Nicaragua: Water and Sanitation | ||
---|---|---|
Data | ||
Access to an improved water source | 85% (2010) [1] | |
Access to improved sanitation | 52% (2010) [1] | |
Continuity of supply (%) | 53% | |
Average urban water use (l/c/d) | ||
Average urban domestic water and sewer bill for 20m3 | 6.50 US$/month | |
Share of household metering | n/a | |
Share of collected wastewater treated | 42% | |
Annual investment in WSS | 9 US$ /capita | |
Share of self-financing by utilities | 16% (1990–99) | |
Share of tax-financing | 7% (1990–99) | |
Share of external financing | 77% (1990–99) | |
Institutions | ||
Decentralization to municipalities | Very limited | |
National water and sanitation company | Yes | |
Water and sanitation regulator | Yes | |
Responsibility for policy setting | A Council | |
Sector law | Yes (1998) | |
Number of urban service providers | 30 | |
Number of rural service providers | n/a |
Drinking water and sanitation in Nicaragua are provided by a national public utility in urban areas and water committees in rural areas. Despite relatively high levels of investment, access to drinking water in urban areas has barely kept up with population growth, access to urban sanitation has actually declined and service quality remains poor. However, a substantial increase in access to water supply and sanitation has been reached in rural areas.
The water sector underwent major reforms in 1998 that separated policy, regulatory, and operating functions. Decentralization has been proposed for a decade, but implementation was very slow and in mid-2007 was reversed when the national water company took over two municipal systems.
Urban (57% of the population) | Rural (43% of the population) | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Water | Improved water source | 98% | 68% | 85% |
Piped on Premises | 89% | 29% | 63% | |
Sanitation | Improved sanitation | 63% | 37% | 52% |
Sewerage (2006 JMP survey & census data) | 22% | 0% | 13% |
Source: WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation [1]
Access to water supply and sanitation in urban areas of Nicaragua has been declining, since there has been little expansion in access while population levels have increased. Even though the JMP found coverage levels to be at 85% in 2010, the Nicaraguan Water and Sewerage Enterprise (ENACAL), the public utility responsible for provision of water and sanitation services to urban areas, estimates that effective coverage is less than 60 percent due to insufficient and unreliable service. There have been significant improvements in rural areas, however, since 1990. Access to improved water supply in rural areas has increased significantly from 54% in 1990 to 68% in 2010. [1]
Access to improved sanitation in rural areas has increased from 43% in 1990 to 52% in 2010. [1] According to the 2005 census, access to improved water supply in Nicaragua was 77% in 2005, which is lower than the JMP estimate of 83%. Access to improved sanitation was 85% according to the 2005 census which is higher than the JMP estimate of 50%. [1] The difference can be largely explained by the fact that the JMP definition takes into account only improved latrines with a complete structure that are in service, while the census also counts abandoned or traditional latrines.
Water supply in 47% of localities monitored by the regulatory agency (46 out of 96 systems) is not continuous. [2] This share is higher in the dry season, between the months of February and May, than in the wet season. Poor quality and efficiency of water service are serious concerns in the Managua region. The existing water supply in Managua cannot meet current demand due to high rates of leakage and wastage, which account for 55% of total water produced and distributed by the system. [3]
Interruptions in service provision are common, with some households receiving service for less than 2 hours per day. Only 42 percent of connections in Managua have meters operating in good condition. Additionally, ENACAL, the national utility responsible for water provision in Managua, has been labelled as "one of the most notorious overbillers in the country". [4]
Bacteriological urban drinking water quality was considered acceptable by the WHO based on samples analyzed by the national utility. [5]
In 2005 CONAPAS estimated that 42% of all collected wastewater in the country was treated. [6] At that moment there was no wastewater treatment system in the city of Managua. The 2005 Census reported that 63% of households have toilet systems which discharge into sewers in Managua, with 30% of the population using pit latrines in settlements, and the remainder using septic tanks managed by five private companies. [7]
In 1996 a Sanitation Master Plan for the City of Managua was completed and later finalized in 2002. Based on this study, ENACAL is currently overseeing the construction of a water treatment plant and collection system, funded by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the German Kreditanstalt fuer Wiederaufbau (KfW), and the Nordic Fund, which was completed by December, 2008. This new plant treats 67% of the sewage waters in Managua. [8]
Nicaragua is a water-rich country with a water availability of 35,000 cubic meter/capita/year, corresponding to more than five times the average for Central America and the Caribbean. Less than 1% of these water resources is withdrawn for human use. The major water user is agriculture (84% of withdrawals), followed by domestic use (14%) and industry (2%). [9]
Rainfall, while abundant, varies greatly. The Caribbean lowlands are the wettest section of Central America, receiving between 2,500 and 6,500 millimeters of rain annually. The western slopes of the central highlands and the Pacific lowlands receive considerably less annual rainfall. Mean annual precipitation for the rift valley and western slopes of the highlands ranges from 1,000 to 1,500 millimeters. Rainfall is seasonal—May through October is the rainy season, and December through April is the driest period.
Groundwater is the main source for municipal water supply in Nicaragua. For example, Managua - which is located on the shores of the polluted Lake Managua - is supplied entirely by groundwater, including by groundwater that infiltrates from the craters of volcanoes - called "lagoons'" within the city. For example, Asososca lagoon, to the west, is Managua's most important source of drinking water.
Under the Somoza government until 1979 the larger urban water systems were operated by the private sector, while a Ministerial department was in charge of water systems in smaller towns. [5] After the revolution a centralized public national water company, the Instituto Nicaragüense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (INAA), was created.
After the electoral defeat of Daniel Ortega's first administration (1979–1990) the subsequent governments tried to decentralize service provision without much success. In 1998, under the administration of Arnoldo Alemán (1997–2002), the sector was reformed, but not decentralized. The reform consisted in the separation of policy, regulatory and service provision functions: CONAPAS was created to set policies; ENACAL was created to provide services, taking over most of the staff and assets of INAA; and a new regulatory agency was created that inherited the name INAA. [10]
Neither before the 1998 reform nor afterwards was there much change in the sector towards decentralization or the establishment of public-private partnerships. The financial self-sufficiency of ENACAL improved between 1998 and 2001, but there were public protests against the hardship imposed by higher tariffs. [11] Subsequently, tariffs were frozen during the administration of Enrique Bolaños (2002–2007), leading to a gradual deterioration of the utility's financial situation.
In 1999, ENACAL, with financial support from the IDB, accepted an international management contract with the goal of restructuring the sector to include private sector participation and transforming ENACAL into a publicly traded company. This project included provisions for decentralization, with private and local water management in the municipalities of León and Chinandega. Protests against privatization put a halt to these reforms and in 2003 the Nicaraguan Legislature passed Law 440 which included a moratorium on any water privatization. [12] Soon after, the Nicaraguan Legislature also changed ENACAL’s status from a “state-owned business” to a “state-owned public utility”. [13]
The current administration of Daniel Ortega took office in November 2006. This administration does oppose private sector participation and has been critical of autonomous regulation. One option considered by the government is to establish a National Water Authority.
The current administration has supported a restructuring of the 1999 IDB project. In December 2006 ENACAL signed a five-year service contract which eliminates all private sector development, including the private contracts for the sector in Léon and Chinandega, and gives ENACAL an exclusive service contract for commercial services (meter reading, billing, customer service), supported by the IDB as part of the modernization of ENACAL. [6] The contract has been criticized by a consumer advocacy group which argues the agreement will make access to public water more costly to most Nicaraguans. [14]
In October 2005 CONAPAS approved a sector strategy that aims - again - at decentralization, financial self-sufficiency and strengthening of the regulator. In addition, it calls for the development of a sustainable operational model for rural areas.
In January 2007 CONAPAS launched a 10-year comprehensive water and sanitation plan. It foresees investments of US$592m and will focus on rural areas using the Social Fund FISE as an implementing agency. [15]
A new Water Law was passed in November 2007 which gives ENACAL responsibility for supervision and control of service provision in rural areas. [16] Although the law's implication for institutional responsibilities is not yet clear, a strategy for the entire sector is under preparation by ENACAL—rather than CONAPAS—and should shed some light on the institutional roles in the sector.
The responsibilities in the water and sanitation sector in Nicaragua are defined in
A General Water Law (Ley General de Aguas Nacionales), which is focused on water resources but also covers a number of water supply and sanitation issues as well, was approved by Parliament on September 9, 2007. [18]
Responsibility for policy setting in the Nicaraguan water and sanitation sector is vested in the National Council for Drinking Water and Sanitation - Comisión Nacional de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado Sanitario (CONAPAS). CONAPAS includes the Secretariat of the Presidency, whose representative presides the Council, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Environment, the national utility ENACAL, the regulatory agency INAA, the Institute for Territorial Studies (INETER) and the Social Investment Fund FISE.
The regulatory agency, the National Water and Sewerage Institute - Instituto Nicaragüense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, INAA - is in charge of sector regulation. It handles customer complaints, approves tariff increases and can provide concessions for service providers. However, there were no tariff increase requests between August 2002 and February 2008 and no requests for concessions, so that the regulator has been condemned to inactivity.
According to municipal law, municipalities are responsible for providing water and sanitation services in Nicaragua. However, in practice very few municipalities actually provide these services. Instead more than 60% of water users are served by the national water and sewerage company Empresa Nicaragüense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (ENACAL), which serves most urban areas. A further 30% are served by community organizations (potable water committees) in rural areas. Less than 10% of users are served by a departmental water company in Rio Blanco as well as by 26 small municipalities. [19]
As of 2004 ENACAL had a total of 410,000 registered users in the country, of which Managua represents 50 percent. [20] ENACAL has 18 regional departments. Some of these departments have received greater autonomy, such as in the case of Granada, under what is called the "Modelo de Gestion Descontentrado".
The Social Investment Fund FISE finances infrastructure and supports local communities in the management of infrastructure. In the water and sanitation sector it has been particularly active in rural water supply and sanitation.
Besides providing services in urban areas ENACAL also supported community organizations in rural areas and has been quite successful in this field. Both the WHO and the US-financed Environmental Health Project report high levels of sustainability of rural water service provision in projects supported by ENACAL's rural water directorate. [5] However, in 2005, the responsibility for support to rural communities was given to FISE and donor funds are now channeled through it. [21]
The efficiency of urban service provision is low, with estimated non-revenue water of more than 55% in Managua. ENACAL has taken recent steps to improve efficiency, however and labor productivity has increased from 7.5 employees per 1000 water connections in 2006 to 7.04 in 2007. In 2007 operating and administrative costs decreased by 10%. ENACAL has accomplished these improvements by cutting back on energy usage, increasing billed revenue to 11.6% as of April 2008 through improving their commercial database, expanding metering, and identifying customers who were not previously billed. [22]
Despite these improvements, ENACAL currently has a debt of 436 million córdobas (US$24 million) which is continuously growing as their expenses exceed their earnings by C$31.8 million (US$1.7 million) per month. [23]
Only 59% of operating costs of ENACAL were recovered through tariff revenues as of 2012. There are many illegal connections that are not billed and many billed customers do not pay their water bills. For the utility, electricity costs for pumping are a major cost item. The government subsidizes operating costs at the tune of about 35 million Euro per year, out of operating costs equivalent to 85 million Euro (2.57 billion Cordoba).
Urban water and sewer tariffs charged by ENACAL have last been increased in 2008. There used to be substantial increases between 1998 and 2001, with annual increases of 28, 27 and 12% in 1998, 1999 and 2000 respectively. [5] Such high and sustained increases were unusual in the region. While these increases allowed the public utility to regain its financial health, in 2001 they led to protests and legal action against a proposed further 30% tariff increase. [11]
Afterwards tariffs have been frozen, eroding again the financial health of the utility. This led to its near bankruptcy and required the National Government to make transfers of an average of US$20 million per year to compensate net losses as of 2005. In February 2008 a water tariff increase was approved to cover the rise in inflation between 2002 and 2006. This increase is to be applied gradually beginning in May 2008, with an average increase of about 16%. Future increases will be approved by INAA.
ENACAL tariffs are complex and ostensibly aim at protecting the poor. Tariffs vary depending on the city (although prices are lower in Managua than in the rest of the country most likely because the cost of delivery is also lower [24] ), user category (three residential user categories and "institutions", the latter paying the highest tariffs; within the residential user categories the ratio between lowest and highest tariffs is 1:3) and consumption (higher tariffs for consumption above 20, 30 and 50 cubic meters per month respectively). The poorest who have no access to water and sewerage or are served by rural water committees are by definition excluded from these subsidies.
It has been estimated that an average household in the two lowest income quintiles in the interior of the country that receives water services from ENACAL paid the equivalent of US$6.50 per month in 2003, which corresponds to about 7% of its income estimated at US$93 per month. [25] While this share is very high, the bill is probably lower than the economic cost of time spent carrying the water and the burden of disease from unsafe water.
In July 2007 there was a modification in sewerage tariffs for the City of Managua which allows sewage treatment costs to be partially covered. This change will be applied as soon as the sewage treatment plant becomes operational, which is expected to occur by the end of 2008.
The government plans to invest 2 billion USD in the water and sanitation sector between 2013 and 2030 as part of its program VIDA - Programa Integral Sectorial de Agua y Saneamiento Humano de Nicaragua, which was elaborated as a draft in 2012. The first phase includes about USD 350 million for 2013 to 2017, or about USD 70 million per year. This would constitute a significant increase compared to previous years.
According to the Nicaraguan Unidad Pública de Inversiones or Public Investment Unit, investments in water and sanitation from 1991-2006 were US$351 million or on average USD 22 million per year. This corresponds to 0.49% of GDP or US$4.5/capita/year. Within that period investment levels increased substantially in 1997. After ranging between US$0.7 and US$1.1 per capita from 1991 to 1996, it went up to US$4.7 to US$9.4 from 1997 to 2006. [27] All in all, the average investment level per capita and year from 1997 to 2003 is higher than in its neighboring countries Costa Rica and Honduras, but lower than in South American countries like Argentina, Peru and Colombia. [28]
Investments are almost entirely financed by foreign donors and the government passes foreign credits on as grants to ENACAL and to water committees in rural areas. Between 2002 and 2007 ENACAL invested US$162 million in the sector, of which 2% was self-financed by the utility, 5% was financed by the national government with its own resources, and the remaining 93% came from external grants and loans. [29]
There are no data on investments by NGOs, which provide funds mainly for infrastructure in rural areas.
ICO has approved a $5 million loan to support the building of a sanitary sewerage and wastewater treatment system in Telica, Nicaragua. The initiative is funded by an agreement between ICO and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI), which also funds other comparable projects in Central America. [30] [31] [32]
The newly built network will be 17 kilometers long, treat 830 m3 of water each day, and serve around 11 000 people. It will save an estimated half-tonne of microplastics from entering the water each year. [33]
The main donors in the water and sanitation sector in Nicaragua are the Spanish development cooperation (AECID) which supports the sector program VIDA, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) that implements the Spanish Water Fund FECASALC, the World Bank with its program to reduce water losses in Managua (PRASMA), a rural program called PRASNICA, a project for adaptation to climate change, Germany through GIZ and KfW, as well as the Swiss Development Cooperation (COSUDE) in rural areas. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the Nordic Fund, the Japan International Cooperation Agency and other donors also support the sector.
Numerous NGOs are engaged in the water and sanitation sector in Nicaragua, including CARE, Save the Children, Plan International, Health without Limits, Water for Life, Living Water International, blueEnergy, Christian Medical Action and Engineers Without Borders.
The various donors that support the Nicaraguan government in its efforts to improve water supply and sanitation coordinate in a sector table and have subscribed in 2005 to a Sector-Wide Approach (SwAp) to even better coordinate their efforts. [34] However, the sector table is not very active and the VIDA program of Spain and the IDB is now a main vehicle for the dialogue with the government on sector policies.
The IDB supports many projects in the sector, in both urban and rural areas:
Water supply and sanitation in Mexico is characterized by achievements and challenges. Among the achievements is a significant increase in access to piped water supply in urban areas as well as in rural areas between 1990 and 2010. Additionally, a strong nationwide increase in access to improved sanitation was observed in the same period. Other achievements include the existence of a functioning national system to finance water and sanitation infrastructure with a National Water Commission as its apex institution; and the existence of a few well-performing utilities such as Aguas y Drenaje de Monterrey.
Drinking water supply and sanitation in Ecuador is characterized by a number of achievements and challenges. One key achievement is a significant increase in both access to an at least basic water source and at least basic sanitation. Significant increases in coverage in urban areas were achieved both by the public utility EMAAP-Q, serving the capital Quito, and the private concessionaire Interagua in the country's largest city Guayaquil. However, municipalities rely overwhelmingly upon central government investment, rather than recouping the costs at a local level. Another problem is intermittent water supply, which affects half of the urban areas. Also, only 8% of all collected wastewater is being treated. The level of non-revenue water is estimated at 65%, one of the highest in Latin America. Addressing these challenges is complicated by the atomization of the sector: A multitude of stakeholders – the Ministry of Housing, the Emergency Social Investment Fund, the Solidarity Fund, the State Bank, NGOs, municipalities and others – intervene in the sector. Despite the existence of an Interinstitutional Committee for Water and Sanitation there remains room to improve coordination.
Water supply and sanitation in Colombia have been improved in many ways over the past decades. Between 1990 and 2010, access to improved sanitation increased from 67% to 82%, but access to improved water sources increased only slightly from 89% to 94%. In particular, coverage in rural areas lags behind. Furthermore, despite improvements, the quality of water and sanitation services remains inadequate. For example, only 73% of those receiving public services receive water of potable quality and in 2006 only 25% of the wastewater generated in the country underwent any kind of treatment.
Uruguay is the only country in Latin America that has achieved quasi-universal coverage of access to safe drinking water supply and adequate sanitation. Water service quality is considered good, with practically all localities in Uruguay receiving disinfected water on a continuous basis. 70% of wastewater collected by the national utility was treated. Given these achievements, the government's priority is to improve the efficiency of services and to expand access to sewerage, where appropriate, in areas where on-site sanitation is used.
Guyana, meaning "land of many waters", is rich in water resources. Most of the population is concentrated in the coastal plain, much of which is below sea level and is protected by a series of sea walls. A series of shallow reservoirs inland of the coastal plain, called "water conservancies", store surface water primarily for irrigation needs. Key issues in the water and sanitation sector in Guyana are poor service quality, a low level of cost recovery and low levels of access.
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 Chile were once considered efficient and equitable but in 2022 Chile struggled to reliably provide water throughout the country. Chile's water resources have been strained by the Chilean water crisis, which was partially caused by a continuing mega drought that began in 2010, along with an increased demand for agricultural and other commercial interests.
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 coverage in Honduras has increased significantly in the last decades. However, the sector is still characterized by poor service quality and poor efficiency in many places. Coverage gaps still remain, particularly in rural areas.
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).
Bolivia's drinking water and sanitation coverage has greatly improved since 1990 due to a considerable increase in sectoral investment. However, the country continues to suffer from what happens to be the continent's lowest coverage levels and from low quality of services. Political and institutional instability have contributed to the weakening of the sector's institutions at the national and local levels. Two concessions to foreign private companies in two of the three largest cities—Cochabamba and La Paz/El Alto—were prematurely ended in 2000 and 2006 respectively. The country's second largest city, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, relatively successfully manages its own water and sanitation system by way of cooperatives. The government of Evo Morales intends to strengthen citizen participation within the sector. Increasing coverage requires a substantial increase of investment financing.
Water supply and sanitation in Venezuela is currently limited and many poor people remain without access to piped water. Service quality for those with access is mixed, with water often being supplied only on an intermittent basis and most wastewater not being treated. Non-revenue water is estimated to be high at 62%, compared to the regional average of 40%. The sector remains centralized despite a decentralization process initiated in the 1990s that has now been stalled. Within the executive, sector policies are determined by the Ministry of Environment. The national water company HIDROVEN serves about 80% of the population.
The water and sanitation sector in Peru has made important advances in the last two decades, including the increase of water coverage from 30% to 85% between 1980 and 2010. Sanitation coverage has also increased from 9% to 37% from 1985 to 2010 in rural areas. Advances have also been achieved concerning the disinfection of drinking water and in sewage treatment. Nevertheless, many challenges remain, such as:
Costa Rica has made significant progress in the past decade in expanding access to water supply and sanitation, but the sector faces key challenges in low sanitation connections, poor service quality, and low cost recovery.
Despite many years of concerted efforts and achievements in expanding coverage and improving service sustainability, many issues remain to be addressed in the water and sanitation sector. Key issues include: (i) a low level of coverage for both water and sanitation, in particular in rural areas; (ii) a low level of cost recovery, despite a legal obligation for tariffs to recover costs; and (iii) an institutional framework that is only partially effective.
The Dominican Republic has achieved impressive increases in access to water supply and sanitation over the past two decades. However, the quality of water supply and sanitation services remains poor, despite the country's high economic growth during the 1990s.
Water supply and sanitation in Jamaica is characterized by high levels of access to an improved water source, while access to adequate sanitation stands at only 80%. This situation affects especially the poor, including the urban poor many of which live in the country's over 595 unplanned squatter settlements in unhealthy and unsanitary environments with a high risk of waterborne disease. Despite a number of policy papers that were mainly focused on water supply and despite various projects funded by external donors, increases in access have remained limited.
Water supply and sanitation in Panama is characterized by relatively high levels of access compared to other Latin American countries. However, challenges remain, especially in rural areas. Panama has a tropical climate and receives abundant rainfall, yet the country still suffers from limited water access and pollution. Intense El Niño periods, periodic droughts, reduce water availability. Multiple factors like urbanization, impacts of climate change, and economic development have decreased water resources. The high frequency of floods in recent years and the lack of corresponding measures resulted in tension among the local population. Rapid population growth in recent decades led to an unprecedented increase in freshwater demand. Regional inequality exists in water resources and water governance. An estimated 7.5-31% of Panama's population lives in isolated rural areas with minimal access to potable water and few sewage treatment facilities.
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 resources management in Nicaragua is carried out by the National water utility and regulated by the Nicaraguan Institute of water. Nicaragua has ample water supplies in rivers, groundwater, lagoons, and significant rainfall. Distribution of rainfall is uneven though with more rain falling on an annual basis in the Caribbean lowlands and much lower amounts falling in the inland areas. Significant water resources management challenges include contaminated surface water from untreated domestic and industrial wastewater, and poor overall management of the available water resources.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help){{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help)