Abstract
The water and waste sector lags sadly behind other infrastructure sectors in the private investment it receives, accounting for only 5%5 of the total including energy, telecoms and transport. By the end of 2006 526 PSP projects worth a cumulative total of $53 billion had been closed in the water and waste sector in developing countries and a further amount in the developed countries. In terms of numbers of people served, the private water sector accounts for 10-12% of the world' s population in 2008, double the proportion ten years ago and the share is expected to increase.
There has been an increasing number of reversals, especially in Latin America and Africa. 53 PPI projects have been cancelled or were in distress, totalling $16.4 billion by the end of 2006. 53% of cancellations were in Latin America and 47% in Asia Pacific. The cancellations have not all been one sided, they have been instigated either by governments, by popular opposition or by the concessionaires. The increasing opposition and politicisation of water privatisation should not be ignored because it will not go away. Anti-privatisation activists have succeeded in forcing a number of reversals of PSP contracts and opposition has been especially strident in Africa and South America. Those in favour of privatisation tend to see water as an economic proposition. Governments are concerned with their responsibility to provide a service to the people and they accept that commercial profit may be a part of this. It may also be more efficient and cheaper. Those who are against privatisation hold the position that water is a basic human right, that should be available to everyone, if necessary at no cost to the consumer.
Historically two French companies, Suez/Ondeo and Vivendi/Veolia and more recently a third Saur/Bouygues, have been the global leaders in private water and sanitation provision. With the advent of liberalisation and privatisation in the energy markets a number of energy multinationals entered the water and waste markets, primarily because they saw limits to investment opportunities and profitability in their traditional industries. Ten years of experience and hard knocks has encouraged all of them to reassess their priorities, and to withdrawn from high risk markets or reduce their exposure. In some case they have withdrawn form the water business entirely. RWE, which in five years became the third largest water company in the world, and ENEL have both announced that they are divesting most of their water interests to concentrate on energy. A new group of national players and smaller private water companies has emerged and the dominance of the large internationals is being eroded around the edges, although they still remain very powerful.
Outline of the report
- This report provides a comprehensive overview of the global water sector
- The situation in each country regarding ownership and the regulation of the market
- A global survey of water & waste deregulation
- Types of water & waste privatisation
- The reasons for liberalisation
- An extensive series of tables, charts and graphics are contained in the report
Table of Contents
- 1.0 Executive Summary
- Overview
- 2.0 Types of Water & Waste Privatisation
- 2.1 Why liberalise the water sector?
- 2.2 The perception of water
- 2.3 PSP - private sector participation models
- 2.4 PUPs - Public-public partnerships and ' twinning' in water and sanitation
- 3.0 World survey of Water & Waste Deregulation
- World survey of water & waste deregulation
- 4.0 Europe
- 4.1 EU water and waste directives and investment
- 4.2 Western Europe
- Austria
- Belgium
- Cyprus
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Ireland
- Italy
- Luxembourg
- Malta
- Netherlands
- Portugal
- Spain
- Switzerland
- United Kingdom
- 5.0 Nordic Countries
- Overview
- Denmark
- Finland
- Iceland
- Norway
- Sweden
- 6.0 Central Europe
- Overview
- Czech Republic
- Hungary
- Poland
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- 7.0 The Baltic Countries
- Overview
- Estonia
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- 8.0 Southeast Europe (Balkans)
- Overview
- Albania
- Bosnia Herzegovina
- Bulgaria
- Croatia
- Macedonia
- Romania
- Serbia Montenegro
- Turkey
- 9.0 CIS
- Overview
- Armenia
- Azerbaijan
- Belarus
- Georgia
- Kazakhstan
- Kyrgyzstan
- Moldova
- Russia
- Tajikistan
- Turkmenistan
- Ukraine
- Uzbekistan
- 10.0 Southeast Asia
- Japan
- Korea, South
- Macao
- Taiwan
- China
- Hong Kong
- Cambodia
- Indonesia
- Malaysia
- Myanmar
- Philippines
- Singapore
- Thailand
- Vietnam
- 11.0 Indian Sub-Continent
- Bangladesh
- India
- Nepal
- Pakistan
- Sri Lanka
- 12.0 Asia Pacific
- Australia
- New Zealand
- 13.0 North America
- United States of America
- Canada
- 14.0 South America
- Overview
- Argentina
- Bolivia
- Brazil
- Chile
- Colombia
- Ecuador
- Paraguay
- Peru
- Uruguay
- Venezuela
- 15.0 Central America and the Caribbean
- Mexico
- The Northern Triangle
- Belize
- Costa Rica
- El Salvador
- Guatemala
- Honduras
- Nicaragua
- Panama
- Puerto Rico
- Caribbean
- Bahamas
- Barbados
- Bermuda
- Cuba
- Dominican Republic
- Haiti
- Jamaica
- Trinidad
- 16.0 Middle East
- Bahrain
- Iran
- Iraq
- Israel
- Jordan
- Kuwait
- Lebanon
- Oman
- Palestine
- Qatar
- Saudi Arabia
- Syria
- United Arab Emirates
- Yemen
- 17.0 MENA - Middle East and North Africa - Mahgreb
- Algeria
- Egypt
- Libya
- Mauritania
- Morocco
- Tunisia
- 18.0 Sub-Saharan Africa
- Overview
- 19.0 East Africa - Great Lake Region
- Burundi
- Ethiopia
- Kenya
- Mauritius
- Rwanda
- Somalia
- Tanzania
- Uganda
- 20.0 Central Africa
- Cameroon
- 21.0 Central African Republic
- Overview
- Chad
- Congo, Republic (Brazzaville)
- Congo, Democratic Republic (Kinshasa)
- Gabon
- Guinea Equatorial
- 22.0 West Africa
- Benin
- Burkina Faso
- Cape Verde
- Côte d' Ivoire
- Gambia
- Ghana
- Guinea
- Guinea-Bissau
- Liberia
- Mali
- Niger
- Nigeria
- Senegal
- Sierra Leone
- Togo
- 23.0 South African Development Community
- Overview
- Angola
- Botswana
- Lesotho
- Madagascar
- Malawi
- Mozambique
- Namibia
- South Africa
- Tanzania
- Zambia
- Zimbabwe
- 24.0 Glossary
Table of Tables
- Table 2.4.1: Public-public partnerships (PUPs) in water and sewerage
- Table 3.1: World Survey of Water and Waste Deregulation
- Table 4.2.1: Major Italian Aziendi water utilities
- Table 4.2.2: Companies with different management types
- Table 6.1: Water concessions companies
- Table 6.2: Concession companies in Hungary
- Table 10.2: Water Supply Plants and Pipelines 2000 - 2005
- Table 10.3: Construction of Sewage Treatment Plants 2000 - 2005
- Table 13.1: A Summary of the Law
Table of Figures
- Figure 1.1: PSP Options - A continuum
- Figure 2.3.1: PSP Options - A continuum
- Figure 4.1.1: Revision of EU Water Policy
- Figure 4.1.2: Investment and employment related to EU environmental policy, 1990 - 2010
- Table 10.1: Water supply bodies
- Figure 18.1: Public water service in African cities
- Figure 18.2: Access to drinking water in 10 African cities
- Figure 18.3: Market share, earnings and employment in concessionaire and independent water and sanitation providers in Dakar and Bamako
- Figure 18.4: How the sanitation market works in African cities
