Social Impact Analysis of Water Supply and Sanitation Services in Central Asia : The Case of Uzbekistan
Reliable evidence on the quality of current WSS service conditions is scarce and consumer experience and views and voices are not systematically collected and used for policy development. International experience suggests that poor drinking water a...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Report |
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2016
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2016/02/24740155/social-impact-analysis-water-supply-sanitation-services-central-asia-case-uzbekistan http://hdl.handle.net/10986/23816 |
Summary: | Reliable evidence on the quality of
current WSS service conditions is scarce and consumer
experience and views and voices are not systematically
collected and used for policy development. International
experience suggests that poor drinking water and sanitation
services can cause households to incur high costs for
dealing with this situation. However, in Uzbekistan and
other Central Asian countries, there is a lack of data on
service quality and on such coping costs. Together with
limited feedback from consumers to those that design WSS
policies and programs this makes it difficult to design
effective reform measures and assess their ex-ante impact on
households, in particular for those at the bottom of the
income distribution. This study assesses consumer
experiences with current WSS services across a range of
selected sites in Uzbekistan and determines consumer
readiness for reform. First of all, the study analyses how
surveyed consumers currently meet their drinking water and
sanitation needs and what proportion of their household
budget is spent on meeting their WSS needs. Second it
assesses the interaction between consumers and service
providers. Third it examines stakeholder views and positions
on service modernization needs and assesses consumer
willingness to pay for quality networked WSS services.
Comparisons are made across consumers in a selection of
cities, small towns and rural areas, between consumers that
are connected to a networked service and those that are not,
and between households in the bottom 40 percent and top 60
percent of the income distribution (as estimated through a
wealth index). |
---|