Water supply and sanitation in the Dominican Republic

Last updated
Dominican Republic: Water and Sanitation
Flag of the Dominican Republic.svg
Data
Access to an improved water source 86% (2010) [1]
Access to improved sanitation 83% (2010) [1]
Continuity of supply (%)10%
Average urban water use (l/c/d)450
Average urban water and sewer bill for 20m3US$5/month (1990–1998)
Share of household meteringlow
Share of collected wastewater treated49% (2000)
Annual investment in WSSUS$14/capita (1991-1998 average)
Share of self-financing by utilitiesvery low
Share of tax-financingn/a
Share of external financingn/a
Institutions
Decentralization to municipalitiesPartial
National water and sanitation companyYes, but limited to small towns
Water and sanitation regulatorNo
Responsibility for policy settingPresidency of the Republic
Sector lawNo
Number of urban service providers6
Number of rural service providersn/a

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.

Contents

Access

In 2015, around 1.6 million people lacked access to "improved" water and 1.7 million lacked access to "improved" sanitation. In the Dominican Republic, 84% of the total population had access to "improved" water, 86% of the urban population and 81% of the rural population. As for sanitation, 84% of the total population, 86% and 76%, urban and rural respectively, had access to "improved" sanitation. [2] [3]

The Dominican Republic, with a population of 8.8 million, of which about 60% are located in urban areas, has a relatively high level of access to water supply and sanitation, although access in some regions and among the poor remains insufficient.

Urban
(60% of the population)
Rural
(40% of the population)
Total
Improved water source 87%84%86%
Improved sanitation 87%75%83%

Source: WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (2010) [1] based on a trend extrapolation from the results of six Dominican Republic Demographic and Health Surveys conducted between 1986 and 2007 as well as a Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey conducted in 2000. [4]

There are substantial regional differences in coverage for water. For example, in nine provinces located in the Central, Northeastern and Eastern part of the country less than 70% of the population had access to an improved source of water supply according to the 2002 census. [5] Poor households exhibit lower levels of access: only 56% of poor households are connected to water house connections as opposed to 80% of non-poor households. Just 20% of poor households have access to sewers, as opposed to 50% for the non-poor. [6]

Service quality

Despite decentralization efforts and continued government support, quality and continuity of service are inadequate in the Dominican Republic. Water scarcity is increasing mainly due to excessive consumption in urban areas, a lack of demand management (low tariffs, low share of metering, limited environmental consciousness) and watershed degradation. Watershed degradation occurs mainly in the lower sections of most coastal basins and is a result of unplanned settlements and activities and lack of sanitation services.

Continuity


Continuity of services (%) [6]

By systemBy serviced population
Continuous service40%10.5%
Intermittent service60%89.5%

Drinking water quality

Various factors affect the water quality in the Dominican Republic, including: poor condition of purification systems, minimal operational controls, low level of maintenance of treatment plants, and mostly intermittent systems. 38.4% of water systems have no chlorination system installed. These are mostly smaller systems in rural areas. The fact that a chlorination system exists is not a guarantee that water is actually properly disinfected.

National chlorination coverage [7]

UrbanRuralNational
Water systems with chlorination systems87.3%57.4%61.4%
Water systems without chlorination systems12.7%42.6%38.4%

According to 2002 figures by the service providers only 73.6% of drinking water quality samples showed satisfactory drinking water quality, as measured by the absence of total coliforms, compared to a standard of 95%. [7] The presence of coliforms as such is not a health hazard, but that the presence of coliforms is an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens.

Wastewater treatment

In 2000 the WHO estimated that 49% of collected wastewater in the Dominican Republic received some kind of treatment. [8] This percentage, while much higher than the average for Latin America and the Caribbean at that time (15%), is still considered insufficient.

Pollution

The depletion of groundwater and the unregulated disposal of wastewater and solid waste are creating problems that might become irreversible. The numerous new communities around urban areas and large hotels usually do not have adequate sanitation.

History and recent developments

During the 1950s and 1960s the water and sanitation sector in the Dominican Republic experienced an abrupt decentralization and subsequent re-centralization. Since 1962, the institutional framework has remained relatively stable, with a gradual process of regionalization to the provinces with the largest cities of the country. In the period since 1980, which was characterized by economic growth fueled primarily by a massive inflow of tourists, substantial investments were made and service coverage increased significantly.

Decentralization and Recentralization (1955-62)

Under the government of Rafael Trujillo (1930–1961) water service provision was first provided centrally through the General Directorate of Water Systems (Dirección General de Acueductos) in the Ministry of Public Works and Irrigation (Secretaría de Fomento, Obras Públicas y Riego). However, in 1955 all responsibilities and assets were transferred to the city councils (Ayuntamientos), a model which failed by 1962. The government of President Joaquín Balaguer thus created INAPA through Law 5994 on July 30, 1962, again administering all water systems centrally.

Gradual establishment of regional water and sewer companies (1973-1998)

Santiago, the second city of the Dominican Republic. SantiagoCitySkyline2.jpg
Santiago, the second city of the Dominican Republic.

In 1973, under the second Presidency of Joaquín Balaguer (1966–1978), CAASD was set up in the capital Santo Domingo as the first regional water and sewer company. This was followed by the creation of CORAASAN in the second largest city of the country, Santiago, in 1977. The regionalization process then stalled for two decades. But at the request of Congressmen representing their respective constituencies, the process of regionalization resumed and in 1997-98 laws were passed creating three additional regional water and sewer companies in Puerto Plata, Moca and Romana. At the same time, INAPA embarked on its own decentralization programme, handing over the operation of rural water supply systems to community-based organizations. These efforts were supported by technical assistance from USAID (see below). [9]

The 1990s under the third Presidency of Joaquín Balaguer (1986–1996) and the first Presidency of Leonel Fernández (1996–2000) witnessed substantial investments in water and sanitation and an important increase in coverage. For example, access to house connections in rural areas increased from 35% in 1990 to 62% in 2004. Access to sewer connections in urban areas increased from 47% in 1990 to 65% in 2004. [10] These increases are among the highest in Latin America and the Caribbean during that period.

Stalled reform efforts (1999–2004)

In 1999 the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) approved an important US$ 71 million loan to consolidate the reform and modernization of the water and sanitation sector. [11] The loan foresaw the financing of investments by INAPA and regional companies, as well as substantial technical assistance. Specifically, it aimed at transforming the five regional water companies outside the capital into commercially operated entities with no political interference in day-to-day management and strong representation of municipalities and civil society in their Boards. The reform was based on the model of CORAASAN. In the case of CORAAMOCA and COAAROM, management contracts with private operators were to be signed. INAPA was to be gradually decentralized into autonomous regional units, and services in rural areas were to be gradually transferred to user associations. A condition for the effectiveness of the loan was the passing by Congress of a water and sanitation framework law that would have established a central government agency (ente rector) in charge of the sector as well as a water and sanitation regulatory agency.

Under the Presidency of Hipólito Mejía (2000–04), the water and sanitation law was debated in Congress in 2002 and again in June 2004, but was ultimately not passed. [12] The IDB loan thus did not become effective. When Leonel Fernández became again President (2004–12) he has not taken the initiative to revitalize the stalled reform process.

Private sector service contracts in Santo Domingo (2001 onwards)

The government undertook steps to involve the private sector in water and sanitation. In 2001 CAASD signed two service contracts for the installation of meters, meter reading, billing and collection, one for the Eastern and one for the Western part of its service area in Santo Domingo. The contract for the Western part was awarded to the Colombian company AAA, which increased the share of metering from 1% to 25% and increased collected revenues by 128% in less than two years. [13] [14]

Responsibility for water supply and sanitation

Policy and regulation

Policy and regulatory functions in the water and sanitation sector in the Dominican Republic are highly fragmented:

No entity is specifically in charge of sanitation and there is no policy on sanitation. According to a 2006 evaluation for USAID, the Dominican Republic is one of the few countries in Latin America where sanitation is managed by a Public Health State Secretariat that is not coordinated with the rural potable water programs. This, together with the weakness of the Environmental Health Directorate in the Public Health Secretariat, has caused latrine and sanitary education programs to be weak or abandoned. [16]

There is no economic regulatory agency for the sector. The absence of a national strategy for water and sanitation is considered a constraint to sector development. Without a clear strategy, there is a lack of direction and no apparent separation of roles among the active sector agencies. This results in overlapping responsibilities and sometimes conflicting activities.

Service provision

Water and sewer services are provided by regional companies in the largest cities, the national water and sewerage authority (INAPA) in other cities and towns, as well as by community-based water boards in rural areas.

The regional water and sanitation companies were established over a period of 25 years, each by its own law. Each company covers one Province. Their general directors are appointed by the President of the Republic, thus showing a continuity of centralized decision-making in the presence of regional companies. Besides this similarity, the governance structure (such as the composition and function of their Boards) of each regional company is different. The regional companies are:

Map of the Dominican Republic Dr-map.gif
Map of the Dominican Republic

About 4.4 million people, or half the population of the country, live in the five provinces and the national district of the capital served by the five regional water and sewer companies.

In rural areas, INAPA handed over the responsibility for the operation of water systems to community-based water associations (Asociaciones Comunitarias de Acueductos Rurales - ASOCAR) consisting of largely unpaid volunteers in domestic and foreign based nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).

Efficiency (water losses)

Non-revenue water has been estimated at being higher than 65%. [7] Currently, service providers produce 41,720 liters per second (LPS), which is an average of 907 liters per person and day (LPPD) before losses. Even after taking into account losses, water use is much higher than in Europe (220 LPPD) and the United States (300 LPPD). The tourism industry explains this high consumption to a large extent. The hotel industry uses 280% more than what other Caribbean countries use - 1,483 liters per guest and night. [18]

Financial aspects

Tariffs and cost recovery

Cost recovery for water and sanitation is minimal. Average tariffs are moderate at US$ 0.21 per cubic meter for water and US$ 0.07 per cubic meter for sewerage. [19] Collection rates are extremely low at only 28%. [20] As a result of moderate tariffs and very low collection rates, according to a WHO estimate in 1998, households paid on average only US$ 0.50 per month for water and US$ 0.09 per month for sewerage. [21] Electricity bills of the utilities are directly paid for by the central government. The regional water and sewer companies and INAPA rely largely on subsidies from the central government using mechanisms that are not transparent and do not promote efficiency.

In rural areas, communities set their own water tariffs. However, the level of estimated operation and maintenance costs is usually not taken into account when setting tariffs. In rural areas, tariffs are flat rates independent of consumption since there are no meters. Tariffs in Hato Mayor Province were set at 10-25 Dominican Pesos (less than one USD) per month in 2006. Two communities near in an economically active area near Baní charge higher tariffs of between 20 and 500 Pesos per month, depending on the economic conditions of each household. [22]

However, there were some improvements. In 2006 the revenues collected by the regional utility in Puerto Plata was 2.5 times higher than in 2002 due to tariff increases and better bill collection. This allowed the utility to generate a moderate surplus to contribute to the financing of investments. The utility has also signed a performance and financing agreement with the national government, providing more transparency and incentives to improve efficiency.

Investment and financing

A total of 84% of investments made between 1990-98 went to urban centers, while only 16% went to the rural zones [23] Average annual investments for potable water supply was US$87.9 million (1990–1998), which is a relatively high level of per capita investments compared to other developing countries. However, investments are not well allocated. For example, investments are biased towards water supply at the expense of improved sanitation and wastewater treatment, which received only 2.3% of total investments. [24]

It has been argued that poor allocation of resources has resulted in lower increases in coverage rates than would be expected, given the levels of investments. [25] Also, little coordination has been carried out by donors.

Investment financing comes mainly from the central government, with some modest contributions by some regional utilities from their own revenues.

External support

The water and sanitation sector receives external support from international financial institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank. It also received support from USAID in the past.

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)

The IDB has played an important role in the sector through its reform and modernization program mentioned above. However, the program has been stalled for many years after Congress did not approve the water and sanitation reform law that was a condition for the program's effectiveness. In October 2010 the IDB approved a US$35m loan to support the Decentralization and Strengthening of INAPA. [26]

United States

Since 1998 USAID has provided technical assistance to INAPA to introduce what it calls a Total Community Participation approach in rural water supply and sanitation. The project served as a laboratory for INAPA, whose activities in rural areas had been limited to water supply, to engage in community participation, in rural sanitation and hygiene promotion. USAID first supported a pilot project for nine rural communities with a total of 700 families in Hato Mayor Province with the support of Catholic Relief Services and a Dominican NGO. From 2002 onwards, USAID and the NGO Family Health International supported INAPA in replicating the approach in other parts of the country. A 2002 study was undertaken to see how NGO systems compared with INAPA and privately built systems. The study concluded that INAPA, the private sector and NGOs were all capable of building good systems. [27] A 2006 evaluation showed that six of the nine pilot communities did not have working systems. The reasons include inappropriate design - pumps and inverters burned out - and the stealing of solar panels. However, the evaluation also showed that the community-based approach has been adopted by other stakeholders, such as CAASD for rural projects in the province of Santo Domingo, an INAPA project supported by Spanisch cooperation and the Peace Corps. [28] One of the NGOs, Hermandad (HElping Reach MANy through Direct Assistance in Development) worked in the villages west of San Jose de Ocoa for many years developing water and sanitation systems and teaching improved health practices.

World Bank

In April 2009 the World Bank approved a USD 34 million Water and Sanitation in Tourist Areas Project. Its main objective is the reduction of the high economic, environmental and social costs caused by wastewater and solid waste deficiencies, especially in tourist areas, and the improvement of the coverage and quality of the provision of water as well as the collection and disposal of wastewater and solid waste in the Dominican Republic. This would be achieved by: (i) supporting the development and implementation of a national water, wastewater and solid waste strategies in a coordinated way among government agencies and donors; (ii) improving water resources management and the quality, efficiency and sustainability of water and solid waste services; and (iii) increasing the coverage of water and solid waste services, especially to poor communities near tourist areas. [29]

See also

Related Research Articles

Water supply and sanitation in Latin America

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.

This article has been written in 2007 with partial updates since then, including most recently concerning access in 2012. Please feel free to update it further. The Spanish article includes some more up-to-date information.

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.

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 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.

Water supply and sanitation in Argentina

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.

This article has been written in 2007, with partial updates in later years including most recently in May 2013. Please update it further. Please also see the French version of the article for further details.

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.

Water supply and sanitation in Jamaica

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.

With surface water resources of 20 billion m3 per year, of which 12 billion m3 are groundwater recharge, water resources in the Dominican Republic could be considered abundant. But irregular spatial and seasonal distribution, coupled with high consumption in irrigation and urban water supply, translates into water scarcity. Rapid economic growth and increased urbanization have also affected environmental quality and placed strains on the Dominican Republic's water resources base. In addition, the Dominican Republic is exposed to a number of natural hazards, such as hurricanes, storms, floods, Drought, earthquakes, and fires. Global climate change is expected to induce permanent climate shocks to the Caribbean region, which will likely affect the Dominican Republic in the form of sea level rise, higher surface air and sea temperatures, extreme weather events, increased rainfall intensity and more frequent and more severe "El Niño-like" conditions.

Drinking water supply and sanitation in Egypt 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. , many challenges remain. Only about one half of the population is connected to sanitary sewers. Partly because of 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. Poor operation of facilities, such as water and wastewater treatment plants, as well as limited government accountability and transparency, are also issues.

Costa Rica is divided into three major drainage basins encompassing 34 watersheds with numerous rivers and tributaries, one major lake used for hydroelectric generation, and two major aquifers that serve to store 90% of the municipal, industrial, and agricultural water supply needs of Costa Rica. Agriculture is the largest water user demanding around 53% of total supplies while the sector contributes 6.5% to the Costa Rica GDP. About a fifth of land under cultivation is being irrigated by surface water. Hydroelectric power generation makes up a significant portion of electricity usage in Costa Rica and much of this comes from the Arenal dam.

References

  1. 1 2 3 WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation - Data Tables, retrieved on April 15, 2012
  2. "WASHwatch.org - Dominican Republic". washwatch.org. Retrieved 2017-03-22.
  3. WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation
  4. The Joint Monitoring Program data do not mention the 2002 census as a source. According to the census, as quoted in Uriana Abreu, Slide 15, coverage for sanitation (broad definition) was 93% (96% in urban areas and 88% in rural areas). These higher coverage figures may be due to a broader definition of improved sanitation in the census compared to the Demographic and Health Survey used as a source by the JMP.
  5. Rosa Urania Abreu, octubre 2005: Republica Dominicana: Situacion actual del sector Agua Potable y Saneamiento y sus principales necesicades (Presentación en Powerpoint), Slide 17
  6. 1 2 World Bank:Dominican Republic - Environmental priorities and strategic options: Country environmental analysis, 2004
  7. 1 2 3 Abreu, R.U. Final Report of Millennium Development Objectives. Objective 7. Potable Water and Sanitation Component, UNDP Millennium Project, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, April 2005, quoted in USAID / RTI International:Evaluation of USAID Strategy to Increase Potable Water Access and Sanitation in Rural Areas - Dominican Republic, 2006, retrieved on 15 April 2012, page 16
  8. WHO/PAHO 2000: Evaluation of Water Supply and Sanitation in the Americas, Country Report Dominican Republic
  9. USAID / RTI International (27 April 2006). "Evaluation of USAID Strategy to Increase Potable Water Access and Sanitation in Rural Areas Dominican Republic" (PDF). p. 8. Retrieved 15 April 2012.
  10. WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program, as quoted further above
  11. IDB:Drinking Water and Sanitation Sector Reform Project, retrieved on April 15, 2012
  12. The draft discussed in 2002 is available at Ley de Reforma. Congress adjourned the debate on the law in June 2004
  13. AAA
  14. AAA DOMINICANA S.A, retrieved on April 15, 2012
  15. Rosa Urania Abreu. October 2005. Republica Dominicana: Situacion actual del sector APS y sus principales necesicades
  16. USAID / RTI International (27 April 2006). "Evaluation of USAID Strategy to Increase Potable Water Access and Sanitation in Rural Areas Dominican Republic" (PDF). p. 18. Retrieved 15 April 2012.
  17. AAA, Slide 4
  18. Javier de la Cal y Cristina Manzanares. Octubre 2005. "Agua potable y saneamiento en la República Dominicana – Un análisis desde el paradigma de desarrollo humano." and Rosa Urania Abreu, octubre 2005: Republica Dominicana: Situacion actual del sector Agua Potable y Saneamiento y sus principales necesicades (Presentación en Powerpoint), Slide 16, based on 2004 data by service providers
  19. WHO/PAHO 2000: Evaluation of Water Supply and Sanitation in the Americas, Country Report Dominican Republic:Tariffs More recent data are not available
  20. Rosa Urania Abreu, octubre 2005: Republica Dominicana: Situacion actual del sector Agua Potable y Saneamiento y sus principales necesicades (Presentación en Powerpoint), Slide 22. These low rates may not take into account improvements in collection efficiency as a result of the service contracts for Santo Domingo
  21. WHO/PAHO 2000: Evaluation of Water Supply and Sanitation in the Americas, Country Report Dominican Republic:water bill sewer bill
  22. USAID / RTI International (27 April 2006). "Evaluation of USAID Strategy to Increase Potable Water Access and Sanitation in Rural Areas Dominican Republic" (PDF). pp. 32 and 47. Retrieved 15 April 2012.
  23. Informe sobre el ODM 7, PNUD 2005, y Evaluación del Sector APS, OMS, 2002
  24. Global Evaluation of Services, PAHO/WHO, Dominican Republic (2000)
  25. Informe Final Objectivos de Desarrollo del Milenio. July 2005.
  26. IDB:Decentralization and Strengthening of INAPA, accessed on 15 April 2012
  27. USAID, Environmental Health Project, Bureau for Global Health, Creating an Enabling Environment for Community-Based Rural Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion, June 2002
  28. USAID / RTI International (27 April 2006). "Evaluation of USAID Strategy to Increase Potable Water Access and Sanitation in Rural Areas Dominican Republic" (PDF). pp. 1, 6 and 36–37. Retrieved 15 April 2012.
  29. World Bank: Water and Sanitation in Tourist Areas Project, retrieved on April 15, 2012