 sanitation service providers in Germany. [14] With a few exceptions, water and sanitation services are typically provided by different entities in the same locality, with sanitation bills being collected by the water utility on behalf of the entity in charge of sanitation.
Among the 1,266 larger water service providers about 15 percent are municipal utilities under public law (Eigenbetriebe); 16 percent are inter-municipal utilities (Zweckverbände); 63 percent are utilities under private or mixed law either under private, public or mixed ownership.; [15] and 6 percent are water and land associations (Wasser- und Bodenverbände). Only 3.5 percent of service providers were entirely privately owned (no figures are available on companies with mixed ownership, an increasingly prevalent form of ownership).
Unlike public water supply, sanitation is considered a sovereign core responsibility (hoheitliche Kernaufgabe) of municipalities in Germany. This implies that, unlike water supply, it is exempt from VAT and corporate taxes. It also implies that companies under private law cannot directly provide sanitation services. The great majority of municipalities thus provide sanitation directly through a municipal sanitation department (Regiebetrieb). Less than 10 percent of the 6,000 sanitation providers are utilities under public law, and none are utilities under private law. However, municipalities or municipal utilities can sign operating contracts (Betreiberverträge) with private companies. Out of the 900 largest sanitation service providers, about 10 percent have signed such contracts for sewerage services and 12 percent for wastewater treatment services.
The largest privately owned public water company is Gelsenwasser AG, although 92,9% of it are still owned by various municipalities, [16] which is a multi-utility company (water, sanitation and natural gas distribution) serving 3.2 million inhabitants in North Rhine-Westphalia, under concession agreements with 39 municipalities, and many other localities throughout Germany and internationally. [17]
An example of a publicly owned large multi-utility (water, electricity generation and distribution, natural gas distribution) is the Mainova AG in Frankfurt. [18]
The Berliner Wasserbetriebe, an Institution under Public Law (Anstalt des öffentlichen Rechts), is the largest communal water service provider after its remunicipalisation in 2013, [19] serving 3.5 million people with water and 3.9 million people with sanitation services. [20]
Responsibility for policy setting in public water supply and sanitation in Germany is shared between the EU, the federal government and state governments (Länder). (For more details on the role of the Länder and municipalities see States of Germany) The EU sets the framework legislation for water quality and water resources management (see EU water policy). The organization of public water supply and sanitation, however, remains a prerogative of EU member states. The German states (Länder) play a key role in the sector by setting, among other things, the legal framework for tariff approvals. Municipalities, legally entrusted with service provision, play an indirect role in influencing policy positions related to water and sanitation through their influential municipal associations (the Deutsche Städtetag representing the largest cities and towns and the Deutscher Städte- und Gemeindebund representing smaller cities and towns).
There are no autonomous regulatory agencies for water and sanitation in Germany at the state or federal level. The recently created federal regulatory agency for network industries (Federal Network Agency) covers telecommunications, postal services, electricity, gas and rail. It does not cover water supply and sanitation, since it is a responsibility of the states. Water and sanitation tariffs are approved through different procedures in each state, usually by a department in the state Ministry of Economy after a review of the tariff increase request by an independent auditor. In city-states (Berlin, Hamburg, Bremen) this means that the Minister (called Senator) of Economy both requests the tariff increase in his capacity as chairman of the board of the utility and also approves it, which constitutes a conflict of interest. In the case of some private utilities, tariffs are set by a mutually agreed arbitrator based on the professional opinion of an auditor.
Drinking water quality is monitored by the public health departments of municipalities and counties (Landkreise). Environmental monitoring is largely based on self-monitoring, which has proven to be reliable, and occasional samples by environmental Ministries of the states.
Industry associations and professional associations also play an important role in self-regulating the water and sanitation sector (verbandliche Selbstverwaltung). In early 2007 there were six associations in the sector. They include two industry associations, the Association of Electricity and Water Utilities BDEW and the VKU (association of municipal utilities); two professional associations, the DWA (professional association for water and sanitation), BVGW (professional association for gas and water); and two associations specialized on sub-sectors, the ATT (working group of dam operators providing drinking water) and DBVW (association of land and water associations). In particular the two professional associations play an important role assisting in the development of technical norms and, more recently, in performance benchmarking.
A study commissioned in 2000 by the Ministry of Economy suggested to liberalize the German water sector, allowing competition similar to the telecommunications and electricity sectors. [21] The proposal met with harsh criticism, including from the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) and the associations of municipalities, which alleged that liberalization could entail setbacks for the protection of health and the environment. [22] The liberalization proposal was not further pursued. However, public-private partnerships continued to become more widespread and the trend towards the creation of private law water utilities (commercialization) continued.
In reaction to the liberalization debate the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag) passed a decision sponsored by the Green party and the Social-democrats (SPD) on sustainable water supply and sanitation (nachhaltige Wasserwirtschaft) in 2001. The decision rejected the liberalization of the water sector, but also called for the merging of smaller service providers, higher competitiveness and the general modernization of the sector, including through systematic performance benchmarking. [23] In 2005, the six professional associations signed a declaration promoting benchmarking, based on a methodology developed by the International Water Association.
Water losses in the distribution network have been estimated at only 7 percent in 2001, down from 11 percent in 1991. [24] According to a study commissioned by the BGW losses are 19 percent in England/Wales, 26 percent in France and 29 percent in Italy. [25] These would not only be the lowest water losses in the four countries, but also in the world. [26] The study states that its methodology allows for an accurate comparison, including water used to flush pipes and for firefighting. This is consistent with the International Water Association's definition of non-revenue water, which includes authorized non-metered consumption such as for flushing and firefighting.
Benchmarking has been undertaken for a long period by German utilities, but not in a comprehensive and systematic manner. In 1998 the Federal Ministry of Education and Research initiated a competition of ideas to reduce the costs of water supply together with the economic research institute RWI and 14 water utilities. It developed a set of criteria to assess strengths and weaknesses in the industry. Participating utilities say that they reduced their operating costs by about 5 percent after two to three years. [27] The professional associations DVGW and DWA have jointly established a voluntary benchmarking system, which keeps individual company data confidential. The associations consider the system as being highly successful.
By law (Kommunalabgabengesetze or Betriebsgesetze der Länder) tariffs must cover the full costs of water supply and sanitation, including capital replacement and the remuneration of equity. The various state laws do not foresee a review of the level of the efficiency of investments and operations as part of the tariff approval procedure. Some states also levy a resource charge for groundwater abstractions which is passed on by utilities to the consumers. [28] There is no such a charge for surface water abstraction, however.
Utilities also pay a wastewater discharge fee which depends on the degree of pollution of the discharged treated wastewater. The discharge fee is supposed to provide an incentive to treat water beyond what is legally required (Abwasserabgabengesetz). It accounts for about 3 percent of total sanitation costs.
In 2004 water tariffs averaged 1.81 euro per cubic meter including VAT, and sanitation tariffs averaged 2.14 euro per cubic meter. [29]
According to NUS consulting water tariffs in Germany (without sanitation) were the highest of 16 mainly OECD countries at the equivalent of US$2.25 per cubic meter, about on par with tariffs in Denmark.
However, according to a study commissioned by the German industry association BGW in 2006, the average household water bill was only 82 euro per year in Germany, lower than in France or in England and Wales, but higher than in Italy. The study shows that subsidies are more prevalent in the three comparator countries and service levels are lower. Taking into account these differences, the cost of supplying water at an equalized service level would be 84 euros in Germany, 106 euro in both France and England/Wales, and 74 euro in Italy. [25] The apparent discrepancy between higher unit tariffs and lower bills is due to the lower water consumption in Germany. Water tariffs have remained stable in real terms over the past ten years.
Comparison of annual water and sanitation bills per capita in four EU countries
Water tariff | Sewer tariff | Total | |
Germany | 85 euro | 111 euro | 196 euro |
England and Wales | 95 euro | 93 euro | 188 euro |
France | 85 euro | 90 euro | 175 euro |
Italy | 59 euro | 40 euro | 99 euro |
Source: Metropolitan Consulting Group: Vergleich europäischer Wasser- und Abwasserpreise, 2006 [25]
Concerning sanitation, unequalized tariffs are by far the highest in Germany at 111 euro per year. Equalized costs net of subsidies are, however, highest in England and Wales with 138 euro, followed by France (122 euro), Germany (119 euro) and Italy (85 euro).
Metering is widespread in Germany and almost universal for single family homes. However, many apartments do not have their own meter, so that households living in apartments where only the consumption of the entire house is metered have little financial incentive to conserve water.
In 2005 investments stood at 7.8 billion euros, including 5.5 billion euros for sanitation and 2.3 billion euros for water supply. [30] Financing is predominantly through debt and ultimately through user fees. Commercial debt is issued directly by the municipalities in the form of municipal bonds (Kommunalanleihen) or by utilities. The development Bank KfW also provides long-term credit for up to 30 years (Kommunalkredit) for municipal investments, including water supply and sanitation.
According to the professional associations of the sector there is no investment backlog (Investitionsstau).
Water supply is the provision of water by public utilities, commercial organisations, community endeavors or by individuals, usually via a system of pumps and pipes. Public water supply systems are crucial to properly functioning societies. These systems are what supply drinking water to populations around the globe. Aspects of service quality include continuity of supply, water quality and water pressure. The institutional responsibility for water supply is arranged differently in different countries and regions. It usually includes issues surrounding policy and regulation, service provision and standardization.
Water supply and sanitation in Latin America is characterized by insufficient access and in many cases by poor service quality, with detrimental impacts on public health. Water and sanitation services are provided by a vast array of mostly local service providers under an often fragmented policy and regulatory framework. Financing of water and sanitation remains a serious challenge.
Access to drinking water and sanitation in El Salvador has been increased significantly. A 2015 conducted study by the University of North Carolina called El Salvador the country that has achieved the greatest progress in the world in terms of increased access to water supply and sanitation and the reduction of inequity in access between urban and rural areas. However, water resources are heavily polluted and the great majority of wastewater is discharged without any treatment into the environment. Institutionally a single public institution is both de facto in charge of setting sector policy and of being the main service provider. Attempts at reforming and modernizing the sector through new laws have not borne fruit over the past 20 years.
Water supply and sanitation in the United States involves a number of issues including water scarcity, pollution, a backlog of investment, concerns about the affordability of water for the poorest, and a rapidly retiring workforce. Increased variability and intensity of rainfall as a result of climate change is expected to produce both more severe droughts and flooding, with potentially serious consequences for water supply and for pollution from combined sewer overflows. Droughts are likely to particularly affect the 66 percent of Americans whose communities depend on surface water. As for drinking water quality, there are concerns about disinfection by-products, lead, perchlorates, PFAS and pharmaceutical substances, but generally drinking water quality in the U.S. is good.
Water supply and sanitation in France is universal and of good quality. Salient features of the sector compared to other developed countries are the high degree of private sector participation using concession and lease contracts and the existence of basin agencies that levy fees on utilities in order to finance environmental investments. Water losses in France (26%) are high compared to England (19%) and Germany (7%).
Access to at least basic water increased from 94% to 97% between 2000 and 2015; an increase in access to at least basic sanitation from 73% to 86% in the same period;
Drinking water supply and sanitation in Argentina is characterized by relatively low tariffs, mostly reasonable service quality, low levels of metering and high levels of consumption for those with access to services. At the same time, according to the WHO, 21% of the total population remains without access to house connections and 52% of the urban population do not have access to sewerage. The responsibility for operating and maintaining water and sanitation services rests with 19 provincial water and sewer companies, more than 100 municipalities and more than 950 cooperatives, the latter operating primarily in small towns. Among the largest water and sewer companies are Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos (AYSA) and Aguas Bonarenses S.A. (ABSA), both operating in Greater Buenos Aires, Aguas Provinciales de Santa Fe, and Aguas Cordobesas SA, all of them now publicly owned. In 2008 there were still a few private concessions, such as Aguas de Salta SA, which is majority-owned by Argentine investors, and Obras Sanitarias de Mendoza (OSM).
Water supply and sanitation in Spain is characterized by universal access and good service quality, while tariffs are among the lowest in the EU. Almost half of the population is served by private or mixed private-public water companies, which operate under concession contracts with municipalities. The largest of the private water companies, with a market share of about 50% of the private concessions, is Aguas de Barcelona (Agbar). However, the large cities are all served by public companies except Barcelona and Valencia. The largest public company is Canal de Isabel II, which serves the metropolitan area of Madrid.
The Water supply and sanitation services in Portugal have seen important advances in access to services, technologies used and service quality over the past decades (1980s–1990s), partially achieved thanks to important funds from the European Union. Nevertheless, sanitation still remains relatively low in mountain rural areas and some people have their own sources of water controlled by municipalities.
Water supply and sanitation in Canada is nearly universal and generally of good quality, but a lack of clean drinking water in many First Nations communities remains a problem. Water use in Canada is high compared to Europe, since water tariffs are low and 44% of users are not metered.
Public water supply and sanitation in Denmark is characterized by universal access and generally good service quality. Some important features of the sector in Denmark as compared to other developed countries are:
Water supply and sanitation in the Netherlands is provided in good quality and at a reasonable price to the entire population. Water consumption is one of the lowest in developed countries at 128 litres per capita per day and water leakage in the distribution network is one of the lowest in the world at only 6%.
Drinking water supply and sanitation in Egypt directly impact the country's public health, industrial developments, and agriculture. Egypt's water and sanitation industry is characterized by both achievements and challenges. Among the achievements are an increase of piped water supply between 1998 and 2006 from 89% to 100% in urban areas and from 39% to 93% in rural areas despite rapid population growth; the elimination of open defecation in rural areas during the same period; and in general a relatively high level of investment in infrastructure. Access to an at least basic water source in Egypt is now practically universal with a rate of 98%. On the institutional side, the regulation and service provision have been separated to some extensions through the creation of a national Holding Company for Water and Wastewater in 2004, and of an economic regulator, the Egyptian Water Regulatory Agency (EWRA), in 2006. Despite these successes, many challenges remain. Only about one half of the population is connected to sanitary sewers. Because of this low sanitation coverage, about 50,000 children die each year because of diarrhea. Another challenge is low cost recovery due to water tariffs that are among the lowest in the world. This in turn requires government subsidies even for operating costs, a situation that has been aggravated by salary increases without tariff increases after the Arab Spring. Furthermore, poor operation of facilities, such as water and wastewater treatment plants, as well as limited government accountability and transparency, are also issues.
Water supply and sanitation in Belgium is provided by a large variety of organizations: Most of the 581 municipalities of Belgium have delegated the responsibility for water supply and sanitation to regional or inter-municipal utilities. There are more than 62 water supply utilities, including 2 regional, 30 inter-municipal and 30 municipal utilities. Another 100 mostly small municipalities provide services directly without having a legally of financially separate entity for water supply. Water is not scarce in Belgium and water supply is generally continuous and of good quality. However, wastewater treatment has long lagged behind and Brussels only achieved full treatment of its wastewater in 2007. In 2004 the European Court of Justice ruled condemning Belgium's failure to comply with the EU wastewater directive, and the ruling has not been fully complied with so far. Wallonia satisfies 55% of the national needs in drinking water while it counts only 37% of the population. Flanders and Brussels are dependent on drinking water from Wallonia, at a level of 40% and 98% respectively.
Water supply and sanitation in Morocco is provided by a wide array of utilities. They range from private companies in the largest city, Casablanca, the capital, Rabat, Tangier, and Tetouan, to public municipal utilities in 13 other cities, as well as a national electricity and water company (ONEE). The latter is in charge of bulk water supply to the aforementioned utilities, water distribution in about 500 small towns, as well as sewerage and wastewater treatment in 60 of these towns.
Water supply and sanitation in Turkey is characterized by achievements and challenges. Over the past decades access to drinking water has become almost universal and access to adequate sanitation has also increased substantially. Autonomous utilities have been created in the 16 metropolitan cities of Turkey and cost recovery has been increased, thus providing the basis for the sustainability of service provision. Intermittent supply, which was common in many cities, has become less frequent. In 2004, 61% of the wastewater collected through sewers was being treated. In 2020 77% of water was used by agriculture, 10% by households and the rest by industry.Charging for water used by agriculture has been suggested.
Water supply and sanitation in Japan is characterized by numerous achievements and some challenges. The country has achieved universal access to water supply and sanitation, has one of the lowest levels of water distribution losses in the world, regularly exceeds its own strict standards for the quality of drinking water and treated waste water, uses an effective national system of performance benchmarking for water and sanitation utilities, makes extensive use of both advanced and appropriate technologies such as the jōkasō on-site sanitation system, and has pioneered the payment for ecosystem services before the term was even coined internationally. Some of the challenges are a decreasing population, declining investment, fiscal constraints, ageing facilities, an ageing workforce, a fragmentation of service provision among thousands of municipal utilities, and the vulnerability of parts of the country to droughts that are expected to become more frequent due to climate change.
Water supply and sanitation in Italy is characterized by mostly good services at prices that are lower than in other European countries with similar income levels. For example, the average monthly residential water and sewer bill in Italy is 20 Euro compared to 31 Euro in France. According to the OECD, water in Italy has been underpriced for a long time. With about 240 liter per day, per capita water use for residential uses in Italy is higher than in Spain or in France, where it is about 160 liter per day. Water resources in Italy are distributed unevenly, with more abundant resources in the North and scarcer resources in the South. Most water withdrawals are for agriculture and industry, with only 18 percent of water withdrawals made for drinking water supply. About one third of the water withdrawn for municipal supply is not billed to the customers because of leakage, malfunctioning water meters and water theft.
The water and sewer system of Bucharest, the capital of Romania with a population of 2.3 million, was privatized in 2000 through a 25-year concession to the French company Veolia. The impact of the concession is mixed. During the first years almost 3,000 employees were laid off and water bills increased four-fold. There were improvements in service quality and efficiency, but most of the improvements occurred before privatization and improvements in service quality since privatization are not well documented. Privatization placed the burden of financing the renewal of the infrastructure directly on water consumers rather than on taxpayers. The private water utility owned by Veolia, Apa Nova București, is considered one of the most profitable Romanian utilities.
Water supply and sanitation in Vietnam is characterized by challenges and achievements. Among the achievements is a substantial increase in access to water supply and sanitation between 1990 and 2010, nearly universal metering, and increased investment in wastewater treatment since 2007. Among the challenges are continued widespread water pollution, poor service quality, low access to improved sanitation in rural areas, poor sustainability of rural water systems, insufficient cost recovery for urban sanitation, and the declining availability of foreign grant and soft loan funding as the Vietnamese economy grows and donors shift to loan financing. The government also promotes increased cost recovery through tariff revenues and has created autonomous water utilities at the provincial level, but the policy has had mixed success as tariff levels remain low and some utilities have engaged in activities outside their mandate.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)