Search

This report analyzes the progress and challenges of 16 countries in the Danube watershed in delivering sustainable water and wastewater services to all, while meeting the European Union environmental acquis communautaire. After putting the services that are being delivered into context, the report analyzes the organization of services in the region and the level of access to services, that is, how well countries are doing in terms of providing access to water and wastewater services for the entire population. It then looks at the performance of the sector, including the quality of services provided and customer satisfaction with it. It also draws a picture of the efficiency of services, including whether they reflect accepted good practices. Finally, it analyzes the financing of services, looking at whether the financing of operation, maintenance, and investments is secured and affordable. The report draws largely from existing public data sources at the national and regional level, and consolidates them into a coherent, regional narrative, and analysis. The methods of analysis include horizontal comparisons among countries at a given point in time and trends within the countries or the region over a given period of time. Given shortcomings in the availability and comparability of data across 16 countries, the report seeks to encourage and inform a policy dialogue around sector challenges rather than provide a definitive set of policy recommendations.

To evaluate and reflect the sustainability of services in the region, an overall sector sustainability assessment was done, taking into account four main dimensions: access to services, quality of services, efficiency of services, and financing of services. Each of these dimensions is measured through three simple and objective indicators. For each indicator, best practice values are established by looking at the best performers in the region, and countries closest to those best performers are deemed to have a more mature sector. A more complete description of the methodology to assess sector sustainability is included in the Annex of the State of the Sector Regional Report from the Danube Water Program. The outcomes of this assessment for Hungary’s water sector are displayed, which also shows average and best practices in the Danube region. The Hungarian sector sustainability score is 74, which is far above the Danube average sustainability of 64, and is among the best practices in the region. The assessment shows that, on average, the country performs well in terms of continuity of access to piped water and flush toilet, collection ratio, nonrevenue water and staffing level. The main deficiencies of Hungary’s water sector identified through the sector sustainability assessment are the operating cost ratio, affordability, and investments. The main sector challenges are: achieving full cost recovery; preventing the degradation of assets in the long term; and preparing for the risks caused by climate change.

To evaluate and reflect the sustainability of services in the region, an overall sector sustainability assessment was done taking into account four main dimensions: access to services, quality of services, efficiency of services, and financing of services. Each of these dimensions is measured through three simple and objective indicators. For each indicator, best practice values are established by looking at the best performers in the region, and the countries closest to those best performers are deemed to have a more mature sector. A more complete description of the methodology to assess sector sustainability is included in the annex of the state of the sector regional report from the Danube Water Program. The outcomes of this assessment for the Croatia water sector are displayed in Figure 9, which also shows average and best practices in the Danube region. The Croatian sector sustainability score is 72, which is above the Danube average sustainability of 64. The assessment shows that on average, the country performs well in terms of access to piped water and flush toilets, continuity of service, nonrevenue water and customer satisfaction. The main deficiencies of the Croatia water sector identified through the sector sustainability assessment are the wastewater treatment coverage and the operating cost ratio. The main challenges are: financing compliance with the European environmental acquis; ensuring affordability of future tariffs; implementing successfully the aggregation reform; and strengthening regulation in the water sector.

To evaluate and reflect the sustainability of services in the region, an overall sector sustainability assessment was done, taking into account four main dimensions: access to services, quality of services, efficiency of services, and financing of services. Each of these dimensions is measured through three simple and objective indicators. For each indicator, best practice values are established by looking at the best performers in the region, and countries closest to those best performers are deemed to have a more mature sector. A more complete description of the methodology to assess the sector sustainability is included in the annex of the state of the sector regional report from the Danube Water Program. The outcomes of this assessment for the Slovenia water sector are displayed, which also shows average and best practices in the Danube region. The Slovenian sector sustainability score is 84, which is above the Danube average sustainability score of 64. The assessment shows that, on average, the country performs well in terms of access to piped water and flush toilets, affordability, continuity of service, customer satisfaction, nonrevenue water, and collection ratio. The main deficiencies of Slovenia’s water sector identified through the sector sustainability assessment are wastewater treatment coverage, operating cost ratio, and investment level. The main sector challenges are: increasing the rehabilitation of the water infrastructure and improving its reliability; and improving monitoring and reporting practices.

To evaluate and reflect the sustainability of services in the region, an overall sector maturity assessment was done taking into account four main dimensions: access to services, quality of services, efficiency of services, and financing of services. Each of these dimensions is measured through three simple and objective indicators. For each indicator, best practice values are established by looking at the best performers in the region, and countries closest to those best performers are deemed to have a more mature sector. A more complete description of the methodology to assess the sector maturity is included in the annex of the state of the sector regional report from the Danube Water Program. The outcomes of this assessment for the Austrian water sector are presented, which also shows average and best practices in the Danube region. The Austrian sector maturity score is 96, which is significantly higher than the Danube average maturity of 64, and the highest score in the region. The assessment shows that, on average, the country performs very well in terms of access to piped water and flushes toilet, wastewater treatment coverage, customer satisfaction, continuity of service, wastewater compliance, collection ratio, and nonrevenue water.

This case study is part of an analytical effort aimed at advising World Bank staff and country clients on options for private sector participation (PSP) in transmission and distribution. The report is based on data collected on the Peruvian case, the review of literature, as well as on a set of interviews held with power sector agencies, including the regulator and system operator, power sector companies and experts in the field. The problems of the power sector were linked to its structure, a legal framework that guaranteed a public monopoly and the use on subsidies as a political tool to redistribute income and control inflation. The crisis justified measures in line with a thorough neoliberal economic reform that was underway. This reform included the reduction of an oversized public sector and the unbundling and privatization of the power sector. The privatization of transmission was justified on the grounds of attracting fresh capital and achieving greater efficiency. PSP in distribution was justified on the same grounds, plus another important factor, it was seen also as a way to prevent or minimize government interference on the day‐to‐day operations of utilities and, most important, to avoid the politicization of electricity tariffs.