Water and Sanitation for Urban Populations

London for WSUP's 20th Birthday Celebration in the House of Lords, thanks to WSUP's Chair, Paul Boateng. Also the launch of WSUP's next five year strategy along with its name adjustment - Ed Mitchell, WSUP's CEO explaining ‘‘Our new name and strategy signal our call to urban leaders, donors, and investors to step up—because the future of our cities depends on resilient, inclusive water and sanitation services for all. Achieving real impact requires more than taps and toilets—it demands functioning systems that deliver and sustain services in the complex and challenging environments of urban slums. We look forward to driving inclusive and resilient urban water and sanitation systems and services through pioneering practices, partnerships, and policies.”

I was also encouraged to see in the strategy document that WSUP's 'Big Initiative' '#01' is 'Rolling out Regulation in Africa'. The document explaining that 'WSUP's experience has shown that regulation is a pivotal part of the systems strengthening activity required to drive universal access to water and sanitation services.'

Having been involved with WASH regulators across the continent for Cranfield's 'Regulating Water and Sanitation for the Poor' research back at the time of WSUP's launch in 2005, subsequently in ongoing projects in Ghana, Kenya, Rwanda, Zambia and Mozambique - along with the excellent ESAWAS, it is very good to see that this work is ongoing.

Though I could be tempted to write a 'think-piece' about regulating in the context of the mess that Ofwat, water and sewerage regulator for England and Wales, seems to have got itself into.

Thirty-five years on from its establishment Ofwat, with its recent much contested 'AMP 8' (Asset Management Plan 8) price review, is being challenged from all sides, including a government review.

Re-using an analogy I still find useful, if the art of regulating is akin to the art of football refereeing, but one where VAR is taking over from instant on the field refereeing and another regulator is determining how much can be invested by one of the teams (my version always saw the match between a 'government team' and a 'private providers team') and the score becomes a complex amalgam of multiple outputs and outcomes ....... and the government has brought in another team to play on its side whilst the private providers have allowed a financier's team to play a completely different game on the same pitch ...... then regulating is mostly likely to get stuck.

In the early years, regulating in England and Wales was making a significant difference, with impressive improvements in efficiency and quality following the years of government-managed under-investment.

So, how to assist Regulators in Africa to maintain the 'art of regulating' so as to continue delivering the impressive achievements they have made to date? Without compromising them through 'high-income country' expectations of service levels that we only began to deliver at significantly higher GDP per person income levels?

Particularly as the donor willingness to lend, let alone grant, significant funds for CapEx seems to have disintegrated.

Pleased that WSUP, amongst others, is supporting this challenge.