Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level TrackFin Initiative GUIDANCE DOCUMENT UN-Water GLAAS UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative: tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level ISBN 978-92-4-151356-2 © World Health Organization 2017 Some rights reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo). Under the terms of this licence, you may copy, redistribute and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided the work is appropriately cited, as indicated below. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. If you adapt the work, then you must license your work under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If you create a translation of this work, you should add the following disclaimer along with the suggested citation: “This translation was not created by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original English edition shall be the binding and authentic edition”. Any mediation relating to disputes arising under the licence shall be conducted in accordance with the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization. Suggested citation. UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative: Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Cataloguing-in-Publication (CIP) data. CIP data are available at http://apps.who.int/iris. Sales, rights and licensing. To purchase WHO publications, see http://apps.who.int/bookorders. To submit requests for commercial use and queries on rights and licensing, see http://www.who.int/about/licensing. Third-party materials. If you wish to reuse material from this work that is attributed to a third party, such as tables, figures or images, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright holder. The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned component in the work rests solely with the user. General disclaimers. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WHO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted and dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by WHO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by WHO to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall WHO be liable for damages arising from its use. Design and layout by L’IV Com Sàrl, Villars-sous-Yens, Switzerland. GLAAS visual identifier design by Ledgard Jepson Ltd, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, England. Printed by the WHO Document Production Services, Geneva, Switzerland. TrackFin initiative: A brief overview Effective financing for drinking-water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) is essential for the sustainable delivery of services. The UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) indicates that there are substantial gaps in our understanding and tracking of financing to the WASH sector. Financial reporting is often insufficient to enable sound, evidence-based planning and budgeting decisions. To help rectify these shortcomings, WHO is leading the TrackFin initiative under the UN-Water GLAAS project. Its objectives are to define and test a globally accepted methodology to track financing to WASH at the national level. This methodology enables countries to track sector financing using standardized classifications, and to develop a set of WASH accounts and indicators presented in a format comparable across regions and countries. Its aim is to answer four basic questions: • What is the total expenditure in the sector? • How are funds distributed between the various WASH services and expenditure types, such as capital expenditure, operating and maintenance expenditure, and cost of capital? • Who pays for WASH services? • Which entities are the main channels of WASH funding, and what is their respective share of total spending? Expected benefits from this initiative include strengthening national systems for the collection and analysis of financial information for WASH sector policy-making and programming, and better understanding of how financial resources for WASH are allocated at both national and global levels. TrackFin is being developed in collaboration with leading country sector institutions, national statistical offices, finance departments, and international entities such as the UN Statistics Division, the OECD and the World Bank, and with support of a Technical Advisory Group comprising sector and finance experts. Building on experience in the health sector, WHO has developed this Guidance Document for use by institutions involved in monitoring and financing the WASH sector at the national level. The approach was successfully applied during pilot testing in Brazil, Ghana and Morocco, and lessons learned have been incorporated into a revised methodology. TrackFin will now be implemented in other countries, and repeated in the initial set of countries in order to gradually build up a set of comparable data. The TrackFin initiative is managed by a small secretariat hosted by WHO. Its purpose is to provide overall methodological guidance for the work at the international level, as well as training for countries interested in applying the methodology. In response to country requests, WHO can provide support to national stakeholders planning to prepare WASH accounts. For further information, please contact glaas@who.int. ii UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Contents TrackFin initiative: A brief overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi List of Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Why is a methodology needed to track WASH financing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii What is the TrackFin initiative? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Guidance Document objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Why should countries develop WASH accounts? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Target audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Overview of the methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Guidance Document structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi 1 Step 1. Get started . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Mobilize political support for WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Define WASH accounts’ scope and key policy questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Identify data requirements and plan the work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4.1 Identify available data and define a data collection plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4.2 Develop a detailed budget and work plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2 Step 2. Collect data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1 Define WASH sector boundaries in terms of services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.1.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.1.2 TrackFin classification of WASH services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.1.3 Tasks to be undertaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.2 Map service provision arrangements and financial flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.2 Trackfin classification of WASH uses, actors and financial flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.3 Tasks to be undertaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.3 Estimate financial flows and fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.3.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.2 Methodologies for collecting data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.3 Tasks to be undertaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3 Step 3. Analyse data and report findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3.1 Compile WASH accounts and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3.1.1 Create the WASH accounts tables and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.1.2 Select appropriate tables and verify data consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.2 Prepare WASH accounts reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3.2.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3.2.2 The WASH accounts final report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.3 Disseminate the policy analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4 Step 4. Prepare for the next WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.1 Rationale for further rounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.2 Formulate recommendations for the next WASH accounts in the country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.2.1 Plan for the next stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2.2 Provide feedback on the methodology proposed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 iiiTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 MN 1.1. Existing WASH service classification systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 MN 1.2. Approach to defining the TrackFin classification of services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 MN 1.3. Proposals for further developing the classification for hygiene services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types . . . . . . . 45 MN 2.1. Classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 MN 2.2. Classification of WASH financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 MN 3.1. Rationale for estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 MN 3.2. Using an economic approach as a possible alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach . . . . 53 MN 4.1. Collecting data by financing types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 FT1: Tariffs for services provided . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 FT2: User expenditure on self-supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 FT3: Domestic public transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 FT4: International public transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FT5: Voluntary transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FT6: Repayable financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 MN 4.2. Potential challenges and how to address them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 MN 4.2.1 Data availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 MN 4.2.2 Allocation of financing types per financing units, WASH uses and services . . . . . . . . . . . 63 MN 4.2.3 Avoiding double counting and tracking how financial flows are channelled across the sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 MN 5.1. Classifying costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 MN 5.2. Potential sources of cost data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 C1: Investment costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 C2: Operating and maintenance costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C3: Large capital maintenance cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C4: Financial costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C5: Support or software costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 C6: Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 MN 6.1. Why is it important to estimate fixed asset stocks? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 MN 6.2. Potential methodological challenges with this approach and ways to overcome them . . . . . . . 76 Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 MN 7.1 How are the WASH accounts tables constructed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 MN 7.2 What are WASH accounts indicators? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Annex A. Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Annex B. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Relevant websites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 iv UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative List of Figures Fig. 1. Overview of proposed methodology to track WASH financing at national level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Fig. 2. Organizational arrangements for developing WASH accounts under the TrackFin Initiative . . . . . . 3 Fig. 3. WASH accounts in relation to SEEA-Water Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fig. 4. Mapping financial flows based on consumption, production and financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Fig. 5. The value chain of WASH services under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) . . . . . . . . 12 Fig. 6. Mapping financial flows for WASH service provision: illustrative example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Fig. 7. Methodologies for estimating expenditure in the WASH sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Fig. 8. Framework for institutionalizing the production and use of WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Fig. 9. Sources of finance for the WASH sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Fig. 10. Costs and revenue to be computed for the Financial Flow Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Fig. 11. Costs and financing types recorded by the economic approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Fig. 12. Example of a financing flow allocation to categories of providers and services . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Fig. 13. Illustrative example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 List of Boxes Box 1. The System of National Accounts (SNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Box 2. Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Box 3. Examples of organizational arrangements from TrackFin pilot exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Box 4. How can WASH accounts data be used for evidence-based policy-making? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Box 5. The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEA-Water) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Box 6. Examples of existing information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Box 7. Key points to cover in the inception report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Box 8. Identifying and classifying WASH sector actors and financial flows: Example from Brazil . . . . . . 22 Box 9. Building a repository of data sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Box 10. Examples of data collection methods from the pilot exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Box 11. Reconciling differences between the Cost-based Approach and the Financing Type Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Box 12. Filling data gaps: Making assumptions and using allocation keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Box 13. Key WASH accounts indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Box 14. Accounting methodologies and financial statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Box 15. Advantages and disadvantages of using the cash flow approach to estimate financial flows . . 51 Box 16. A possible economic approach to estimating financial flows in the WASH sector . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Box 17. Regulatory data on tariffs of service provision from national regulators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Box 18. Estimating household investment for self-supply (C1 costs for P5): Examples from the pilot exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Box 19. Estimating households’ operation and maintenance costs (C2 costs for P5) for self-supply: Examples from Brazil and Morocco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Box 20. Estimating loans: Examples from country studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Box 21. Data availability in Ghana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Box 22. Example: How to use allocation keys to allocate spending across categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Box 23. Estimating flows per use: Financing types (revenue) and expenditure per type of use . . . . . . . 65 Box 24. Example: How to avoid double counting of financial flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Box 25. Other taxes on production in SNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Box 26. Example from Brazil: The importance of tracking taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Box 27. Alternative methodologies for valuing fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Box 28. Example from Brazil: Estimating fixed asset stocks of service provides and households . . . . . 78 vTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level List of Tables Table 1. TrackFin classification of WASH goods and services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 2. TrackFin classifications for WASH service use, WASH sector actors, and financing types . . . . 16 Table 3. Recommended WASH accounts tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 4. Link between WASH accounts information and policy questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Table 5. Summary of main international systems of classification of goods and services . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Table 6. Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Table 7. Classification of water services users in the SEEA-Water system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Table 8. Classification of water services providers in the SEEA-Water system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Table 9. Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Table 10. TrackFin classification of WASH financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Table 11. Gathering data on financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Table 12. TrackFin classification of costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Table 13. Gathering data on costs of service provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Table 14. Terminology used in SNAs to evaluate changes in fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Table 15. Classifications used in WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Table 16. WA 1 (SxA) WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Table 17. WA 2 (SxU). WASH expenditure by type of WASH use and service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Table 18. WA 3 (SxP). WASH expenditure by type of WASH provider and service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Table 19. WA 4 (PxFT). WASH expenditure by financing type and WASH provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Table 20. WA 5 (SxFT). WASH expenditure by type of financing and type of WASH service . . . . . . . . . 82 Table 21. WA 6 (SxFU). WASH expenditure by financing unit and WASH service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Table 22. WA 7 (PxFU). WASH expenditure by WASH provider and financing unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Table 23. WA 8 (FTxFU). WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Table 24. WA 9 (CxP). WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Table 25. WA 10 (CxS). WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Table 26. WA 11 (ASxP). Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Table 27. WASH accounts indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 vi UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Acknowledgements This report has been prepared by Sophie Trémolet and Marie-Alix Prat of Trémolet Consulting Limited (London), under the leadership and guidance of Bruce Gordon, Didier Allély-Fermé and Fiona Gore, as well as Jacqueline Sims and Betsy Engebretson of WHO. This is the second version of the Guidance Document, incorporating comments received from the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for the TrackFin initiative on the initial version, and from all participants at the interregional workshop held in Rabat, Morocco in September 2014. We are very grateful for comments provided during early stages of the exercise and at the inter-regional workshop. We thank the local WASH accounts team that led the testing of the initial version of the Guidance Document, namely: • In Brazil: Lauseani Santoni and Marta Litwinczik (Ministério das Cidades), João Batista Peixoto, Consultant, Brazil, with support from Teófilo Monteiro and Paulo Teixeira of PAHO/WHO; • In Ghana: Fred Addae and Suzzy Abaidoo, Ministry of Water Resources, Works and Housing, Kweku Quansah, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, Harold Esseku, Consultant, Phillipa Ross, Consultant, UK, with support from Akosua Kwakye, WHO; and • In Morocco: Samir Bensaid, Institut de l’Eau et l’Assainissement, Mokhtar Jaait, ONEE-Branche Eau, Morocco, Khalid Nadifi, Consultant, Morocco, with support from Hamed Bakir and Rola Aleman of WHO. Together with national stakeholders in all three countries, they made an invaluable contribution to developing the first set of WASH accounts and providing feedback on the methodology. In addition, we thank members of the Technical Advisory Committee for their useful suggestions, including Gérard Payen, United Nations Secretary General’s Advisory Board on Water (UNSGAB), Dominick de Waal and Guy Hutton, World Bank, Patricia Hernandez, WHO, Meera Mehta, CEPT, India, Catarina Fonseca, IRC, Richard Franceys, Cranfield University, Xavier Leflaive, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Alessandra Alfieri and Ricardo Martinez-Lagunes, United Nations Statistics Division. viiTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level List of acronyms and abbreviations 3Ts Tariffs, Taxes and Transfers (sources of finance) AICD Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic AMCOW African Ministers’ Council on Water CBO Community-based organization CLTS Community-led Total Sanitation COFOG Classification of the Functions of Government CPC Central Product Classification CRS Creditor Reporting System CSO Country Status Overview DAC Development Assistance Committee (OECD) GDP Gross Domestic Product GLAAS UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water IBNET International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development IEA Institut de l’Eau et de l’Assainissement, Morocco IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre ISIC International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities JMP WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation MDGs Millennium Development Goals MTEF Medium-term Expenditure Framework NEA National Education Account NGO Non-governmental Organization NHA National Health Accounts NSO National Statistical Office ODA Official Development Assistance OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PER Public Expenditure Review Ofwat Office of Water Services PPP Purchasing Power Parity PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper SWA Sanitation and Water for All SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SEEA System of Environmental and Economic Accounting SEEA-Water System of Environmental and Economic Accounting for Water SFP Strategic Financial Planning SHA System of Health Accounts SNA System of National Accounts UIS UNESCO Institute of Statistics UN United Nations UNSD United Nations Statistics Division UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UOE UNESCO/OECD/Eurostat USAID United States Agency for International Development WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WASH accounts Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Accounts WHO World Health Organization WSP Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank WSS Water Supply and Sanitation viii UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Introduction This Guidance Document sets out a methodology to identify and track financing to the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) sector. Referred to as WASH accounts, its purpose is to help countries track sector financing on a regular and comparable basis. Indicators drawn from the exercise are expected to support evidence-based policy-making. While the principal objective is to compile national level WASH accounts, the methodology can be applied at various levels, including the regional or city level. Further methodological development will doubtless be needed in future years, as more countries apply the methodology. The long-term aspiration of the TrackFin (tracking financing) initiative is to develop a common approach to obtaining reliable financial data. Achieving this will guide improved decision-making at the national level, and facilitate benchmarking within and between countries. Why is a methodology needed to track WASH financing? This methodology is based on the findings of the WHO and UN-Water GLAAS Working Paper “Tracking national financial flows into sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water” (Trémolet & Rama, 2012) published in July 2012. The paper stressed that effective financing for water, sanitation and hygiene is essential if the services necessary to save two million lives each year are to be delivered and sustained. To date, limited availability of financial data, coupled with inadequate monitoring systems, has impeded countries’ ability to assess progress and improve performance. The working paper concluded that the current understanding of financial flows to the WASH sector at the national level is limited. Against this background, there is common agreement that better understanding of financing to the WASH sector at the national level is critical for policy development and implementation. It is also important to encourage better and more equitable utilization of existing funds, and to attract additional financing. There is consensus, given the current deficiencies of financial data in the sector, that this is a difficult and challenging task. Even where data are available, an adequate level of disaggregation may not be possible. A methodology that could be used by a broad range of countries is therefore required. Demand for sound financial information in the sector has been confirmed at the highest political level, such as at the High Level Meetings organized by Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) in Washington DC in 2012 and 2014. On these occasions, several SWA member countries made commitments to improving financial tracking in the WASH sector. What is the TrackFin initiative? These calls for action provided the rationale for launching the WASH TrackFin initiative in August 2012. Its purpose is to develop and apply, over time, a common methodology for tracking financing to the WASH sector. This Guidance Document presents the TrackFin methodology as it currently stands, based on pilot results from Brazil, Ghana and Morocco obtained in 2014. TrackFin is currently managed by a secretariat hosted by WHO on behalf of UN-Water. It is closely linked to the GLAAS report, which tracks inputs to the sector, including financial contributions. The initiative will be developed jointly with leading sector institutions and experts involved in financial tracking, such as the World Bank, the OECD or UN Statistics Division. Work will proceed iteratively, starting with simple objectives and developing more complex approaches as more countries adopt the methodology and apply it at regular intervals. ixTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Guidance Document objectives This Guidance Document sets out a methodology to help countries produce WASH accounts. Its purpose is to track all expenditure in the WASH sector by all economic entities, including governments and public institutions, public and private organizations, NGOs, foundations, international and national donors, investors, and households. The methodology enables countries to answer four key questions: • What is the total expenditure in the WASH sector? • How are funds distributed to the different WASH services and expenditure types? • Who pays for WASH services and how much do they pay? • Which entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector? More specific policy questions may be answered depending on the level of detail generated. Data could, for example, be broken down to evaluate the distribution of WASH expenditure at the regional level, and to examine issues of equity. Early identification of specific questions that policy-makers would like to address is fundamental so that the data produced can be as policy-relevant as possible and capable of informing specific funding decisions. Why should countries develop WASH accounts? WASH accounts can help country decision-makers gather valuable information on current sector financing, track its evolution over time, and benchmark spending against other sectors or other countries. These accounts will provide detailed information on the origins of WASH funding and how that funding is used. The many benefits of this approach include the following: • Increased transparency over funding to the WASH sector: WASH accounts enable the tracking of expenditure across time, and the benchmarking of expenditure against sector targets or targets in other sectors or countries; • Ability to monitor the allocation of funding to sub-sectors and geographic regions according to need and in an equitable manner; • Ability to monitor the implementation of a financing strategy for the sector, leverage further investment, and support the institutions responsible for channelling funding to the sector; and • Ability to track whether commitments made by sector actors have been met. WASH accounts can also provide the foundation for robust and transparent communication with sector stakeholders, and the public at large, concerning the financial means deployed within the water sector. This facilitates comparison between financial investment in the sector and results achieved. Target audience The Guidance Document has been developed for governments and their advisers, especially in middle-and- lower-income countries. Its objective is to guide the preparation of WASH accounts to strengthen national policy-making and facilitate international reporting, such as for the GLAAS report. Country-level WASH accounts are also likely to interest bilateral donors, multilateral institutions, NGOs and philanthropic organizations seeking financial data to support programme planning at the national and international level. The methodology is intended for countries producing WASH accounts for the first time, in addition to those that have already prepared them. In the latter case, WASH accounts teams are strongly encouraged to build on existing work, especially with respect to sector mapping, identifying data requirements and sources, and improving the methodology for estimating expenditure. The Methodological Notes at the end of this Guidance Document contain detailed information on developing the methodology further over time. x UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Overview of the methodology The methodology is applied in a series of steps, as outlined in Fig. 1 below. STEPS DELIVERABLES NATIONAL STAKEHOLDER GROUP MEETINGS 1. Get started 1.1. Mobilize political support for WASH accounts 1.2. Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by institutions 1.3. Define the WASH accounts’ scope and key policy questions 1.4. Identify data requirements and plan the work 2. Collect data 2.1. Define WASH sector boundaries in terms of services 2.2. Map out service provision arrangements and financial flows 2.3. Collect data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks 3. Analyse data and report findings 3.1. Compile WASH accounts and indicators 3.2. Prepare WASH accounts report 3.3. Disseminate findings to policy-makers 4. Prepare for the next WASH accounts Inception report Start-up meeting Interim report WASH accounts validation meeting Final report Policy briefs Sector dissemination workshop Figure 1. Overview of proposed methodology to track WASH financing at the national level The WASH accounts final report should be approximately 60 pages (additional relevant detail can be annexed) including a set of 11 WASH accounts tables and an Executive Summary. The report should cover three main aspects: • Results of the analysis; • Policy recommendations based on the outcomes; and • Recommendations to the WHO Secretariat and expert group on improvements or modifications to the global methodology, based on challenges encountered and measures taken to overcome them. Countries are encouraged to gather existing data where possible, but where these are weak or non-existent, gaps should be filled by accurate estimates based on a combination of actual data and transparent assumptions. These assumptions can be refined in subsequent exercises, so as to gradually improve the level of precision in financial estimates. The methodology builds on existing international systems for tracking expenditure. These include the System of National Accounts (SNA) (see Box 1 below), and sector-specific systems such as the System of Health Accounts (SHA) for the health sector, or the Water Accounts for the water sector as a whole. It therefore implements the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water framework (SEEA-Water) designed by the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD). See Step 1.3, Box 5, for more detail on this system. xiTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 1. The System of National Accounts (SNA) The System of National Accounts (SNA) is a broad structure for national economic accounting. This system was first adopted by the United Nations in 1952, and has since been revised and updated. The rules and structure of the SNA are contained in a manual entitled, “System of National Accounts 2008”. It is the internationally agreed standard set of recommendations for compiling measures of economic activity. The SNA comprises a set of coherent, consistent and integrated macroeconomic accounts, based on internationally agreed concepts, definitions, classifications and accounting rules. It provides an overview of economic processes, demonstrating how production is distributed among consumers, businesses, government, and other nations. It shows how income originating in production, modified by taxes and transfers, flows to these groups and how they allocate these flows to consumption, savings, and investment. It provides the definitions that underlie concepts such as gross domestic product (GDP). Specific areas of learning, and references to additional resources or Methodological Notes, are highlighted throughout the text using the following symbols. Learning from country experiences: The methodology was initially tested and subsequently revised in Brazil, Ghana and Morocco. Similar approaches may have been used in other countries. Where insights were gained from these experiences, they are highlighted in boxes showing the flag of the country concerned. Learning from the health sector: The methodology draws substantially on the System of Health Accounts (SHA) developed over the last 20 years in the health sector and currently used on a regular basis by more than 100 countries throughout the world. Learning that can be gained from the SHA is shown in a box bearing this sign. Coordinating with SEEA-Water: TrackFin is being developed in parallel with the rolling-out of the SEEA-Water system of water accounting, which aims at developing comprehensive Water Accounts over time by tracking both physical (hydrological) and financial flows. WASH accounts can be seen as a subset of these broader Water Accounts. Where SEEA-Water Accounts are developed, coordination between the two methodologies and dialogue between the teams should be encouraged. Boxes with this sign highlight areas where the SEEA-Water methodology should be taken into account to increase harmonization. Potential challenge: The development of WASH accounts is likely to give rise to a number of specific challenges. These challenges, and potential solutions, are highlighted in boxes with this sign. Methodological Notes: These provide more in-depth detail on the methodology, proposing alternative approaches to specific issues and giving suggestions for future development. They appear as annexes to the Guidance Document. Resources: These additional resources can be used by stakeholders seeking to apply the TrackFin methodology in the preparation of WASH accounts. They include practical tools, existing outputs from earlier stages of the TrackFin initiative, and a policy brief on WASH accounts for information purposes. They are available on the TrackFin website. Guidance Document structure The Guidance Document takes the reader through each step of the proposed methodology. The steps are as follows: • Step 1 – Get started: Sets out the initial steps needed to initiate the preparation of WASH accounts; • Step 2 – Collect data: Includes guidance on collecting and organizing the necessary data, calling on various methods capable of reflecting different circumstances; • Step 3 – Analyse data and report findings: Sets out how the WASH accounts and associated indicators should be compiled, and provides guidance on how the data can be interpreted and used for policy-making; and xii UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative • Step 4 – Prepare for the next WASH accounts: Summarizes what needs to be done by the WASH accounts team to extract and document lessons learned, share feedback on the international methodology, and to prepare for the next round. The sections are set out in the correct order of implementation. The WASH accounts team should familiarize themselves thoroughly with the Guidance Document prior to taking action, to ensure that they understand the overall process. To complement the guidance given here, a series of Methodological Notes has been developed. These Notes form an integral part of the Guidance Document, providing greater detail and alternative methodologies for specific areas, as shown in the box below. Annex A includes a glossary of key terms employed in this guide, while Annex B contains a list of useful references and websites. Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators Additional resources are available on the TrackFin website to support the preparation of WASH accounts. These are detailed in the box below. Policy Note: How can WASH accounts support policy-making? This is essential reading for any country currently considering whether to develop WASH accounts, and seeking to better understand their uses and benefits. It provides additional background on how WASH accounts can support policy-making; Summary overview of the methodology. This rapid overview of the methodology can be used by countries interested in applying the methodology, and by national stakeholders participating in elements of the process. This might include those providing data or receiving results, but who do not require in-depth knowledge of the entire methodology; A brief presenting the summary findings of the pilot exercises carried out in Brazil, Ghana, and Morocco. This covers lessons learned and provides an overview of the main results; Summary results of the TrackFin Initiative in the three pilot countries, with associated Powerpoint presentations; Standard Terms of Reference for the TrackFin champion and Focal Point, the national stakeholder group and the WASH accounts team; Outlines for the WASH accounts interim and final reports and executive summary; and A questionnaire designed to provide feedback on the methodology and any points for future methodological developments identified during the process. 1Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 1 Step 1 – Get started Step 1 – Tasks to be undertaken • Mobilize political support for WASH accounts – Mobilize support from high level members of government – Identify a country champion and a national TrackFin Focal Point – Convene a national level stakeholder group to oversee data collection and provide political support to the project • Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by national institutions • Identify the overall scope and key policy questions for WASH accounts – Organize a start-up meeting with members of the national level stakeholder group – Agree on a list of priority policy questions that the exercise aims to answer – Define a time period over which to gather information (2 to 3 years is optimal) - Agree on the geographic scope of the exercise and the level of geographic disaggregation • Identify data requirements and plan the work – Identify available data and define a data collection plan – Develop a detailed budget and work plan for data collection and analysis 1.1 Mobilize political support for WASH accounts The production of WASH accounts will most benefit countries if the outputs are ultimately used by policy-makers and sector stakeholders. The preparation of WASH accounts should, therefore, only take place in response to a clearly expressed policy demand. The first step consists of mobilizing support for the preparation of WASH accounts from high level members of the government, such as the ministries in charge of WASH services or the Ministry of Finance. This is essential to ensure the success of the exercise, and to overcome potential technical difficulties such as limited availability of information, weak information systems, or internal barriers to greater transparency. To that end, a champion for TrackFin within the ministries in charge of WASH needs to be identified. This person will lead the exercise, and will designate a TrackFin Focal Point responsible for establishing the WASH accounts team and overseeing the WASH accounts process (see Step 1.2 below). The champion is typically someone who has expressed the government’s intention to carry out the TrackFin initiative, either directly or in response to an invitation from the WHO TrackFin Secretariat or another agency. The champion will be responsible for obtaining support for the preparation of WASH accounts at the highest level of government. He/she will have clearly explained the expected benefits of undertaking the exercise to policy-makers in relevant sectors, such as the ministries in charge of WASH services, the Ministry of Finance, and the National Statistics Office. Policy Note: How can WASH accounts support policy-making? This note sets out the potential benefits of WASH accounts for decision-makers in more detail. It is essential reading for any country currently considering whether to develop WASH accounts, and seeking to better understand their uses and benefits. It is available on the TrackFin website. The TrackFin champion should then convene a national stakeholder group to oversee the production of the accounts. This group is responsible for appointing the TrackFin Focal Point and the WASH accounts team. The group will identify the policy questions that the WASH accounts aim to answer, define their scope, facilitate data collection, review outputs, and provide feedback to the Focal Point at critical moments of the analysis. Ideally, the TrackFin champion should chair the national stakeholder group. The national stakeholder group is central to the process. It provides the political support required and can help to ensure the participation of key stakeholders with data required for the compilation of the WASH accounts. It also 2 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative serves to strengthen links between the policy process and WASH accounts, institutionalizing their preparation so that the exercise can be repeated on a regular basis. This national stakeholder group can be established at different levels. It might include a TrackFin Steering Committee established at the decision-making level, as was the case in Morocco (see Box 2 – Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee below). It could also comprise a broader stakeholder group, including all parties likely to provide data for the exercise and to utilize the results. Final decisions on the national stakeholder group will depend on the number of institutions involved in the exercise and the level of engagement required to secure participation of key institutional actors. The national stakeholder group should ideally include representatives of the ministries in charge of WASH services, the Ministry of Finance, and the Department of Statistics, as well as of the main utilities, regulators, donors, NGOs and foundations active in the WASH sector. To the extent possible, the group should build on existing country-level WASH sector coordination platforms. Box 2. Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee In Morocco, the International Water and Sanitation Institute (IEA) housed in the National Office for Electricity and Water (ONEE) acted as the TrackFin Focal Point for the production of WASH accounts in 2014. To gain high level engagement with TrackFin’s objectives from all sector institutions, IEA set up a Steering Committee at the director level. This proved critical to gaining support and facilitating data collection. The Steering Committee was composed of directors from all key institutions, including the Ministry of Energy, Mines, Water and Environment, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of General Affairs and Governance, the High Commission for Planning, ONEE and IEA. In addition, a technical committee was set up with members of the same institutions in order to provide advice to the WASH accounts team on methodological and data collection aspects. Morocco benefited from having strong stakeholder involvement from the outset. The strong links between IEA and national sector stakeholders was very beneficial in setting up such high level coordination. This meant that the WASH accounts team could collect information rapidly and was able to complete the exercise in five months. Standard TORs for the TrackFin champion and the TrackFin Focal Point, as well as for the national stakeholder group, can be found on the TrackFin website. In addition, a package of information on TrackFin and WASH accounts (based on resources available on the TrackFin website) should be provided for dissemination to high level government members and key sector stakeholders. This will raise awareness about the benefits of tracking WASH financing and how the outputs can be used for policy. 1.2 Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by institutions The Focal Point’s role is to organize and coordinate the WASH accounts team. This team will collect and analyse the data, and prepare all the outputs. As the Focal Point reports to the champion, he or she would preferably be a staff member of the ministry principally in charge of WASH services. Alternatively, the Focal Point could be hosted by a well-established public policy or research institution. The WASH accounts team should ideally comprise a relatively small number of people with a diverse and complementary range of expertise, including technical and policy experts from the WASH sector and representatives of the National Statistics Office. They will require good analytical and communication skills. Some members of the WASH accounts team should preferably be government personnel, to ensure capacity building at the national level and country ownership of the exercise. This team can either carry out the work itself or obtain the support of a national consultant, who would then form an integral part of the WASH accounts team. This was the case in the Brazil pilot exercise (see Box 3 below). Relying on external consultants may seem to be an effective way of ensuring that public sector employees are not diverted from their day-to-day responsibilities, particularly as data collection should ideally take place within a short timeframe. This approach does, however, require consultants to maintain close contact with the WASH 3Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level accounts team in order to minimize any risk that skills and expertise developed in the process accrue only to the consultant and are not institutionalized for national benefit. The WASH accounts team should be briefed by the Focal Point, and if necessary by the TrackFin Secretariat. The latter can also be contacted for on-going quality control, and for assistance with implementation of the methodology. Fig. 2 below summarizes the organizational arrangements necessary for the preparation of WASH accounts, and the Terms of Reference required at each level of intervention. LEVEL OF INTERVENTION RESOURCES AVAILABLE International level WHO TrackFin Secretariat Support and learning National director level National Stakeholder Group • TORs for the stakeholder group • TORs for champion and focal point National manager level WASH Accounts Team • TORs for the WASH Accounts Team TrackFin Champion TrackFin Focal Point Appoints Reports Figure 2. Organizational arrangements for developing WASH accounts under the TrackFin initiative Box 3. Examples of organizational arrangements from TrackFin pilot exercises In Brazil, the TrackFin champion was the Director of Institutional Coordination from the Ministry of Cities—the main ministry in charge of water and sanitation services. He appointed the manager of the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS), located in the National Secretariat for Environment in the Ministry of Cities, as the Focal Point. The WASH accounts team was composed of a local consultant and a staff member from the National Secretariat for Environment. In Ghana, the TrackFin champion was the Director for Water from the Ministry of Water Resources, Works and Housing. He appointed a Ministry of Water officer as the Focal Point. The WASH accounts team was led by the local consultant, and received support from the Focal Point. In Morocco, the TrackFin champion was the Director of the International Institute for Water and Sanitation (IEA), a research and learning institute housed within ONEE, the main provider of water and sanitation services. He appointed his Head of Research and Development as the Focal Point. The WASH accounts team included a local consultant, and received support from a technical committee composed of managers from the IEA, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Interior, the High Planning Commissariat, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of General Affairs and Governance, and the utility (ONEE). The technical committee, which was specific to Morocco, was conceived as the executive arm of the Steering Committee (see Box 2 – Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee above). Recommended standard TORs for the WASH accounts team can be found on the TrackFin website. 4 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 1.3 Define WASH accounts’ scope and key policy questions To ensure that outputs serve as evidence for decision-making, WASH accounts must be able to answer questions defined by policy-makers. The Focal Point for the exercise should start by either seeking views independently, or if possible, by organizing a workshop to obtain feedback on the issues set out below. This will help to define the exercise, and provide the basis for drafting more targeted Terms of Reference for the WASH accounts team (see Step 1.4 for more detail). As a minimum, WASH accounts should aim to answer four main questions: • What is the total expenditure in the sector? • How are funds distributed among the different WASH services and expenditure types? • Who pays for WASH services and how much? • Which entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector, and what is their share in total spending? Countries should aim to develop all WASH account tables and indicators required to answer these four basic questions. Beyond national level priorities, this will also be useful for international benchmarking purposes. Ways of using the information are summarized in Box 4 below and discussed in more detail, with relevant examples, in the accompanying Policy Note. The indicators required to answer these questions are specified in Step 3. Box 4. How can WASH accounts data be used for evidence-based policy-making? WASH accounts can make a significant contribution to evidence-based policy-making. They can help identify funding needs and priorities, and in the design of a WASH strategy, to plan expenditure at the national level based on agreed priorities. Regular tracking of actual spending on WASH services over time can help monitor the efficiency of these policies and ensure evidence-based funding allocation. • Total sector expenditure data enables the monitoring of funding trends over time, and benchmarking of funding to the WASH sector against other countries or sectors. Information on how WASH expenditure varies over time, and how expenditure compares to that in other countries and sectors can be used to raise awareness of the funding levels required to meet agreed targets. In subsequent stages, data on financial inputs in relation to outputs and outcomes can be used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sector financing. • Information on how WASH sector expenditure is distributed across regions, urban and rural areas, sub-sectors, services, service providers, and types of expenditure can be used as follows: – To identify inequities in the distribution of spending across regions and population groups; – To change the allocation of funds to sub-sectors, services, providers and programmes; – To plan national WASH policies and strategies; and – To monitor policy outcomes and effectiveness. • Information on how much is paid for WASH services, and by whom, can be used as follows: – To define financing strategies, such as the use of targeted subsidies or the leveraging of private funds, and to monitor the effectiveness of these strategies over time; – To coordinate donor aid and international transfers; and – To track commitments and targets expressed in financial terms. Data on actual spending on WASH can also be used to track government and donor commitment with respect to sector financing. Several governments have made commitments to the WASH sector at international level. For example, the eThekwini declaration in 2008 committed signatory African countries to establish specific public sector budget allocations for sanitation and hygiene programmes. Compiling this kind of indicator on a consistent, comprehensive and comparable basis is fundamental to tracking the implementation of such commitments. In addition, NGOs and foundations often make significant contributions that are not currently tracked; recording those flows in WASH accounts would facilitate comparison with expenditure by households and government. • Information on how funding is channelled, and via which actors, can provide essential information on who holds the “purse strings” and where influence may be needed to achieve reallocation of spending. For example, local governments often play an important role in channelling funds to local levels. Collecting data on local government spending on WASH can help evaluate the performance of decentralized financing policies. 5Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Countries are free to identify any additional policy questions they need answered; this implies the identification of additional specific indicators. Defining the appropriate level of data disaggregation at the outset is essential if the results are to inform decision-making. If, for example, regional distribution of spending is an area requiring policy attention, WASH accounts can be designed to analyse the share of WASH expenditure by region or by population group. Information of this kind can be used to identify whether inequities across population groups and regions could be reduced by reassigning public transfers to the most vulnerable areas. Data collection and the production of WASH accounts should, therefore, focus on the issues most critical to the country concerned, thereby also ensuring that the exercise is most cost-effective. Examples of potential policy questions that WASH accounts can address are found in more detail in the Policy Note, “How can WASH accounts support policy-making?” Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators. This contains a list of tables and indicators that can be created to address policy questions. The national stakeholder group and the WASH accounts team should familiarize themselves with these tables prior to starting work. The policy questions defined will drive the scope of the WASH accounts exercise, and the level of detail required for specific elements of analysis. It is therefore critical to agree on these questions before defining a data collection plan. To that end, the national TrackFin Focal Point should call a start-up meeting with the national level stakeholder group. At this meeting, the participants should agree on a list of priority policy questions and the level of detail required for the analysis. For example, would it be sufficient to collect information separately on water, sanitation and hygiene, or would a more detailed breakdown of spending by type of sanitation service be required? The WASH accounts team should also define the timeframe for the exercise. With respect to financial flow data, it would be preferable to gather data over a period of at least two to three full financial years, rather than only a single year. To ensure the greatest validity for subsequent policy decisions, the most recent data should be used. Finally, in order to avoid duplication, the national stakeholder group should identify other related initiatives with which collaboration should be encouraged. Some countries, for example, might be in the process of preparing Water Accounts based on the SEEA-Water methodology (see Box 5 below). If this is the case, the two initiatives should seek to harmonize methodologies to the extent possible, and to collaborate on data collection. The TrackFin initiative currently tracks financing specifically to water supply, sanitation and hygiene services rather than throughout the broader water sector. WASH accounts can therefore be seen as a sub-set of the broader Water Accounts based on SEEA-Water. As the latter may prove somewhat complex for water sector professionals to use, it would be advisable to identify what stage of development the Water Accounts have reached, and whether common terminology can be established. The Water Accounts, for example, use public accountancy terms from the 2008 System of National Accounts (SNA). In the countries where TrackFin was piloted, however, the development of SEEA-Water accounts was still at a relatively early stage of development. In Brazil, Water Accounts are under preparation, but the focus so far has been on tracking hydrological flows; tracking financial flows is not envisaged for several more years. Coordination between the two initiatives was sought, but opportunities to exchange information were limited due to mismatched timing. 6 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 5. The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEA-Water) The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEA-Water) prepared by the UN Statistics Division (United Nations Statistics Division, 2012) provides a conceptual framework for organizing hydrological and economic information in a coherent and consistent manner, thus overcoming the tendency to divide issues along disciplinary lines. SEEA-Water is a potentially important tool for policy-makers, as it provides them with indicators to monitor the interaction between the environment and the economy, a database to guide decision-making on sustainable development paths, and appropriate policy instruments for implementing them. SEEA-Water is based on the 2003 System of Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA) and was further elaborated to reflect the 2008 System of National Accounts (SNA). In 2007, the SEEA-Water framework was adopted as an international standard by the UN Statistical Commission, and countries were encouraged to implement it. In 2010, the International Recommendations for Water Statistics (United Nations Statistics Division, 2012) were adopted to assist countries in the implementation of SEEA-Water. For ease of application, SEEA-Water has been divided into four areas of policy application, presented in Fig. 3 below. WASH accounts are linked to the first quadrant, “Improving drinking-water and sanitation services”. Figure 3. WASH accounts in relation to SEEA-Water Accounts SYSTEM OF NATIONAL ACCOUNTS (SNA) TrackFin WASH Accounts I. Improving drinking-water and sanitation services II. Managing water supply and demand III. Managing water resources degradation/Improving quality of water resources IV. Adapting to extreme hydro- meteorological events Water security System of Environmental Economic Accounts for Water (SEEA-Water) The SEEA-Water framework comprises five categories of accounts: • Category 1: Physical supply and use tables describing the flows of water from the environment within the economy and back to the environment; • Category 2: Emission accounts describing the quantity of pollutants added to water as a result of production and consumption; • Category 3: Hybrid and economic accounts linking the physical accounts with monetary information from the national accounts, disaggregated for water and sanitation; • Category 4: Water asset accounts; and • Category 5: Quality accounts describing the quality of water and changes in quality; these accounts are still experimental. Of these, Category 3 (hybrid and economic accounts) is particularly relevant to tracking national financial flows to water and sanitation services as it aligns physical information with monetary information on supply and use. Referred to as “hybrid” because they combine different types of measurement units, these accounts can compare physical quantities with the corresponding economic flows. They include information on the various costs associated with water supply and use, such as water abstraction, purification, distribution and wastewater treatment. They also provide information on financing—for example, the amount users pay for wastewater treatment services, and the extent to which these services are subsidized by government or other entities. Information of this kind can assist official decision-making on cost recovery and water allocation policies, and can be used in economic models to evaluate the potential costs and benefits of creating new infrastructure. Hybrid and economic accounts can provide data on the following: • The costs of water supply and use; • The income generated by the production of services; • Investment in water-related infrastructure and the relevant maintenance costs; and • The user fees paid for water-related services, as well as subsidies received. To date, more than 50 countries have expressed an interest in compiling national environmental-economic accounting for water following the SEEA- Water framework. These are principally developed countries (European Union countries and Australia), but some developing countries are also starting to adopt the framework. These include Algeria, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Botswana, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, Panama, South Africa, Tunisia, West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Zimbabwe. At the national level, SEEA-Water is being implemented on a step-by-step basis. Only a small number of countries have been able to develop a complete set of Water Accounts comprising both physical and monetary data. The UN Statistics Division is encouraging countries to use this system of accounts by organizing regional workshops and capacity-building activities. Other institutions, such as the World Bank are providing financial support, in particular through the WAVES partnership.1 1 WAVES: Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services. Link: http://www.wavespartnership.org/en 7Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 1.4 Identify data requirements and plan the work Following the identification of policy needs, the Focal Point should draw up tailored Terms of Reference for the production of WASH accounts. These Terms of Reference should reflect the country context, existing knowledge about data availability, and the policy questions identified. The WASH accounts team should then carry out preliminary work to assemble available information, identifying data gaps and key issues in relation to the specific country context. They will also identify potential data collection strategies and estimation methods to address gaps and weaknesses, and present them at a national-level workshop to be attended by all members of the national stakeholder group, together with a broader range of relevant actors if feasible. 1.4.1 Identify available data and define a data collection plan Before launching the inception phase, the team needs to familiarize itself with the methodology. Step 2 in particular, and the associated methodological notes, present the type of data required and potential data sources. To keep the costs of the exercise down, countries should start by identifying relevant data already available through existing reports and information systems. Examples of potential documentation appear in Box 6 below. If data are not available, the team should identify a strategy for collecting or estimating the missing data. Data availability is likely to be a key constraint. The WASH accounts team should therefore initially aim for optimum accuracy within this constraint. In some cases, it might be necessary to collect primary data, particularly for the costs of certain services such as informal providers, or certain financial flows such as household investment in on-site sanitation. These are unlikely to be routinely collected. When new surveys are not possible, or are too expensive, formulating assumptions to derive initial estimates will be necessary, even if these assumptions are approximate. Step 2 of this Guidance Document proposes ways forward on specific data issues. As collecting new data has budgetary implications, these should be taken into account from the start. It is also important to consider trade- offs between different methods of data collection. Box 6. Examples of existing information • Household surveys, for example UNICEF’s Multi Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) • Access data from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) • GLAAS reports and survey responses • Information on the water sector from National Statistics Offices • The World Bank Water Sanitation Programme’s Country Status Overviews (sub-Saharan Africa only) • Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) documents and planned poverty reduction expenditure • Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks • National sector plans and policies • National budgets • Local government budgets (for decentralized WASH sectors, for a sample of localities) • Utilities’ financial accounts • Sector financing reports produced by the sector regulator (where these exist) • OECD Creditor Reporting System and data from the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) database • SWA Aid Effectiveness Working Group and Country Processes Working Group documentation • Data from the IBNET database on water and sewerage utilities performance • UN-Water Country Briefs • World Bank Public Expenditure Reviews (PERs) • Relevant studies of the United Nations Economic Commissions • Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic studies • WASH sector reports • Project-specific documentation • Reports on decentralization processes • Benchmarking reports from utility associations, governments (for example Brazil or India) or regulators (for example Kenya or Mozambique) 8 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Where there has already been some analysis of the WASH financing system, country profiles and reports on different segments of the system may indicate other data sources. The WASH accounts team should interview key informants in stakeholder institutions to identify the extent of data availability within those organizations. With respect to private operators and non-profit organizations, it will be important to seek out umbrella organizations such as NGOs and industrial associations, as these may have some consolidated information on their activities. International organizations should be contacted as they may have databases complementing or extending national sources, particularly on international aid issues. Potential challenge: Alignment with National Statistics Office (NSO) systems When identifying data sources, the WASH accounts team should assess the extent to which NSOs already collect financial data from the WASH sector at a level of detail permitting conclusions to be drawn for policy definition. It would be preferable to align with the NSO’s classification system to facilitate integration further down the line, but this may not always be possible. • If NSOs collect data on WASH, it is important to work with them to identify how this data can be extracted and used by sector actors. This will ensure that the data collection exercise is embedded in national systems and can be repeated at minimal cost. A key area of coordination will be to identify how NSOs and sector stakeholders can work together on WASH policy needs to produce data at the most appropriate level of disaggregation. WASH sector stakeholders can also learn from NSOs on data collection methods. • If WASH statistical data are insufficiently detailed, either because NSOs are performing poorly, or they do not collect data from a comprehensive set of WASH service providers, it will be necessary to initiate a sector-level data collection process. 1.4.2 Develop a detailed budget and work plan Once all available information has been mapped, the WASH accounts team should prepare an inception report. This will contain a work plan and detailed budget for producing WASH accounts. Recommended content for this report is presented in Box 7 below. Box 7. Key points to cover in the inception report The inception report should contain the following information: • Overview of the institutional arrangements established to manage TrackFin in the country • Summary of key results from the review of documentation available on WASH sector financing • Summary of discussions held at the inception meetings and the national stakeholder group start-up meeting, including: – Definition of the scope of the exercise in terms of duration (number of years of data collection) and geographic area – Identification of the key policy questions drawn up by the national stakeholder group • A detailed workplan and associated budget Annexes should include the minutes of the start-up meeting, a list of members of the national stakeholder group and the WASH accounts team with their Terms of Reference, and the list of wider sector stakeholders with their contact information. The inception report should be approved by the national level stakeholder group or by the TrackFin champion. The work should start with reasonable expectations in terms of the detail and complexity of the information produced, and the intention to improve it over time. The WASH accounts team and the national stakeholder group should agree on a realistic budget, taking into account the potential challenges indicated below. 9Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Potential challenge: Defining a budget and workplan for WASH accounts • WASH accounts should ideally cover the whole country, but could include detailed information for specific regions only, with data for other regions based on extrapolation. If there are substantial discrepancies between geographic areas, regions should be classified into types and data should be obtained from at least one region from each type, to provide an adequate basis for representative extrapolation. • If answering a key policy question requires disaggregation of data by region, the team should check the geographic boundaries of different data sources. Some organizations might aggregate data based on water basins, while others may use municipal boundaries. It would require significant work to reconcile differing geographic boundaries—probably requiring estimations and triangulation. • Depending on how the WASH sector is organized, data collection may need to be conducted separately in each sub-sector. In a developing country, the service provision and financing arrangements for urban water, urban sanitation, rural water and rural sanitation tend to differ. Hence each of the four sub-sectors should be considered separately, and the analysis may therefore need to be repeated in each, even though the methodological tools and approaches remain the same. Potential challenge: Contracting consultancy support for the WASH accounts team The timing of consultancy support can be difficult to handle and may vary between countries. The detailed scope and budget for the TrackFin exercise—and thus the budget for consultant assistance—will only be known when the inception phase has been completed (after Step 1.4). Ideally, the consultant should be involved from the outset. One potential solution is to prepare a flexible contract, agreeing on a fee rate and a number of workdays. The contract can then be amended and refined at the end of the inception stage to reflect any variation in scope. 10 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 2 Step 2 – Collect data This section sets out in more detail the framework for preparing WASH accounts. Its purpose is to serve as a practical guide for identifying, collecting and classifying financial data. To define the data collection plan, the WASH accounts team must be in a position to answer three main questions: • What WASH services are consumed and by whom? • How are these services provided and by whom? • How much do these services cost and how are they financed? Fig. 4 below draws on a figure developed for the SHA. It presents the main “dimensions” to examine in tracking financing to the WASH sector at the national level. These dimensions are the main classifications used to create WASH accounts. 1 Initial capital costs of putting new services in place, including ‘hardware’ such as pipes, toilets and pumps, and one-off support or ‘software’ costs, such as for detailed design/engineering studies or associated training and consultation. Costs (C) Costs of WASH goods and services produced • Investment costs including hardware and associated support1 • Operating and maintenance costs • Large capital maintenance costs • Financial costs • Support costs (also referred to as software costs) • Taxes Services (S) WASH services consumed Water supply services • Water supply through large network systems • Basic drinking-water supply Sanitation services • Sanitation though large network systems • Basic sanitation Support services to the WASH sector • Policy-making, legislation and regulation, planning, programme administration and governance • Capacity building Water resources management (related to water supply and sanitation services) • Water resources protection • River basin development Hygiene • Hygiene promotion programmes (including in schools and health care centres) • Household-level hygiene activities Service providers (P) Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH services • Government agencies • Network corporate providers • Non-network corporate providers • NGOs and community-based organizations • Self-provided users Uses (U) Type of use of WASH goods and services • Served domestic use • Self-provided domestic use • Served non-domestic use • Self-provided non-domestic use Financing Types (FT) Financial flows that circulate between financing units and service providers • Tariffs for services provided • Users’ expenditure on self-supply • Domestic public transfers • International public transfers • Voluntary contributions • Repayable financing What is being financed and by whom? Financing Units (FU) Institutional entities that provide funding to the sector • Users • National authorities • Regional authorities • Local authorities • Network corporate providers • Non-network corporate providers • Economic and quality regulators • Bilateral and multilateral donors • NGOs and community-based organizations • Banks and financial institutions What is being produced by whom and at what cost? What is being consumed by whom? Figure 4. Mapping financial flows based on consumption, production and financing types 11Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Using this framework, the following sections provide more detail on data collection for WASH accounts. They provide guidance on issues such as: • Step 2.1: Defining the boundaries of the WASH sector, i.e. defining which services are included • Step 2.2: Mapping service provision arrangements and financial flows • Step 2.3: Collecting data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks 2.1 Define WASH sector boundaries in terms of services The WASH accounts team should start by defining the boundaries of the WASH sector based on a list of potential services to be included in WASH accounts. This will be done through the tasks outlined below. Step 2.1 – Tasks to be undertaken • Become familiar with the classification of WASH services proposed in the Guidance Document and understand the rationale behind this classification; • Identify the classifications and categories of WASH services used in the country’s information systems, and the type of activities they include; • Analyse similarities and differences with the classification proposed in the Guidance Document (see Table 1 and Table 6 – Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain below) to establish whether the same categories can be used, and whether data are collected on this basis; • Identify the WASH services for which expenditure will be reported in WASH accounts; • State very clearly which activities are included or excluded under each category of WASH services; and • Collect data according to these categories where possible, or based on aggregated categories (for example, water supply services, sanitation services, construction services, support services). 2.1.1 Rationale Adopting and using a common classification of products, services and activities relevant to the WASH sector is essential. The definition of the WASH sector often varies from one country to another, so it is critical to clarify what is included or excluded in the country concerned.1 Defining WASH sector boundaries is essential for a number of reasons: • To identify the list of products and services for which costs and financing types will be tracked through WASH accounts: These products and services may be produced jointly with other water services. For example, some water supply companies may also be involved in managing water resources up-stream, or managing irrigation schemes for agricultural purposes. Other services may be seen as going hand-in-hand with the provision of WASH services, such as solid waste management, whereas other countries typically do not include solid waste management in the definition of sanitation services. Many countries also have difficulties in defining hygiene, and most do not comprehensively track WASH-related hygiene services. • To help ensure data consistency across different countries: The standard list proposed in this document can help countries identify the services that should be included, for example downstream sludge management, and others that should be excluded – such as building dams mainly for hydropower generation. If services they need to include are not part of this standard list, because data is tracked jointly with other WASH services in their national systems, these should be clearly identified so that the reason for differences across countries can be understood. • To define service categories within the WASH sector for which financing should be tracked separately: This is required to evaluate whether financing is currently being allocated to the most appropriate services or products. For the first round of WASH accounts, it may only be feasible to disaggregate financial flows for a limited number or type of services. At the very least, however, disaggregation between water and sanitation services should be shown. A long-term methodological objective is to show financial allocation to a variety of service categories, including hygiene, to create a more detailed and in-depth analysis. 1 The TrackFin initiative currently focuses on tracking financing to water supply, sanitation and hygiene services rather than the broader water sector. The standard list of services provided here therefore concentrates on these services. The list could potentially be expanded at a later stage, should the initiative take on a broader scope. 12 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Learning from the health sector The System of Health Accounts (OECD, 2011) defines the boundaries of health care activities from an international perspective, based on the functions of health care. Health expenditure is included in Health Accounts based on the following four elements: a) A transaction b) Which is linked to an individual’s consumption c) Whose primary purpose is health. The purpose of the spending determines the health care functions. This is defined as “the type of need that the transaction aims to satisfy or the kind of objective pursued” d) Which involves the application of qualified health knowledge, directly or through supervision. Activities included in the boundaries of the Health Accounts are those that aim to “improve, maintain and prevent the deterioration of the health status of persons and mitigating the consequences of ill-health through the application of qualified health knowledge”. Based on these criteria, health activities are classified into seven main categories of health care functions, which are themselves sub-divided into a total of 36 categories. These seven are: health promotion and prevention; diagnosis, treatment, cure and rehabilitation of illness; caring for persons affected by chronic illness; caring for persons with health-related impairment and disability; palliative care; providing community health programmes; and governance and administration of the health system. Countries choose what they can classify based on the nature of their national health statistical systems, the data available, and their ability to link an accounting framework to their classification. 2.1.2 TrackFin classification of WASH services Broadly defined, the WASH sector refers to the provision of water, sanitation and hygiene services. However, providing access to water and sanitation is only a subset of the services needed to manage the water and sanitation cycle sustainably while meeting the needs of all users. Fig. 5 below shows the WASH services required, beyond access, in order to ensure sustainability. This approach is reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which require a broader set of WASH services to be monitored, both upstream and downstream. Whether or not these services are available depends on the level of development of the water sector in a given country. In most developing countries, it is unlikely. Where providing access is a priority, for example, wastewater collection and treatment services are often very limited, but should become more prevalent through implementation of the SDGs. Figure 5. The value chain of WASH services under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) UPSTREAM ACTIVITIES • Production (augmenting and protecting water resources) • Water treatment, transport and distribution Source: Adapted from “Benefits of investing in water and sanitation: An OECD Perspective” (OECD, 2011), p.31. DOWNSTREAM ACTIVITIES • Wastewater transport , treatment and safe disposal SDGs provide access to: • water • sanitation • hygiene promotion Integrated water resource management Augment supplies Water storage Abstract water Treat water Transport water Distribute water Manage demand Provide consumer services Provide water Provide sanitation Promote behaviour change Transport sewage via networks Collect pit sludge Protect the resource Reuse sludge or treated effluent Dispose of sludge Develop natural treatment systems Treat wastewater Treat faecal sludge Transport wastewater or pit sludge 13Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level To support this broader approach and ensure that the overall WASH sector is operating adequately, additional functions such as planning, management and coordination functions will need to be carried out at ministerial level (or at regional level, in the case of federal systems). The TrackFin classification of WASH goods and service presented in Table 1 below covers the services required for sustainable provision of water and sanitation. The table lists the broad categories of services, activities included under those services, and for easy reference, the ISIC reference from the System of National Accounts. Its value is in clarifying the boundaries of the WASH sector at the national level and identifying the activities to be included or excluded when preparing WASH accounts. Code Category Activities included Included in S1 Water supply services Water supply through large network systems • Collection of rain water and water from various sources such as rivers, lakes, wells • Purification of water for water supply purposes, desalination of sea/ groundwater by treatment plants • Storage of water • Large scale transport/conveyance of water via pipelines • Distribution of water through mains (includes water pumping and transport via local water networks) • Management of water connections and consumer support activities ISIC 36 Basic drinking-water supply • Collection of rain water and water from various sources (rivers, lakes, wells) using hand-pumps, spring catchments, gravity-fed systems, rainwater collection and fog harvesting • Storage of water in tanks • Distribution of water through small distribution systems (pipes, wells or trucks) or local neighbourhood networks typically with shared connections/ points of use • Management of water access points and consumer support activities S2 Sanitation services1 Sanitation though large network systems • Construction of sanitation facilities in households and communities and connection to large sewage systems • Collection of sewage by large scale sewer systems including trunk sewers, sewage pumping stations, and drains • Sewage treatment and disposal, including residual sludge disposal ISIC 37 Basic sanitation • Promotion of sanitation, including demand promotion and sanitation marketing (excluding hygiene promotion if that can be disaggregated) • Construction of basic sanitation facilities in households and communities (latrines, septic systems) • Collection and transport of sludge from onsite facilities (pit emptying and cleaning services) • Treatment and disposal of sludge by faecal sludge treatment facilities S3 Support services to the WASH sector • Water and sanitation sector policy-making and governance, including: – Development of sector policies – Legislation: Definition and enforcement of drinking-water and discharge standards for municipal wastewater – Regulation of water and sanitation supply activities and service providers – Sector planning, including estimating future sector financial needs – Administration of water and sanitation programmes • Capacity building in water supply and sanitation ISIC 8412 S4 Water resources management (which relate to water and sanitation services) Water resources protection • Collection and use of quantitative and qualitative data on water resources • Creation and sharing of water knowledge • Conservation and rehabilitation of inland surface waters (rivers, lakes), ground water and coastal waters • Prevention of water contamination No existing category River basin development • Integrated river basin projects and related institutional activities; river flow control; dams and reservoirs S5 Hygiene services Hygiene promotion • Hygiene promotion programmes by government or service providers, including handwashing campaigns, menstrual hygiene management and chlorine distribution No existing category Household-level hygiene activities • Handwashing, bathing, washing clothes and washing material/equipment (soap, tippy taps, bathrooms) • Point-of-use water treatment. Table 1. TrackFin classification of WASH goods and services 1 Although solid waste is not a standard category in WASH accounts, a country might decide to include solid waste as part of TrackFin for a specific purpose. In this case, solid waste should NOT be included under S2. A new category should be created for solid waste. 14 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative There are a number of potential challenges in seeking to apply this classification. Potential challenge: Defining WASH sector boundaries • Water resource management activities do not typically fall under the existing definition of WASH services. Some of these activities are, however, implemented by water service providers and are essential for the sustainable provision of such services. Where possible, water resource management activities directly relevant to water and sanitation service provision should be included in the scope of the WASH accounts. Broader water resource management activities, such as the construction of dams for irrigation purposes, should be excluded. • Defining hygiene services. There is no internationally agreed definition for hygiene, and none of the existing international classifications identifies water and sanitation-related hygiene services as a specific product or service category. As a result, hygiene can mean very different things in different countries, which reduces comparability. Given the importance of hygiene in the SDGs, however, and the need to prioritize these activities, it is critical to define and track them as a separate category. Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems provides additional detail on existing international classifications (with a particular focus on Central Product Classification (CPC), International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) and Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) that were used as a basis for developing the WASH service categories presented in Table 1 above. This note explains how they work and where gaps need to be filled. It makes recommendations for the development of a more comprehensive classification of WASH services, particularly with respect to hygiene services. 2.1.3 Tasks to be undertaken The WASH accounts team should identify those services and activities that fall into the WASH sector definition. To the extent possible, data should be collected based on the TrackFin classification in order to facilitate comparison. The team should identify classifications of WASH services already in use in the country, and identify the extent to which these correspond to the TrackFin classification. It should then clearly set out how the classification for the WASH accounts was derived, and the extent to which it aligns with the TrackFin classification. Countries may also need to introduce further disaggregation for certain categories to reflect their own policy needs. For example, a country with a significant investment backlog in the area of rural sanitation may choose to adopt a higher level of disaggregation for these services; a country wishing to track funding to different types of sanitation services could define sub-categories for that purpose. In the first instance, it is unlikely that countries will be able to report financial information on sub-categories for all these services separately. Countries should attempt to report at least on financing to the high level categories of services such as water, sanitation and hygiene. Initially, however, even that level of detail may be challenging, particularly for hygiene, as described in the box below. Potential challenge: Tracking expenditure to hygiene activities • Funding for hygiene activities is difficult to separate from funding to broader water and sanitation services, as these services are commonly provided jointly. This is particularly problematic when dealing with large WASH programme expenditure, for which detailed data on activity spending is difficult to obtain. In this case, the WASH accounts team should conduct interviews with programme managers in order to estimate the percentage of total spending that goes to hygiene activities. They should also identify specific hygiene programmes, in particular those conducted by the Ministry of Health. 15Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 2.2 Map service provision arrangements and financial flows The team should then identify the main WASH sector actors and the financial flows between them. Step 2.2 – Tasks to be undertaken • Gain familiarity with the TrackFin classifications of WASH uses, actors and financing types, and understand the rationale behind them; • At country level, identify and classify WASH uses, actors and financing types – On the basis of data gathered in Step 1.4, identify the classifications of WASH uses, actors and financing types used in the country – Analyse similarities to and differences from the TrackFin classifications, and chart areas where the terminology corresponds – Define the classifications that will be used to create WASH accounts; and • Map WASH sector financing based on these classifications – Represent the WASH sector actors and financing types separately for each of the four sub-sectors as appropriate to the country context. 2.2.1 Rationale Identifying the main WASH sector actors and the financial flows circulating between them is essential to understanding what data needs to be obtained and from where. Making a graphic representation of financial flows, as shown in Fig. 6 below, can facilitate this process, ensuring that all actors and flows are recorded. It also assists in communicating the results. All countries should preferably use an identical or similar classification system for WASH sector actors and financial flows. This will facilitate international comparison and ensure that the information produced is consistent. At present, there is no standard classification of WASH sector actors. Country-level statistical offices and WASH sector officials use their own classifications, which vary depending on the structure of the WASH sector. The proposed TrackFin classification of WASH sector actors and financial flows is sufficiently broad to capture all or most sector organizations. It can be used as a guide to classify WASH uses, actors and financial flows at country level, thus facilitating the production of comparable data. The TrackFin classification is aligned with existing classifications used at the international level, but includes improvements aimed at overcoming certain identified weaknesses. Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types. This note presents the existing internationally accepted systems of classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types that were used as reference points in developing the TrackFin classifications. Classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units was adapted from SEEA-Water, while the classification of financing types elaborates on the OECD 3Ts terminology—Tariffs, Taxes and Transfers. 2.2.2 Trackfin classification of WASH uses, actors and financial flows The proposed classification distinguishes between: • Use of WASH services, i.e. who is consuming the services and how; • WASH sector actors, differentiating between WASH service providers and financing units; and • Financing types, characterized by the origin and the nature of the financial flows. The TrackFin classification focuses on tracking financial flows by type of use rather than user categories. This is principally because for policy purposes, financial flows should be tracked independently of how users obtain their services. Table 2 below presents the synthesized TrackFin classification. It encompasses all definitions for WASH sector actors, financing sources, and WASH service uses required by the proposed methodology. Further explanation is given in the text following the table. 16 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Code Category Definition U: Uses of WASH services Types of use of WASH goods and services U1 Served domestic use Household consumption through service providers, paid via a tariff. Includes water supply to households connected to the water and/or sewerage network, but also water taken from a public standpipe or obtained through other providers such as water tankers. U2 Self-provided domestic use Household consumption of self-provided water and sanitation services. Users pay an up-front initial investment (in a well or private latrine) for access to the service, and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. U3 Served non-domestic use Consumption by non-domestic users through purchase of water and sanitation from a service provider. This includes institutional users (government agencies such as ministries, hospitals, schools), voluntary organizations such as NGOs or community-based organizations (CBOs), foundations, and industrial and commercial users. The service providers are paid via a tariff. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: U3.1 Served institutional use, and U3.2 Served industrial and commercial use. U4 Self-provided non-domestic use Consumption of self-provided water and sanitation services by non-domestic users. This includes institutional users such as government agencies, ministries, hospitals, schools, voluntary organizations such as NGOs and CBOs, foundations, and industrial and commercial users. Users make an up-front initial investment for access to the service and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: U4.1 Self-supplied institutional use, and U4.2 Self- supplied industrial and commercial use. P: WASH service providers Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH services, including government institutions that provide support P1 Government agencies Government providers including public agencies such as ministries, hospitals, or schools, as well as self-providing municipalities (i.e. those operating the service directly rather than through a corporate entity). This would include government institutions providing support services to the sector in domains such as policy-making, planning, or regulation. This category can be further disaggregated into sub-categories such as P1.1 National authorities, P1.2 Regional authorities, and P1.3 Local authorities. P2 Network corporate providers Utilities that own and/or operate facilities for production and distribution of water and sanitation services through network systems for the public, as well as for bulk services. They may be either privately or publicly owned, mandated or independent, large, medium or small in size, providing either a public service or self-providing the service for their own use. P3 Non-network corporate providers Corporations that provide any small-scale WASH goods (e.g. bottled or sachet water) or services along the value chain through non-network systems. They usually involve low-skilled labour and a low level of initial investment. Taking various organizational forms from cooperatives to private ventures, they may be formal or informal. This category would include estate developers involved in infrastructure construction. P4 NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs) Non-profit organizations seeking to complement WASH public services. They usually have a formal structure and offer services beyond their own membership. In most cases, they are registered with national authorities. CBOs habitually operate within a local area. P5 Self-provided users Users providing services themselves. These may be domestic (household) or non-domestic (institutional, industrial or commercial) users. They pay an initial investment up-front for access to a well, private latrine, or a private system, and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: P5.1 Domestic self-provided users, and P5.2 Non-domestic self-provided users. Non-domestic self-provided users would include, for example, a mining company or other industry producing water for its own consumption. FU: Financing units Institutional entities that provide funding to the sector. They mobilize funding to pay WASH service providers. They may allocate funds directly to service providers or channel them through other financing units. FU1 Users Households that self-provide services such as on-site sanitation. They either pay up-front through initial investments (in a well or private latrine, for example) or purchase services from a variety of providers including water tankers. This category can be further disaggregated into sub-categories: FU1.1 Served users, FU1.2 Self-supplied users; FU1.1.1 Served domestic users, FU1.1.2 Served non-domestic users, FU1.2.1 Self-supplied domestic users, FU1.2.2 Self-supplied non-domestic users. FU2 National authorities Public authorities at central government level, including relevant ministries such as the Ministry of Finance or Ministry of Water, or national institutions. FU3 Regional authorities Public authorities operating at the regional level. FU4 Local authorities Public bodies operating in a smaller geographic area, such as a city, town, or district. FU5 Network corporate providers Utilities that own and/or operate facilities for production and distribution of water and sanitation services through network systems for the public, as well as for bulk services. They may be either privately or publicly owned, mandated or independent, large, medium or small in size, provide a public service or self-provide the service for their own use. FU6 Non-network corporate providers Corporations that provide any small-scale WASH goods (e.g. bottled or sachet water) or services along the value chain through non-network systems. They usually involve low-skilled labour and a low level of initial investment. They take various organizational forms from cooperatives to private ventures, and may be formal or informal. FU7 Economic and quality regulators Public authority responsible for overall supervision of the WASH sector in areas such as control of tariffs, water quality, and competition throughout the sector. FU8 Bilateral and multilateral donors Governments providing official development assistance directly to a country or through multilateral international institutions (UN, World Bank or regional development banks). Table 2. TrackFin classifications for WASH service use, WASH sector actors, and financing types 17Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Code Category Definition FU9 NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs) Non-profit organizations that seek to complement WASH public services. They usually have a formal structure and offer services beyond their own membership. In most cases they are registered with national authorities. CBOs habitually operate within a local area. FU10 Banks and financial institutions A financial institution that provides banking services, such as taking deposits and providing credit facilities and loans to individuals and/or small businesses and corporations. FT: Financing types Financial flows between financing units and service providers, characterized by their origin and nature FT1 Tariffs for services provided Payments made by users to service providers for obtaining and using the service. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT1.1 Domestic tariffs for services provided, FT1.2 Non- domestic tariffs for services provided. FT2 User expenditure on self- supply Funding provided by users to invest in or provide the service themselves. Self-provided users pay an initial investment up-front to gain access to the service (for example a well, a private water production system, or a private latrine). They then cover all operating and maintenance costs themselves. This can be in form of cash, material or time, but only cash payments are included in WASH accounts. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply, FT2.2 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply. FT3 Domestic public transfers Public transfers to WASH actors from central or local government agencies. These are often subsidies derived from taxes or other government sources of revenue. Includes grants, but excludes concessionary loans that are included in FT6 Repayable financing. FT4 International public transfers Voluntary donations or grants from external public donors and multilateral agencies. Concessionary loans are excluded and covered entirely in FT6 Repayable financing. FT5 Voluntary contributions Voluntary donations or grants from international and national non-governmental donors including from charitable foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Concessionary loans are excluded and covered entirely in FT6 Repayable financing. FT6 Repayable financing Sources of finance derived from private or public sources and requiring repayment. Examples are loans (including concessionary loans and guarantees), equity investments, or other financial instruments such as bonds. This category can be divided into 2 sub-categories: FT6.1 Concessionary repayable financing, and FT6.2 Non-concessionary repayable financing. 2.2.2.1 Classification of WASH uses WASH uses refers to how services are obtained and used. When differentiating between served and self-provided WASH use, an initial distinction concerns how services are obtained. They may either be self-provided – meaning that users organize their own services – or obtained from a service provider. The TrackFin classification refers to the latter as “served uses”. Many households or industrial users self-provide water and sanitation services, particularly when network services are too expensive or inaccessible, or when network service quality is unsatisfactory for reasons such as unreliable service hours or inadequate quality. In such circumstances industrial users may develop their own water supply. At the level of WASH accounts, it is important to track financial flows for these types of use separately, as “self-provided use” typically indicates users with different socioeconomic characteristics from those in the “served” categories. TrackFin recommends tracking financial flows by type of use rather than users (i.e. the consumers of WASH goods and services). This is because financial flows have to be tracked independently of how different users obtain or receive services. Indeed, users cannot always be attributed to a single category. Domestic users, for example, may obtain water from multiple sources, including through self-provided sources or different providers. Users may invest in a well, for example, through self-provision but may also pay a tariff for piped water supply. It is therefore difficult to define “user categories” capable of capturing such multiple modes of access to services, although it is essential for WASH accounts to distinguish between financial flows to different types of use. Types of use also differ according to purpose – principally domestic or non-domestic. Non-domestic purposes include institutional, industrial, agricultural or commercial purposes. As TrackFin is closely linked to the GLAAS report, which tracks overall resource inputs into the sector, it places special emphasis on identifying funding to WASH services for domestic use, schools, and health care facilities, in line with the objectives of the SDGs. The methodology recommends the inclusion of financial flows for all types of use likely to be jointly served, but requires that they be tracked separately. This means that domestic, institutional, commercial and industrial uses would be tracked, but agricultural, hydropower or environmental uses, which tend to be served through separate systems, would not. 18 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 2.2.2.2 Classification of WASH actors WASH sector actors are characterized according to the role they play in the provision and financing of WASH services. Actors are identified as follows: • Service providers that produce and deliver WASH services; and • Financing units that collect funds from various sources and transfer them to service providers, potentially via other financing units that pool and distribute the funding, These include households, domestic and foreign governments, private corporations, and non-profit organizations. Potential challenge: Classifying service providers • Service providers can be classified in many different ways, depending on their size, type of ownership (private or public, mandated or independent), or status (formal or informal). Because ownership is not necessarily relevant to public policy and is difficult to assign, splitting public and private operators is not recommended. It is also difficult to separate providers according to size. The TrackFin classification therefore focuses on the institutional sector that owns them (government, corporation or household). Corporate providers are simply divided between category P2 Network corporate providers, and P3 Non-network corporate providers, as they are financed differently. • Depending on policy needs, countries could further disaggregate the TrackFin classification and characterize service providers according to criteria such as public or private, formal or informal, utility size, mandated or independent, and so on. Where corporate providers are self-providing, this could be noted specifically in a sub-category. Potential challenge: Allocating actors to a single WASH category • Actors can play different but simultaneous roles in the WASH sector, so allocating them to a single category may be difficult. Households may simultaneously be categorized as both financing units (paying tariffs to a utility) and as self-providers. They may be investing their own resources while also receiving government subsidies. All financial flow information must be recorded and coded appropriately, with a single flow potentially recorded in different ways to reflect this multiplicity of roles. • Distinguishing between roles as service providers and as financing units: Service providers such as a utility (classified as P2 Network corporate providers) are seen as financing units only if they provide equity to the sector as private investors. They are not considered to be financing units generating funds through tariffs and reallocating these to the sector since they only collect tariffs from users. In this case, therefore, the financing unit is defined as FU1 Users. This issue was discussed during the pilot exercise, where Ghana and Brazil followed the proposed approach, but Morocco preferred to present service providers as a source of tariffs. Examples of how to interpret tables and graphs from WASH accounts using these classifications can be found in the reports by Brazil and Ghana on the pilot phase. 2.2.2.3 Classification of WASH financing types Financial flows can be characterized according to the nature and origin of the funding. Financing types are differentiated according to their origin. Sector funding may come from either private or public sources. Private sources include households through tariffs or their own investment, charitable donations, or private investment. Public sources are derived from taxes managed by national or foreign governments, in the form of public transfers through official development assistance. As financing types are not sector actors per se, it is important to identify separately the financing units that channel funding (see the challenge box below). Potential challenges: Aligning with existing classification systems • Different classification systems refer to financing types in slightly different ways. In the OECD 3T terminology, financing sources refers to the origin of the funding and the type of funds that can be mobilized. The SEEA-Water terminology refers to financing units (actors grouped by financing sectors) that provide sector funding. To add to the confusion, the SHA terminology refers to these financing units as financing sources. Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types provides more detail on the OECD 3T and SEEA-Water classifications, and identifies where the different classification systems use similar or identical terms. • In the TrackFin classification, financing type refers to financial flows, whereas financing units designates the actors from which funds are mobilized. Households (FU1.1) are financing units that potentially provide two types of financing to the sector: tariffs (FT1) and user expenditure on self-supply (FT2). National Authorities (FU2) can provide domestic public transfers (FT3) and concessionary loans, categorized under repayable financing (FT6). The broad financing types can be further disaggregated, for example to differentiate between various types of repayable financing (concessional or non- concessional) or between tariffs paid by households and those paid by non-domestic users. 19Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 2.2.3 Tasks to be undertaken The WASH accounts team will then identify and classify WASH uses, actors and financial flows, with the aim of mapping sector organization and financing.1 This mapping exercise may have to be undertaken for each of the four main subsectors, i.e. urban water, urban sanitation, rural water and rural sanitation, as the organization of each may vary substantially. For example, sanitation services may be provided jointly with or separately from water services. In many cases, there is no formal sanitation service provider and households have to invest in on-site sanitation and maintain the installations themselves. This is referred to as “self-supply”. The team should identify what existing classifications of WASH actors and financing types are in use by the NSO or the WASH sector itself. Where these exist and are in use, similarities to and differences from the TrackFin classifications should be identified. With this understanding, each country should then decide which classification(s) should be used to maximize the amount of data that can reasonably be collected in the given timeframe. The classifications selected should be clearly explained. To the extent possible, data should be collected according to the TrackFin classifications presented in Table 2. Depending on the structure of the WASH sector in the country, it may not be necessary to use all categories. Categories can also be adapted to facilitate further disaggregation if policy needs so require. A country with a significant investment backlog in the area of rural sanitation, for example, may need a greater degree of disaggregation for these services. 2.2.3.1 Identify and classify all WASH sector uses and actors This entails listing all actors in the WASH sector and gathering basic information on them. Guidance on this process is provided below. Identify WASH service uses The WASH accounts team should identify the different types of WASH service uses and identify data collection methods for each type, focusing particularly on domestic and institutional use. Separating WASH services by type of use according to purpose can raise some methodological challenges, as discussed below. Potential challenge: Separating WASH services by type of use according to purpose • WASH service providers encompass a wide range of user types, including industrial, commercial and institutional users. This is a key difference with the health sector, for example, where it is principally individuals who use services. • Disaggregating financial data by use (for example, to distinguish between domestic and institutional use) is likely to be time-consuming and in some cases impossible to achieve, as most municipal providers serve not only households and institutions but also other customers. • For self-provided use, distinctions are easier to establish as long as information is available on this type of user. Financial flows concerning self-providing households would be obtained from different sources, for example, than information on industrial users who self-provide water for production. • For served users, financing for providers primarily serving domestic and institutional users should be tracked as a priority, noting if possible the proportion of revenue and costs involved in relation to other users (such as commercial or industrial). To be more specific, financial flow data for different uses should be collected based on the tariff paid by the service consumers. It can be assumed, for example, that water sold at an industrial tariff has been provided for industrial uses. Tracking financial flows to other types of use, such as industrial use, is also important because industrial users may be providing cross-subsidies to households if the same service provider is involved. In this context, growth in self-provided industrial use might be a source of concern for the wider sector, as it could translate into reduced cross-subsidies to the domestic WASH sector. If, however, limited data are available on self-provided use, tracking domestic use is the priority. 1 Mapping financial flows must be distinguished (and kept separate) from mapping institutional arrangements. The latter show lines of responsibility and allocation of powers and functions, including policy- making, regulation, asset ownership, and service provision, whereas financial mapping mainly focuses on the actors and on tracking the origins of funding, how it flows, and where it goes. 20 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Countries may also use additional criteria to classify uses depending on the policy questions they wish to answer and the availability of data. Domestic uses can be further classified in the following ways: • Geographic region (R) – Regions, districts or central as defined by country, using central when relates to activities that cover all regions; • Service area (A) – Urban, rural or central, according to the country definition; using central when neither urban nor rural apply because both benefit, e.g. support activities of the state or an NGO, performed by a central or a decentralized actor; • Socioeconomic strata – Level of income, tariff scale. Identify service providers The WASH accounts team should identify service providers for all four main subsectors (urban water services, urban sanitation services, rural water services and rural sanitation services) and the services they provide. Data should be collected on main providers or main types of provider, focusing on: • Their characteristics and legal status (public or private ownership, enterprise or non-enterprise, formal or informal); • The WASH services they produce; • The types of use and users they cover (including numbers); • Geographic coverage and human resources; • The number of entities falling under this category. Potential challenge: Ensuring that all service providers are taken into account • Households’ role as self-providers must be fully recognized. In many sub-Saharan African countries there is no formal sanitation service provision. Households, and sometimes commercial users, invest in on-site water and sanitation solutions and maintain the installations themselves. This expenditure can represent a substantial share of total sector spending and should be included under category P5 Self-provided users. • Informal service providers should, where possible, be included in the mapping. Although the economic activities of informal actors may not be counted by statistical offices, they often represent a large proportion of WASH service provision in developing countries. Using the TrackFin classification, these would be classified as category P3 Non-network corporate providers. Financial flows to informal actors will probably need to be estimated as they are rarely officially recorded. The National Statistics Office can provide guidance on how informal activities in the WASH sector are valued. • Some companies that are not WASH service providers per se, but are involved in the cycle of WASH activities at some point, may be more difficult to classify. In Morocco, for example, a significant proportion of hardware investment in water and sewerage networks does not come from service providers, but from housing and real estate developers. These developers invest in networks and then pass on the management and operations of these networks to the main water utility. In the TrackFin classification, these housing developers are categorized under P3 Non-network corporate providers. Identify financing units The WASH accounts team should identify relevant financing units providing and/or allocating funds to the sector. Some financing units, such as central government institutions, do this from their own resources, while others channel funds provided to them by other institutions, drawing from different financing types. Category FU4 Local authorities, for example, may channel funds from category FU2 National authorities, or from category FU8 Bilateral and multilateral donors. These may also have their own sources of finance such as internally generated funds from local resources, property taxes, business rates, or sanitation taxes. Data on the characteristics and status of these entities, and on the organizations and programmes they finance, is therefore required to ensure complete understanding of whether they act as primary or secondary funding sources. If secondary, it indicates that they are only channelling funds. The challenge box below provides greater detail. 21Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Potential challenge: Avoiding double counting between financing units • To establish overall expenditure in the WASH sector, financial flows should be computed at the level of the financing unit through which they enter the sector. A key principle is that one flow should only be recorded as one financing type. Donor funding channelled to local government through the national government, for example, should always be recorded as FT4 International public transfers. This is also why FT1 Tariffs for services provided, is judged as originating from FU1 Users (i.e. the financing unit that has injected the revenue into the sector) rather than from FU5 Network service providers. Applying this rule consistently should eliminate the risk of double counting in overall expenditure. Accordingly, the only financing injected by FU5 Network service providers would be reinvested profits or equity investments, recorded as FT6 Repayable financing. • However, financial flows also need to be recorded in other ways to enable investigation of a range of key policy questions, such as what funds are used for and how they are channelled. Each financial flow should therefore be “coded” in more detail, to track its distribution in various ways such as: – Direct disbursement to service providers – Channelled through another financing unit – Received from another financing unit and disbursed to service providers. Additional guidance is provided in Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach. 2.2.3.2 Map WASH actors and financial flows Once the bulk of this information has been collected, the second task consists of mapping the organization and financing of the sector, showing how money flows between the different actors. Mapping financial flows visually is the best way of doing this, as presented schematically in Fig. 6 below for a hypothetical WASH sector. This figure is illustrative, and does not cover all possibilities. The figure can also be used to capture information on data availability. The WASH accounts team can visually demonstrate the differences between financial flows for which TrackFin is likely to have good and reliable data, and those where difficulties are anticipated. Bold lines could be used to indicate potentially reliable data, and dotted lines for flows where only broad estimates can be expected. Each type can also be assigned a number to facilitate identification of data sources and estimation methodologies at later stages. Donor governments and multilateral agencies Commercial lenders International and local NGOs and foundations Microfinance institutions Equity investors “Served” households (tariffs) Households, self-supply investments (part of tariffs) Central government Financing types Tariffs for services provided Private repayable financing Voluntary transfers International public transfers Domestic public transfers Households’ out-of- pocket expenditure on self-supply Institutional entities Financing units Service providers Service provision Service provision Figure 6. Mapping financial flows for WASH service provision: Illustrative example Service providers Local governments Regional governments 22 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 8 below illustrates the concepts presented above, taking Brazil as an example. It shows how actors and flows were identified and classified in order to map sector funding. Box 8. Identifying and classifying WASH sector actors and financial flows: Example from Brazil WASH service provision in Brazil has to be seen in the context of the overall political structure. The Brazilian Federation consists of a national (federal) government as well as subnational governments comprising 26 states, 5,570 municipalities, and a Federal District. The three levels of government are politically and administratively independent of each other. The municipalities are responsible for the organization, management and direct or indirect provision of local WASH public services in urban and rural areas. The federal government and state governments, in cooperation with the municipalities, implement water, housing and basic sanitation programmes. The federal government is also responsible for establishing general guidelines and regulations for the management of services by all levels of government, in coordination with the Ministry of Cities, which is responsible for water and sanitation. The Ministry of Cities also coordinates the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). This system has been rolled out at the federal level and captures a wealth of sector data on service providers throughout the country (91% of municipalities for water and 65.5% for sewage disposal). The Ministry of Health is also responsible for direct provision of WASH services to indigenous people in rural areas. There is no central national regulator for water and sewage disposal services, but water resources are centrally regulated. Service providers and financing units provide water and sewerage services in both urban and rural areas, so creating four sub-sector actor maps was not necessary. Service Providers In Brazil, 26% of municipalities provide water directly through local service providers, and 78% directly provide sewerage services. In addition, 26 regional providers supply water services at the state level to 64% of municipalities, and sewerage services to 22%. Six micro-regional providers serve a small number of municipalities. While most of these delegated service providers are public, some are private. These providers offer WASH services through a variety of supply arrangements including direct, indirect (delegated), jointly managed, centralized, decentralized, by consortia, and through concession contracts. NGOs and CBOs are involved in providing hygiene promotion. Households in rural areas that build their own sanitation facilities also act as service providers. Financing units (shown in bold) and financing types (shown in italics): • The main types of financial flow are tariffs paid by served users such as households, industries, and institutions. Users also provide expenditure for self-supply. • The main spending by the federal government is on public transfers (grants) from the federal budget and repayable financing managed through 1) the Fundo de Garantia por Tempo de Serviço (FGTS) funding scheme managed by the Caixa Economica Federal (CAIXA) – a state-owned bank, and 2) the Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES), with funding from the Fundo de Assistência ao Trabalhador (FAT) which is a public fund under the Ministry of Labour and Employment, and other smaller funds providing equity finance. • Some states also have specific programmes for the sector funded through public transfers from their own state funds, usually from royalties for oil exploration or from environmental fines and compensation (for example the states of Rio de Janeiro, Espirito Santo and Bahia) or from water resources revenues (Fehidro of São Paulo). Some state programmes are also financed with repayable financing from their own state development finance institutions such as the Development Bank of Minas Gerais (BDMG). These are important from a local perspective, but not very significant at national level. • Some remaining funding is received from multilateral and bilateral donors for the execution of works and institutional development. These include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the International Development Bank (IDB), KFW of Germany and the Japanese JICA /JBIC. The federal government has also received substantial funding from IBRD to implement the Water Sector Development Programme (INTERÁGUAS), focused on institutional capacity building and integrated planning for the water sector. These are mostly grants (international public transfers). • Since 2004, public private partnerships have been authorized by law and have increased in number, but even so private capital contributions from corporate providers (a form of repayable financing) to the sector remains low. • NGOs and CBOs also provide a small share of voluntary contributions to the sector. 2.3 Estimate financial flows and fixed asset stocks Collecting financial data is the core objective of the TrackFin methodology. Two main types of financial data should be collected: • Financial flow data: this estimates how much funding flows into the sector each year from tariffs, household expenditure for self-supply, domestic public transfers, international public transfers, voluntary transfers and repayable financing, and how much is “spent” on providing services; and 23Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level • Fixed asset stock data: this estimates how much has been invested by economic actors in building up WASH assets over the years. It provides the basis for asset management planning, which is critical for future financial planning. Step 2.3 – Tasks to be undertaken • Understand the approaches to estimating financial flows and fixed asset stocks and become familiar with the cost classification. • Identify the data required to answer the policy questions set out in Step 1.3. – Identify whether the National Statistics Office already collects data on WASH financing and if so, understand their methodology; – Identify whether any national database for the sector already collects financial information; – Create an overview of data sources available and propose data collection methods for missing data; and – Decide if financial flows and/or fixed asset stocks will be included in the scope of WASH accounts, depending on data availability. • Gather data on financial flows at the source, starting with the approach that allows the most comprehensive dataset to be created (either the Financing Type Approach or the Cost-based Approach). – Note that both approaches need to be applied in parallel as they provide complementary information essential to the allocation of costs to types of service. • Gather data on fixed asset stocks using the Fixed Asset Stock Approach (if this approach is also selected). • Enter the financial data into the WASH accounts database: – Create a data collection tool or define the structure of the database and data records in a way that facilitates regular, ongoing maintenance; and – Code all data entries using WASH accounts classification codes. • Reconcile the data, identify information gaps, and recommend/conduct any supplementary surveys. 2.3.1 Rationale To date, most financial tracking initiatives have focused on financial flows. This often originates from an emphasis on tracking public financial flows, as public budgets typically distinguish between “recurrent” expenditure and “development” expenditure (i.e. capital investment). As a result, data on development budgets from public agencies’ accounts are often used to provide an estimate of government capital investment. This Guidance Document argues that collecting data on fixed asset stocks, alongside data on financial flows, is important to gain better understanding of the overall value of assets. However, this is often difficult to achieve due to data deficiencies. It is therefore proposed that collecting data on fixed asset stocks should be attempted only if WASH accounts based on financial flows have already been computed at least once, and data sources have been well mapped in advance. Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks. This note provides the rationale for using the Fixed Asset Stock Approach as a complement to the Financial Flows Approach, and gives additional guidance on how this approach can be applied. It also refers to Brazil’s experience in doing so. 2.3.2 Methodologies for collecting data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks Collecting information on financial flows can be done through two approaches: • The Financing Type Approach consists of tracking flows from each financing unit to estimate the amount of money allocated to the sector and aggregate the estimates by financing type; and • The Cost-based Approach consists of tracking expenditures on different services to estimate what is being spent, and deriving total expenditure figures by aggregating the expenses by type of cost. The Financing Type Approach answers questions such as, “What are the main financing units for the sector,” and “What has been spent?” In most cases, this is likely to be the most straightforward approach to tracking public financial flows, as many public entities acting as financing units have a budget allocation for the sector and should be able to report on it. The WASH accounts team should seek to collect data on financing units’ actual expenditure from their financial reports and the data sources indicated above. They should also collect revenue data from service providers’ cash flow statements. This approach alone is often not sufficient, however, 24 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative when seeking to track how funds are spent—their distribution between water and sanitation, for example—or to gather information on certain sources of finance such as household spending. For the reasons stated above, it is often necessary to combine the Financing Type Approach with a Cost-based Approach to evaluate the costs of providing services. This should be done based on the proposed TrackFin typology of costs, distinguishing at a minimum between capital expenditure (including large maintenance costs, which should be accounted for as a separate item), operating costs, and minor maintenance expenditure. Combining the two approaches improves the quality of information and facilitates the level of detail required to create WASH accounts capable of responding to key policy questions. An alternative approach, consisting of collecting data on fixed asset stocks, is referred to as the Fixed Asset Stocks Approach. This method estimates the value of existing asset stocks in the sector and is in line with the System of National Accounts, although potentially more difficult to apply. Data for this approach also need to be obtained at the level of service providers, focusing on their assets (and potentially liabilities) rather than on their revenue and expenditure. These approaches and the way they may be combined are presented schematically in Fig. 7 below. Figure 7. Methodologies for estimating expenditure in the WASH sector FIXED ASSET STOCK APPROACH Fixed asset stock values COMBINED APPROACH Calculate national WASH expenditure and allocate by: Geographic regions WASH uses Expenditure type Estimate national WASH expenditure FINANCING TYPE APPROACH Funding from financing units allocated by financing types COST-BASED APPROACH Expenditure of service providers for providing the service FINANCIAL FLOWS When estimating financial flows, it is important to use the same accounting approach and common terminology for the financing types and costs. This will ensure data comparability not only across activities, years and countries, but also against other economic aggregates such as gross domestic product.1 The Guidance Document recommends that data should be collected on actual financial flows, using a cash flow accounting method for both costs and revenue. The rationale for doing so is discussed in more detail in Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies. When using the Financing Type Approach, it is also essential to clarify whether budgeted flows or actual flows are to be collected. The Guidance Document recommends that, where possible, actual flows should be collected; this will build up the most accurate picture of what is actually spent, and allow comparison with costs incurred. Some methodological challenges can potentially be encountered, as outlined below. Whichever methodology is used, the types of financial flows being tracked must be clearly recorded if comparisons are to be made. 1 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a financial flow indicator: GDP estimates the total value of goods and services produced in a country based on production and consumption expenditure. It indicates the total monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country’s borders in a specific time period (usually a year). It includes all private and public consumption, government outlays, investments and exports less imports that occur within a defined territory. It is derived from expenditure figures reported in the National Accounts. Service areas 25Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Potential challenge: Tracking actual vs. budgeted expenditure • When using the Financing Type Approach, different financial flows can be recorded, ranging from committed or budgeted expenditure to actual expenditure on the ground. Although budgetary information may be easier to collect (particularly for transfers from public institutions), it is preferable to obtain actual expenditure amounts for all types of financial flows tracked using the Financing Type Approach. This allows comparison between different funding sources (including with funding provided by households, for which only actual figures are likely to be available) and provides a more accurate representation of expenditure in the sector. It also facilitates the reconciliation of total financial flow information, using both the Financing Type Approach and the Cost-based Approach. • If obtaining actual expenditure information is proving challenging, it may be possible to estimate it based on budgeted amounts and estimated percentages for actual budget spending based on past experience. This could be complemented with qualitative and quantitative assessment of specific programmes or investments to evaluate the difference between budgeted amounts and actual spending. In the longer term, tracking multiple types of financial flows in parallel may be useful to measure efficacy in spending. This is not an immediate objective of the TrackFin exercise, however, and the need to maintain multiple data sets could lead to complexities. Financing allocated to the sector may not always translate into actual services consumed, due to losses along the way. Ideally, these losses need to be quantified. The TrackFin initiative could potentially help quantify amounts that are budgeted or allocated but that do not result in service delivery. The following methodological notes provide additional guidance on applying these approaches and the associated data needs: • Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies • Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach • Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach • Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks 2.3.3 Tasks to be undertaken 2.3.3.1 Identify data sources and define data collection methods The first task is to identify what data should be collected, and in what detail, to achieve the allocation of expenditure to specific categories. Before starting, it is important to understand Methodological Notes 3 to 6, which provide detailed guidance on methods and data sources to estimate different financing types, costs and fixed asset stocks. When collecting data, the WASH accounts team should adopt a combined approach, looking for aggregated and comprehensive sources but combining this with collection of more detailed data from the source. Based on an initial review of available data, the WASH accounts team will need to prepare questionnaires and pro-forma documents for data collection. The TrackFin Secretariat can make some examples available on request. For the purpose of pilot testing the Guidance Document, a simple data collection tool in Excel format was developed, based on the software used to prepare Health Accounts. During the piloting, it was found that standard spreadsheets could be used as guides to develop country-specific data collection tools. In Brazil and Morocco, the WASH accounts team developed their own tailor-made Excel spreadsheet to reflect data availability at the country level. This was done to minimize the need for retreatment of the data. However, the data gathering exercise entailed the collection of a large number of financial data items (up to 13,000 data items in the case of Morocco) and their compilation in multiple dimensions, which was challenging to handle in Excel. The TrackFin tool was used in Ghana—the country that had the least detailed data. Based on the pilot exercise and health sector experience, there are medium-term plans to develop an automated “data collection tool” to facilitate the compilation of WASH accounts over the course of several years. This will facilitate ongoing monitoring, as explained in more detail below. 26 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Developing a data collection tool for WASH accounts on the model of the Heath Accounts tools • Building on experience in the health sector, a data collection and analysis tool, similar to the Heath Accounts tools, will be developed in the coming years. This could be used to prepare WASH accounts on a regular basis with a minimum of external support. The health sector has developed two separate tools: a Health Accounts production and a Health Accounts analysis tool. These tools are now used by over 40 countries, and are valued for the systematic support they provide. The production and analysis tools can potentially be combined into a single tool. • Software similar to the Heath Accounts tools will be created to simplify the exercise, standardizing the data treatment and cutting down the costs of replicating the exercise annually. This tool will process information in different formats in different countries, but operators will need to assign codes to each type of data so that it can be processed for the production of the WASH accounts. If the same data formats are used in subsequent years, the need for data coding will be greatly reduced in successive iterations. • The tool will also help with coding different types of flows, avoiding double counting, visualizing how financial flows are distributed between different financing types or financing units, and producing summary tables and pivot tables of WASH accounts. It will also support proper traceability and accountability of the work underlying the figures, and can be used as a repository for the questionnaires and pro-forma documents for data collection that have been tailor-made for the country. One important data source is likely to be the National Statistics Office (NSO). It is important to verify whether the NSO already collects data on financing to WASH and if so, to understand the methodology it uses. Information gathered by NSOs can provide useful background information, and indicate whether or not the NSO has established systems for data-gathering from the WASH sector. Information gathered by the NSO has limitations, however. Firstly, the SNA focuses on one main aspect of national expenditure, namely the creation of value in production processes. Therefore, this information can principally be used to estimate service providers’ costs and revenue. Secondly, the information gathered through the National Accounts system is likely to be difficult to understand and interpret. It uses terminology and concepts that WASH sector actors may not be familiar with, and the information is unlikely to provide the level of detail required to support policy-making at sector level. Nonetheless, engaging the NSO is important in order to better understand their methodologies for gathering data, and influence how they conduct regular surveys (for example, on household expenditure on WASH). This should facilitate the collection of accurate data and ensure NSO involvement in the recurrent preparation of WASH accounts. Other important sources of information are the main service providers and financing units in the country. The team should be able to collect primary information on expenditure patterns from these sources. It may also be possible to obtain data from an existing sector monitoring and information system, as was the case in Brazil through the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). This has been in existence for 20 years and compiles data on a very large number of service providers throughout the country (see Box 10 for more detail). Data for the Financing Type and Cost-based Approaches should be identified in parallel. To help create the database, the WASH accounts team should identify the main data sources from which information on expenditure can be extracted. Building an inventory of data sources can help keep track of the core data sets available, and identify whether information is missing or additional investigation, such as household surveys, is required. For each type of data, it is useful to collect the type of information indicated in Box 9 below. Box 9. Building a repository of data sources For each data source, it is important to gather the following metadata (i.e. data that describe and provide information about other data). This will assist in keeping track of where the data came from, how they were collected, and clarify what they include, so as to provide a basis for replicating the exercise in successive years. • Name of data source • Administration/institution/origin of the source • Type of data source (registers, business surveys) • Method of collection (administrative source, statistical full-scope or sample survey; national source versus standardized international survey) • Availability of data (years of data available) • Concept of the measuring units (costs, expenditures, turnover) • Variation in the methodology used to estimate data over time • Data reliability bands, i.e. how reliable is the data? Is the methodology to compile the data traceable? This can be assessed with a scoring system. 27Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Where it is obvious that no reliable “hard” data is available, the WASH accounts team will need to make estimates to fill the gaps. It will also need to specify how these estimates can be refined in later iterations of the exercise. To that end, the data repository should clearly signal where estimates have been made for each type of data collected. Box 10 below presents the main type of data sources used in the countries where the methodology was piloted, and the methods proposed to estimate missing data. Data sources used by each country depended on the state of the monitoring and information system for the sector, and the availability of financial data. In all three countries, no information was readily available from the National Statistics Offices, but the TrackFin exercise provided a useful platform for WASH sector stakeholders to engage in dialogue with the NSO on ways of increasing WASH data availability. Box 10. Examples of data collection methods from the pilot exercise In Brazil, the WASH accounts team was able to rely on the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS), an online database that gathers economic and financial data on the WASH service provision from municipalities. The SNIS covers the whole country, but as the provision of data is voluntary, it currently contains data for approximately 89% of the municipalities for water services and 35% for sewage services. However, most municipalities that do not provide data are small and rural. This means that existing data accounts for 97.3% and 80.4% of the urban population for water and sanitation respectively. The SNIS has no systematic data on services in rural areas, particularly for smaller villages. For larger rural agglomerations, the data is usually aggregated with the urban sector. To allocate service providers’ expenditure in more detail, financial reports for the biggest WASH service providers were also collected. The annual report on public expenditure for “saneamento basico” (which includes water, sanitation and solid waste) prepared by the Ministry of Cities was also an important source of data, as was the Transparency Portal of the federal government. It contains systematic and detailed information on federal government expenditure on the WASH sector, at all levels of government, including on domestic transfers to sub-national governments, and regional and local public institutions and NGOs operating in the sector. Finally, the national household survey and household budget surveys of IBGE (the national statistics bureau) were used to estimate household self-expenditure. The TrackFin exercise helped identify potential improvements to those surveys, which IBGE was prepared to take on board at the end of the exercise. Data disaggregated between regions is available, which indicates that regional analysis is possible where resources are available. In Ghana, data availability was a key constraint for the exercise, as data are not readily available in any information system. Data had to be collected from each institution’s own system or reports, where these existed. The data obtained were usually available at the level of disaggregation required for analysis. The TrackFin exercise was therefore key to identifying data gaps and proposing measures to improve data collection in the sector. The exercise coincided with the rolling out of a central financial management system for the public sector—the Ghana Integrated Financial Management Information Systems (GIFMIS)—to improve tracking of government expenditure. One key issue identified during the exercise is that there is no specific code for water or sanitation in the system at present. The national consultant made a presentation to the GIFMIS Steering Committee on the development of the WASH Sector Information Systems, underlining the necessity of tracking government expenditure to WASH, and creating new GIFMIS codes to increase the potential for disaggregated tracking of WASH expenditure. In Morocco, the sector information system does not collect financial information from utilities. A questionnaire was therefore designed to collect primary data directly from the main utilities, public agencies and the ministries. Financial reports were also collected from these institutions. It was not possible to collect data from smaller municipalities not served by ONEE (the main national utility) or a private concessionaire. These small municipalities provide the service directly, or through a CBO. As a result, data on rural WASH was largely missing. For the next exercise, it was proposed to conduct a survey from a sample of municipalities to fill the gap. There is also no consolidated information on international donor funding, so in the next exercise, a questionnaire for donors could be developed to acquire further detail on financing types. Box 9. Building a repository of data sources, continued Regarding expenditure data, it will be important to record the level of disaggregation possible for the different data sources, in order to answer the following questions: • Can expenditure be assigned to categories of providers or financing types and units? • Can expenditure be assigned to categories of WASH services? • Can expenditure be allocated by type (for example to differentiate between investment costs, operating and maintenance, or large capital maintenance costs)? 28 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Once data sources and categories are identified, and before starting data collection, the WASH accounts team should prepare an interim report, summarizing key findings from Steps 1, 2.1 and 2.2, for submission to the TrackFin champion and the national stakeholder group. This report should ideally be presented at a meeting of the national stakeholder group where in-depth discussions on data availability, constraints, and methods to fill data gaps can take place prior to engaging in any data collection exercises. A proposed outline for the interim report can be found on the TrackFin website. This report should contain the following information: • Definition of the scope of WASH accounts (the duration, geographic boundaries, and the WASH services for which financial flows will be tracked); • Identification of key actors and financial flows in the WASH sector, and the associated map of financial flows; • The classifications of WASH uses, actors and financial flows; • An overview of potentially available data sources; • Definition of specific estimation methods to value financial flows and fixed asset stocks, with the identification of potential methodological issues; • A preliminary list of the WASH accounts tables and indicators to be prepared; and • Possible implementation considerations that may affect the preparation of the WASH accounts. 2.3.3.2 Collect data, create database, and categorize financial flows The third task entails creating a database of WASH financial data based on the initial investigation. Once the list of data sources is complete and the methodologies to be applied are clearer, the WASH accounts team should create a database to house all available data. Its structure should facilitate ongoing maintenance. The team should then collect financial flow data and enter it into the database, starting with the approach likely to generate the most comprehensive data set – i.e. the approach for which data availability is greatest and access the easiest. Other approaches can then be introduced at a later stage to fill gaps and gather complementary information where greater detail is needed for policy analysis. To estimate financial flows, both the Financing Type and the Cost-based Approaches will need to be applied in parallel, as some data may only be available based on cost, whereas other data may be more readily available through examination of funding sources, expressed as expenditure. Ideally, the WASH accounts team should try to collect cost information from each service provider. If this is not possible, for example in circumstances where countries have large numbers of service providers, it may be feasible to collect data from a sample of service providers and extrapolate from the results. To refine initial estimates, the data collection process needs to be iterative. The database will be completed progressively through successive cycles, during which remaining data gaps can be filled and estimates reconciled as more data becomes available. Data collection must be carefully planned to avoid burdening data providers with overwhelming requests for data and related tasks. When data entry is complete, WASH accounts classification codes should be assigned to all entries to enable identification of the following: • The financing unit from which the flow originated; • The service provider receiving the funds; • The WASH services it funded, the intended use, and in which geographic area; and • The costs that were covered by this financial flow. More guidance can be found in Methodological Notes 3 to 6 on how to allocate spending to the different categories—for example to estimate spending on a particular use, or a category of spending such as household expenditure on self-supply. 29Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 2.3.3.3 Triangulate and reconcile the data collected The final activity consists of reconciling the different data sets by combining them to refine the allocation of spending to different categories. If significant gaps are found between the results of the two different approaches to capturing financial flow information, further investigation is required to identify estimation errors or missing flows. Potential reasons for this gap are identified in Box 11 below. This may require supplementary information gathering from primary data sources, applying estimates, or using cost allocation keys to estimate data. Box 11. Reconciling differences between the Cost-based Approach and the Financing Type Approach As different data sources are used in the two approaches, the total expenditure calculated is bound to be somewhat different. If this gap seems significant after initial data computation, it is essential to identify potential reasons for the gap in order to reduce sources of error and arrive at the best estimate of total sector expenditure. Factors that could explain differences at the provider level between financial flows received (cash inflows) and costs / expenditures (cash outflows) are as follows: • Variations in the net cash balance between the beginning and end of the period. This is a normal difference for which correction is not possible. The difference might come, for example, from the expenditure or repayment of a loan. More guidance on the treatment of loans is available in Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies. • Missing data, or inadequacy in the estimation methods used. The methods for estimating costs and financing types have been designed for consistency. The data sources may not, however, provide the figures in the way envisaged by the method, which may create false variations between the two approaches: – In the Financing Type Approach, the value considered for FT1 Tariffs for Service Provided, should be the amount of funds actually collected, rather than the gross revenue billed—which is what appears in the profit and loss account of the service provider. If only the gross revenue as billed is available, these figures should be adjusted by increasing or decreasing the balance of accounts receivable. – In the Cost-based Approach: ° Data for current capital expenditure on works in progress may be missing from the Investment Costs category (C1). Indeed, available data might only include expenditure on completed works, especially if estimates are based on the value of the completed asset in the balance sheet; ° Depreciation and amortization of fixed assets should not be included in the Investment Costs category (C1); and ° Data on Financial Costs (C4), which include capital repayments, interest payments and dividends, may not be available. • Double counting of some flows. As indicated in the Challenge Box in Section 2.2.2 above on financing units, a potential difficulty is avoiding the double counting of financial flows, particularly when resources are channelled through several financing units. More guidance can be found in Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach Finally, as already indicated, some degree of estimation will be necessary (see Box 12 below) or additional data gathering required. In the event of the latter, the WASH accounts team should make a request to the national stakeholder group, as additional budget may be required. Assumptions should be tested, possibly by enquiring further into the cost structure of the service provider. All estimation methods and assumptions should be clearly presented in metadata attached to the final results; they should be justified and well documented. Transparency is a key part of WASH accounts development, and provides clearer understanding of how the data was compiled. It also facilitates subsequent compilation rounds. 30 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 12. Filling data gaps: Making assumptions and using allocation keys In some cases, data will not be available to comprehensively estimate a category of WASH accounts. In these cases, estimation methodologies should be proposed, together with recommendations on obtaining more accurate information in the next iteration of the exercise. It may be necessary to use other kinds of information, such as physical information, to derive “allocation keys” for estimating the breakdown of financial flows. If, for example, there is no information on the distribution of expenditure across WASH services for a particular actor, the distribution of its activities can be used as the “key” for allocating expenditure. Making assumptions may also be necessary where insufficient information is available. Estimating the allocation of software costs (i.e. costs associated with infrastructure development such as project preparation, capacity building, training, or community mobilization and behavioural change activities) through the activities of a service provider can be difficult when only its total expenditure is known. It may be necessary to make an assumption about the amounts that should be attributed to each kind of support activity. Support costs may not, however, be directly linked to overall expenditure on a service. Typically, for a public provider of rural WASH services, support costs as a percentage of total costs tend to be higher for sanitation than for water supply. This is because households are increasingly expected to invest in sanitation themselves rather than receiving a subsidy, which means that the support costs borne by the public party may represent a higher share of their total investment than for water. Public investment in water, particularly for capital expenditure, is still very much the norm. Using small-scale studies and extrapolating from these to the rest of the population: In some cases, the results of a small-scale study can be used to estimate the data for a particular component. For example, a survey on the allocation of NGO expenditure can be used more broadly to cover this component in WASH accounts, as NGO expenditure and allocation is usually not known in any detail. This approach does carry risks, however, as the selected sample may not be representative of all NGOs in the country. It is therefore important to document the methods employed and any potential biases from such methods. This approach can be used for households, NGOs or CBOs in a variety of areas where a separate accounting mechanism for WASH expenditure does not exist. 31Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 3 Step 3 – Analyse data and report findings This section sets out how the WASH accounts and associated indicators should be compiled, and provides guidance on how the data can be interpreted and used for policy-making. 3.1 Compile WASH accounts and indicators The WASH accounts and indicators can be compiled only after the data has been collected. Step 3.1 – Tasks to be undertaken • Identify, from the comprehensive list of potential WASH accounts tables and indicators, those most relevant to the country’s policy questions; • Compile WASH accounts tables and verify their coherence; • Calculate WASH accounts indicators; and • Prepare an Annex to the WASH accounts report. 3.1.1 Create the WASH accounts tables and indicators The WASH accounts team should now construct a number of tables, presenting the information obtained in a format that can be easily understood and used by policy-makers. Taken together, these tables form the WASH accounts. Comparable indicators can be derived from these tables. The TrackFin methodology proposes a number of standard tables that can address most policy needs. Their chief purpose is to provide responses to the fundamental policy questions defined at the start of the exercise. These are: • What is the total expenditure in the WASH sector? • How are funds distributed to the different WASH services and expenditure types? • Who pays for WASH services and how much do they pay? • What entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector? All countries taking part in the TrackFin initiative should preferably use a basic set of common WASH accounts tables and indicators, created in a similar format to facilitate international comparison. Depending on their policy needs and the information available, countries may choose to prepare fewer tables or to present more detailed information on aspects relevant to their own priorities. Table 3 below presents the set of tables required to obtain a comprehensive national picture of WASH financing. The tables required as a minimum are highlighted in bold text. Table WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and use Table WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and provider Table WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH provider and financing type Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and financing type Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by WASH service and financing unit Table WA 7 (PxFU) – WASH expenditure by WASH provider and financing unit Table WA 8 (FTxFU) – WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit Table WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider Table WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and main WASH service Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider Table 3. Recommended WASH accounts tables 32 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative WASH accounts indicators are a set of key headline figures derived from the tables. They provide the core information in a quicker and more digestible way, useful for easy assimilation and widespread dissemination of the results. Box 13 below presents key WASH accounts indicators that can be calculated from the tables. They should be systematically estimated using the same parameters to ensure international comparability.1 Box 13. Key WASH accounts indicators 1. Total WASH sector expenditure at the national level 2. Total WASH expenditure per capita at the national level 3. Total WASH expenditure in the country as a percentage of GDP (This can be compared to the total health expenditure as a percentage of GDP) 4. Expenditure on sanitation as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 5. WASH expenditure in the urban sector as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 6. Public expenditure on WASH as a percentage of total public expenditure (Public expenditure includes funding from national, regional and local authorities, bilateral and multilateral donors for all domestic public transfers, and international public transfers and public loans) 7. User expenditure as a percentage of total WASH expenditure (the sum of FT1 Tariffs, and FT2 User self-expenditure) 8. Domestic public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 9. International public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 10. Total maintenance and operating costs as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Further indicators can be derived based on country needs, which are presented in Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators. Countries may select those most representative of their needs. Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators. This contains the actual tables, explaining in detail how they are created and for what purposes they can be used. 3.1.2 Select appropriate tables and verify data consistency The WASH accounts team should firstly determine which tables from the proposed full list it plans to produce (see Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators). This will depend on their relevance to national policy requirements, and on the available data. International benchmarking should also be a key consideration when selecting appropriate tables. Data then needs to be extracted from the database (Step 2.3) to complete the tables. It may be helpful to begin with the most disaggregated tables, then move on to more aggregated levels. One major advantage of developing data collection and analysis software, as described in Section 2.3.3.1, is that it facilitates the creation of tables automatically from the database, hence saving a considerable amount of time. Finally, the WASH accounts team should verify that the data presented in the tables is robust and internally consistent. It is important to check points such as the following: • Totals should be consistent across all tables. The total expenditure on consumption should also hold for provision and financing; • Totals reported should be equal to the sum of the constituent parts; • Values for similar items of expense from the same classification should be consistent across tables; and • The indicators are plausible in relation to a) the total expenditure figures, b) the population (per capita value), c) GDP, and d) historical values, if there are several time series of WASH accounts. Throughout this procedure, the compilation process and methods used to estimate the figures shown in the tables should be reported to enable assessment of data quality. An annex to the final report should clearly address how estimations were made and how the tables were constructed (see Step 4.2.1). Documenting the metadata and data sources in an annex to the tables is essential if they are to be appropriately interpreted and used. At a minimum, background information should include the data sources, how they were validated (especially where there are multiple sources), the hypothesis used when evaluating data (method of accounting 1 Regarding exchange rates, the team should convert the results into dollars and use the World Bank official exchange rate (average for the period) available on the World DataBank. 33Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level chosen), the reasoning behind the selection of data used in the estimation, and the procedures applied to render the data usable. 3.2 Prepare WASH accounts reports Step 3.2 – Tasks to be undertaken • Prepare the WASH accounts final report: – Gather information on the sector context (access data, institutional and policy background) – Summarize the methodology used – Summarize key findings from WASH accounts using graphs and tables to answer the four main questions and any additional policy questions – Interpret WASH accounts data to answer policy questions • Present the WASH accounts findings to the national stakeholder group for validation 3.2.1 Rationale Data are not information. In addition to producing tables and indicators, it is important to analyse the data in relation to background information on the WASH sector. This will ensure that the figures derived are correctly interpreted. If it is to be used effectively by policy-makers, the information from WASH accounts must be concise, meaningful, and directly relevant to policy purposes. Table 4 below summarizes how elements of WASH accounts tables and indicators can address policy questions and support policy development. A discussion follows on how these data can be used and interpreted to answer the key policy questions of the exercise. WASH accounts Tables (T) WASH accounts Indicators (I) Policy questions answered by these data 1. What is the total expenditure in the sector? Total from Table WA 10 (CxS) and Table WA 5 (SxFT) Comparison of total WASH expenditure estimated from the Financing Type and Cost-based Approaches • Total WASH sector expenditure (at the national level) • Total WASH expenditure per capita (at the national level) • Total WASH expenditure in the country as a percentage of GDP (this can be compared to the total health expenditure as a percentage of GDP) • What is total funding to WASH? Is current funding sufficient? • What is the trend in funding? Is it increasing or decreasing? • How does the level of funding compare to countries with a similar level of income, or with neighbouring countries? • How does the level of funding compare with other social sectors such as health or education? 2. How are funds distributed to the different WASH services and expenditure types? Table WA 1 (SxA) - WASH expenditure by WASH service area (urban/rural/central) • Expenditure on (rural/urban) sanitation as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Expenditure on (rural/urban) water as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • WASH expenditure in the urban sector as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • WASH expenditure in the rural sector as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • What is the urban/ rural, water/sanitation split in spending? • Is spending allocated to the WASH sub-sectors that need it most? • Is funding going to areas that need it most? Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and use • Total expenditure per type of service use • Which types of use are benefiting most from the financial resources allocated to the WASH sector? Table WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and main WASH service • Maintenance and operating costs as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Investment costs as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Is sufficient spending allocated to operations and maintenance as opposed to investment? Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider • Total WASH asset stocks per capita • What is the stock of fixed assets for WASH services and for each sub-sector? • Is the fixed asset stock being increased or run down? Table 4. Link between WASH accounts information and policy questions 34 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative WASH accounts Tables (T) WASH accounts Indicators (I) Policy questions answered by these data 3. Who pays for WASH services and how much? Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and financing type • Public expenditure on WASH as a percentage of total public expenditure • User expenditure as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Domestic public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • International public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • By whom is each type of service financed? • What is the financial burden on households? Are policies and utilization of public funds effective at leveraging private investment, including from households? • What is the share of public vs. private expenditure? • What is the share of donor contribution? How much is donor spending in relation to the total government budget? • Are government and donor commitments on WASH financing respected? 4. Which entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector? Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and financing unit • Focus on WASH expenditure by financing units that channel funds • How is funding in the WASH sector channelled? • What percentage of WASH public expenditure is channelled via local governments and how can they be supported? Table 4. Link between WASH accounts information and policy questions, continued 3.2.2 The WASH accounts final report To conclude the exercise, the WASH accounts team should produce the final report, presenting the results systematically in response to key policy questions and reform needs. A draft Executive Summary should be included. The report should also provide careful documentation of data sources, classifications, and the methodology used to estimate the results, so that differences observed between countries or in one country over time can be understood and put in the appropriate context. The final report should cover the context of the exercise, national motivation for undertaking it, and its specific sectoral challenges, but crucially must remain concise and to the point. It should not exceed 40 pages, excluding annexes. The findings should be summarized principally in tables and graphs. To the extent possible, final reports should use a similar format across countries to facilitate comparison and use of the data at both the national and international level. The WASH accounts final report should contain the following elements: • An introduction setting out the objectives of the WASH accounts and the policy questions the exercise aims to answer. • Country background information. This should present the general socioeconomic characteristics of the country, as well as key data on access to WASH services. It provides the context for interpreting and understanding the WASH accounts findings. • An overview of the water and sanitation sector in the country, setting out the institutional and financing arrangements and mapping the main actors and financial flows. To place the findings in context, it should also present major policy issues such as recent reforms and those still required, current policies, and the institutional framework. • The methodology used to compute the WASH accounts tables, including information on the scope of the exercise, the geographic range, sub-sectors involved, and number of years covered by the study. It should address the classifications used to generate the WASH accounts and the approaches used, highlighting the main methodological choices made for data collection and analysis. • The findings, which are the heart of the report. These should cover the main indicators calculated from the WASH accounts data, translating the core quantitative findings from the tables into qualitative information in order to provide answers to the main policy questions. • Policy recommendations, extracting the main policy implications from the findings and formulating recommendations for future exercises in the country. Guidance on future applications of the methodology should also be provided. The annexes to the report should contain the following: • The full WASH accounts tables; • Detailed information on the data collection and estimation methods used; 35Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level • Documentation of the WASH accounts data sources and any methodological information essential for correctly interpreting the results; and • Lessons learned from the exercise: Feedback from the WASH accounts team on the implementation of TrackFin, focusing on the methodology used but also on organizational and procedural aspects, for example the cost and resource requirements of the exercise. In addition, an executive summary should be produced, summarizing the main findings. This should be a stand- alone document of maximum ten pages that can be shared with high level decision-makers. The WASH accounts draft final report and draft executive summary should be presented at a national stakeholder group meeting. The meeting should validate the results and help clarify the main policy findings. This will provide the basis for engaging in broader dissemination of the results, as detailed in Section 3.3 below. Outlines for the final WASH accounts report and the Executive Summary are available on the TrackFin website. These include the summary findings from the three countries where the exercise was piloted. 3.3 Disseminate the policy analysis Step 3.3 – Tasks to be undertaken • Prepare policy briefs for decision-makers focusing on their specific policy questions; and • Communicate the findings to the wider sector and a broad general audience. Once the results have been validated and the key policy messages emerging from the analysis have been extracted, the WASH accounts team should finalize the Executive Summary. Short policy briefs (maximum of four pages) that extract key information in response to the main policy issues expressed in Step 1 should be prepared. This is a critical measure for conveying the results of the exercise to policy-makers and other sector actors in a clear and easily understandable way. Each policy brief could focus on a specific question, such as, “Does the geographical balance of WASH sector expenditure needs rebalancing?” “Does the country need to spend more on sanitation?” or, “How can additional funding from users be leveraged?” Writing these policy briefs will require a solid understanding of the sector context and the key policy decisions being debated. This information and analysis can be used at the following stages of the policy process, as discussed in more detail in the Policy Note available on the TrackFin website: • Advocacy and attracting funds • Defining financing strategies • Budgeting and planning • Monitoring • Regular tracking of funding, commitments, and targets • Benchmarking against other sectors or other countries • Coordinating donor aid. These policy briefs should be circulated as widely as possible across the WASH sector, to decision-makers, high level members of government, WASH advocates, NGOs, and international organizations in the country. This wide dissemination is crucial to ensuring that the findings of the WASH accounts are understood, and also to raise awareness, gain support, and create future demand for such financial information. In addition, countries should aim to make the collected data available online (downloadable in Excel format, for example) so that it can be used for further analysis by sector actors such as NGOs, think tanks, or policy research institutions. This can enhance transparency in the sector and provide insights to inform policy. 36 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 4 Step 4 – Prepare for the next WASH accounts Step 4. – Tasks to be undertaken • Make recommendations for the next exercise in terms of: scope and years to be covered; timing for the next data collection phase; testing other estimation methods; additional data collection; and possible improvements to existing information systems; • Plan for the next stage: seek funding for the exercise and ways of building the capacity of the WASH accounts team; and • Contribute to improving the methodology by responding to the feedback questionnaire: – Assess and comment on the suitability of the proposed classifications that define the WASH sector and its financing; – Assess and comment on the feasibility of collecting the kind of data required; – Assess the methodology proposed to value the financial flows and fixed asset stocks; and – Suggest improvements in respect of the classifications and the methodology. 4.1 Rationale for further rounds Maximum value can be gained from the WASH accounts exercise when many countries apply the methodology and repeat it on a regular basis. The end goal of WASH accounts is not to produce data, which in itself has limited value, but to ensure that the data generated are transformed into policy insights and used to strengthen policy-making. Using the data is crucial, especially in the first exercise, to “make the case” for WASH accounts, demonstrate its pertinence to sector decision-making, and to encourage national decision-makers to keep producing WASH data over successive years. Monitoring expenditure over time can also help to promulgate WASH accounts in other countries. Involving more countries in the production of WASH accounts on a regular basis will benefit all, as it provides the basis for benchmarking results and increasing understanding of differences in data analysis and outcomes. Using WASH accounts to strengthen policy will also pave the way for institutionalizing the process. This will only take place if there is routine, government-mandated and country-owned production and utilization of a set of WASH expenditure indicators. Fig. 8 below is based on lessons from the health sector, and illustrates how producing and using WASH accounts on a regular basis can generate a virtuous cycle. In order for this to happen, three key structural factors need to be in place: • A clear governance structure for the WASH accounts exercise (including formal and informal arrangements), setting out who is responsible for what in respect of each WASH accounts activity. If the exercise is conducted by consultants, there has to be continuity between the exercises. One institution should be responsible for leading, planning, supervising, and providing quality insurance for the WASH accounts. This institution should also hold the database where data from all previous exercises is recorded and WASH accounts tables computed. The national stakeholder group and WASH Account team should be established as permanent bodies and meet on a regular basis. • Staff capacity: Members of the WASH accounts team should be trained to implement the methodology, either by former members of the team (if there is staff turnover), international consultants, or nationals of other countries that have already implemented the methodology. This should include a “learning-by-doing” component on how to use the data collection tool. • Financing for WASH accounts production, and the dissemination and translation of findings: Financing for WASH accounts activities should be secured by the lead institution. Countries may seek funding from development partners, or ask the TrackFin Secretariat for support in this endeavour. 37Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Source: Authors. Adapted from World Bank (2011), Harnessing National Health Accounts to Strengthen Policymaking – A Compendium of Case Studies. Demand and use of data • As country leaders make tough trade-offs to ensure an equitable and efficient allocation of scarce WASH resources, there is a critical need for an evidence base. • Regular use of WASH accounts findings in policy-making contributes to more sophisticated policy analysis. Production, data management, and quality assurance of WASH accounts • The adaptation and integration of sector monitoring and information systems to collect financial data will enable the production of WASH accounts in a more sustainable manner, in comparison to one-off “manual” data collection. Translation of data and dissemination of specific policy analysis • WASH accounts data have the most value when used to inform evidence-based financing decisions. • When an institution owns the translation process and champions key policy insights, it increases the likelihood that the answers WASH accounts data provide will be used to influence policy. Dissemination of findings • Making the collected data and findings available for analysis enhances transparency and, with experience, analysis and insights that inform policy. • Dissemination takes place at two stages: (1) when the WASH accounts tables are produced and (2) after the data has been translated into policy relevant briefs. STRUCTURAL FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PRODUCTION AND USE OF WASH ACCOUNTS • Governance structure and organization of WASH accounts production (who is responsible for what). • Capacity of institutions to plan and implement the WASH accounts activities. • Financing of WASH accounts activities. 34 1 2 Figure 8. Framework for institutionalizing the production and use of WASH accounts 4.2 Formulate recommendations for the next WASH accounts in the country To facilitate the regular production of WASH accounts, the team should initiate the subsequent iteration as soon as an ongoing exercise is completed. It is crucial to maintain momentum if capacity and experience are not to be lost. Based on their experience, the WASH accounts team should formulate recommendations to the TrackFin champion and the national stakeholder group on how to improve the process for the next exercise. It should advise on scope (by sub-sector) and duration, and whether new data from additional actors or financing types should be gathered, potentially through ad hoc surveys. This could include household surveys, or surveys at the local government level, to collect more detailed estimates on funding allocation and spending. Additional data might be obtainable from existing sector data collection tools, surveys or information systems. This requires working with the partner institutions responsible for these tools or data collection methods. Data could also be collected at a more disaggregated level. Expenditure on repayable financing from international donors, for example, can be divided into concessionary and non-concessionary repayable financing if extra data on the nature of each loan can be collected from primary sources. 38 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 4.2.1 Plan for the next stage At the end of the exercise, the TrackFin champion and TrackFin Focal Point should come together to plan the next iteration, based on guidance from the national stakeholder group. It is essential to take advantage of the momentum created by the final report and policy briefs, and to maximize the attention of policy-makers and development partners to the results they show. Fundraising is a critical aspect of planning the next stage. The planning should happen at the same time as the dissemination of findings, so that the national Focal Point can follow up rapidly with interested funders, including the national government, and present them with a proposal for a future exercise. The WASH accounts team, under the supervision of the Focal Point, should draft a budget and work plan for the next stage. This should include capacity building for the team. The WASH accounts team should advise on the timing for the next data collection phase. New data collection may take place every one or two years depending on what is most appropriate for the policy and budgeting cycles, and taking account of habitual timing for the release of key data, such as national household surveys or census data. 4.2.2 Provide feedback on the methodology proposed The WASH accounts team should also complete the feedback questionnaire, reporting on their experience with preparing WASH accounts and using this Guidance Document. This allows them to evaluate any methodological issues they have faced, and to suggest potential modifications to the methodology and classifications. Feedback is essential for the improvement of future exercises at the national level, but also to inform ongoing revisions to the methodology and Guidance Document at the international level. A feedback questionnaire is provided for countries to report on their experiences with the implementation of TrackFin and application of the methodology. 39Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems Objectives: This note presents existing international systems of classification of WASH-related products, services and activities. These have been used to develop the TrackFin classification system. The purpose of this Note is to increase the WASH accounts team’s understanding of data from National Statistics Offices, which often use these classifications. It also highlights areas requiring longer-term methodological refinement to better capture WASH activities at the level of detail needed to inform policy-making. In particular, it proposes a separate category for hygiene services for immediate use and subsequent further development in TrackFin exercises. MN 1.1. Existing WASH services classification systems This section presents a list of existing international classification systems, showing how they capture water, sanitation, and hygiene activities. There are three main international systems of classification used to categorize industries, activities, goods and services. These are described in Table 5 below. Classification Purpose CPC VERSION 2 (Central Product Classification) Classifies goods and services to help answer the question, “What is being consumed?” ISIC REV. 4 (International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities) Classifies service providers to help answer the question, “Who provides these goods and services?” COFOG (Classification of the Functions of Government) Classifies functions performed to ensure that these products are provided. There are also other functional classifications such as CEPA (Classification of Environment Protection Activities), which are less frequently used. Table 5. Summary of main international systems of classification of goods and services Table 6 – Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain below summarizes where the CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications correspond along the water and sanitation value chain. The nature of these classifications is clarified below the table, with an explanation of the codes most relevant to the WASH sector. The Central Product Classification (CPC) is a system used in national accounts to classify all goods and services based on their physical properties and intrinsic nature, and on their industrial origin. It is comprehensive, internationally recognized, and includes all economic activities. Its breakdown of activities into categories is not, however, a close match with WASH accounts’ needs. There is no clearly identified CPC category for sanitation and hygiene promotion services, although these may be aggregated into other “public service” categories, for example non-WASH education activities. In addition, services provided by government (i.e. public administrative functions) are classified on a highly aggregated basis. This prevents the identification of specific government functions. Learning from SEEA-Water: Simplified standard SEEA-Water tables use only two of the products related to water: CPC 18000 (natural water) and CPC 94100 (sewerage, sewage treatment and septic tank cleaning services). This could be because they track products produced by water and sanitation industries (ISIC 36 and 37) and consider that other products are produced by the construction industry. However, to track expenditure related to capital investments, it is essential to track water and sanitation-related construction services. The International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) is a United Nations system. It classifies economic data according to the type of activity carried out by an economic unit. An “industry” is defined as a set of production units engaged primarily in the same or similar productive economic activities. This classification examines only the activities undertaken and does not distinguish between them according to their legal status (i.e. whether the producers are governmental, non-governmental, or private). 40 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Va lu e c ha in CP C ( Ce nt ra l P ro du ct s C la ss ifi ca tio n) IS IC (I nt er na tio na l S ta nd ar d In du st ria l C la ss ifi ca tio n) CO FO G Co de De sc rip tio n Co de De sc rip tio n W ha t i t i nc lu de s Co de De sc rip tio n W at er su pp ly se rv ice s ( S1 ) 53 23 3 Da m s 42 90 Co ns tru cti on of ot he r c ivi l en gin ee rin g p ro jec ts 53 23 1 Aq ue du cts an d o th er w at er su pp ly co nd uit s, ex ce pt pip eli ne s 42 20 Co ns tru cti on of ut ilit y p ro jec ts 54 34 1 W at er w ell dr illi ng se rv ice s W at er w ell dr illi ng an d s ep tic sy ste m in sta lla tio n s er vic es 18 00 0 Na tu ra l w at er 36 00 W at er co lle cti on , t re at m en t an d s up ply Co lle cti on of ra in wa te r a nd w at er fr om va rio us so ur ce s s uc h a s riv er s, lak es , w ell s Pu rifi ca tio n o f w at er fo r w at er su pp ly pu rp os es De sa lin at ion of se a o r g ro un dw at er to pr od uc e w at er as th e pr inc ipa l p ro du ct 69 21 0 W at er di str ibu tio n t hr ou gh m ain s, ex ce pt st ea m an d ho t w at er (o n o wn ac co un t) Di str ibu tio n o f w at er th ro ug h m ain s 86 33 0 W at er di str ibu tio n s er vic es th ro ug h m ain s ( on a fee or co nt ra ct ba sis ) 69 23 0 W at er di str ibu tio n, ex ce pt th ro ug h m ain s ( on ow n ac co un t) Di str ibu tio n o f w at er by tr uc ks or ot he r m ea ns 86 35 0 W at er di str ibu tio n s er vic es , e xc ep t t hr ou gh m ain s ( on a fee or co nt ra ct ba sis ) Sa nit at ion se rv ice s (S 2) 54 34 2 Se pt ic sy ste m in sta lla tio n s er vic es 42 20 Co ns tru cti on of ut ilit y p ro jec ts W at er w ell dr illi ng an d s ep tic sy ste m in sta lla tio n s er vic es 94 12 0 Se pt ic ta nk em pt yin g a nd cl ea nin g s er vic es 37 00 Se we ra ge Co lle cti on of se wa ge by se we r s ys te m s o r s ew ag e t re at m en t fac ilit ies 94 11 0 Se we ra ge an d s ew ag e t re at m en t s er vic es Tre at m en t a nd di sp os al of se wa ge by se we r s ys te m s o r s ew ag e tre at m en t f ac ilit ies Ta bl e 6 . S im ila rit ie s b et we en CP C, IS IC an d CO FO G cla ss ifi ca tio ns al on g th e w at er an d sa ni ta tio n va lu e c ha in 41Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Va lu e c ha in CP C ( Ce nt ra l P ro du ct s C la ss ifi ca tio n) IS IC (I nt er na tio na l S ta nd ar d In du st ria l C la ss ifi ca tio n) CO FO G Co de De sc rip tio n Co de De sc rip tio n W ha t i t i nc lu de s Co de De sc rip tio n Un all oc at ed co ns tru cti on ac tiv iti es (f or bo th w at er an d sa nit at ion se rv ice s) (S 1 a nd S2 ) 53 25 1 Lo ca l p ipe lin es (w at er an d s ew er ag e) 42 20 Co ns tru cti on of ut ilit y p ro jec ts Co ns tru cti on of pi pe lin es an d l on g- dis ta nc e t ra ns po rt of w at er an d s ew ag e 53 25 3 Se wa ge an d w at er tr ea tm en t p lan ts Co ns tru cti on of se wa ge di sp os al pla nt s 54 24 1 Ge ne ra l c on str uc tio n o f lo ng -d ist an ce pi pe lin es Co ns tru cti on of pi pe lin es an d l on g- dis ta nc e t ra ns po rt of w at er an d s ew ag e 54 25 1 Ge ne ra l c on str uc tio n o f lo ca l p ipe lin es Co ns tru cti on of pi pe lin es an d l on g- dis ta nc e t ra ns po rt of w at er an d s ew ag e 54 25 3 Ge ne ra l c on str uc tio n o f s ew ag e s er vic es an d w at er tre at m en t p lan ts Su pp or t s er vic es (S 3) 91 12 3 Pu bli c a dm ini str at ive se rv ice s r ela te d t o h ou sin g a nd co m m un ity am en iti es 84 12 Re gu lat ion of ac tiv iti es th at pr ov ide he alt h c ar e, ed uc at ion , c ult ur al se rv ice s an d o th er so cia l s er vic es , ex clu din g s oc ial se cu rit y Pu bli c a dm ini str at ion of pr og ra m m es to in cre as e p er so na l we llb ein g: he alt h, ed uc at ion , c ult ur e, sp or t, re cre at ion , en vir on m en t, ho us ing , o r s oc ial se rv ice s Th is cla ss inc lud es : • A dm ini str at ion of po ta ble w at er su pp ly pr og ra m m es • A dm ini str at ion of w as te co lle cti on an d d isp os al op er at ion s 5.2 W as te wa te r m an ag em en t 6.3 W at er su pp ly Ta bl e 6 . S im ila rit ie s b et we en CP C, IS IC an d CO FO G cla ss ifi ca tio ns al on g th e w at er an d sa ni ta tio n va lu e c ha in (c on tin ue d) 42 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative There are two main categories relating to WASH activities, namely ISIC class 36 covering the collection, treatment and supply of water, and ISIC class 37 covering sewerage. These two categories are utilized by SEEA-Water in their Economic Accounts. While they are service-oriented, they do not capture the full range of activities involved in providing access to and delivery of water and sanitation services, such as construction of WASH infrastructure, or water resource management. Moreover, ISIC 36 does not separate water provided for domestic use from that provided for industrial use, or for irrigation canals, while ISIC 37 does not explicitly include faecal sludge management or hygiene promotion. Finally, activities under ISIC 84 (activities linked to collective government activities) are aggregated, so those specifically relating to the water and sanitation sector cannot be singled out in this system. Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is a classification of government expenditure according to purpose. It classifies transactions such as outlays on final consumption expenditure, intermediate consumption, gross capital formation, and capital and current transfers according to the function that the transaction serves. These COFOG categories allow further breakdown of the broad ISIC category in which water supply and sewage administration are included, i.e. ISIC 8412 (Public Administration). Four COFOG categories relate to water management in general: wastewater management, soil and ground water protection, environmental protection not elsewhere classified, and water supply. These COFOG categories refer to collective services of government (formulation and administration of government policy, the setting and enforcement of public standards, and the regulation, licensing or supervision of producers, as in the case of education and health). Other systems of classification of government environmental protection activities have been developed and could potentially be used. For example, Classification of Environmental Protection Activities (CEPA) was developed by Eurostat in cooperation with the United Nations to classify environmental protection activities, environmental protection products, and expenditures for environmental protection. These environmental protection activities are production activities in the sense of the SNA as they combine resources, such as equipment, labour, manufacturing techniques and information networks or products in order to create an output of goods or services. In the case of water, CEPA includes wastewater management and protection and remediation of soil, ground water and surface water. Learning from SEEA-Water: SEEA-Water uses the CEPA definition of wastewater management to classify expenditure for activities and measures aimed at preventing the pollution and protection of water through reductions in the release of wastewater into inland surface water and seawater. As a CEPA category does not exist for water management and exploitation, SEEA-Water has created this classification, which corresponds to ISIC 36 and part of ISIC 84. However, according to the UN Statistics Division, this classification is not greatly used in developing countries. MN 1.2. Approach to defining the TrackFin classification of services Existing international classification systems do not fully capture the reality of the WASH sector and hence have limited capacity to answer policy questions. CPC categories are too infrastructure-based, while ISIC categories do not explicitly include some services essential to developing countries, such as faecal sludge management. The TrackFin classification of water and sanitation services presented in Table 1 of the Guidance Document builds to the extent possible on existing classifications and definitions. It also seeks to better reflect the realities of providing water and sanitation services, particularly in developing countries. This classification covers the main activities alongside the WASH value chain, including hygiene. Table 1 also shows whether and to what extent the categories proposed for WASH accounts and those of international classification systems correspond. Water Resource Management activities directly relevant to water and sanitation services provision (S4 in the TrackFin classification) are not explicitly mentioned as a separate category in CPC, ISIC, and COFOG, which is why they are not shown as corresponding. 43Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level In the longer term, the WASH international community should examine whether a revised and more disaggregated classification of WASH services is needed to create even closer matches with the sector’s analytical and policy needs. If this long-term objective were pursued, the following limitations of the current TrackFin classification system would need to be addressed: • There is no internationally agreed definition and classification of hygiene services. Section MN 1.3 below presents the rationale for the proposed TrackFin classification but also identifies how it would need to be further developed in subsequent exercises; and • The list of support services (usually provided by government) is rather limited and needs to be further developed in the context of country needs. MN 1.3. Proposals for further developing the classification for hygiene services As indicated above, there is no internationally agreed definition for hygiene at present. Furthermore, none of the existing international classification systems identifies hygiene activities relating to water and sanitation as a specific product or service category. If hygiene financing is to be adequately tracked, this requires the development, adoption, and mainstreaming of specific classifications for hygiene products, service providers, and functions. During the TrackFin pilot phase, countries identified the need for a separate category of hygiene activities. In the earlier version of the Guidance Document, hygiene promotion had been designated under either sanitation or support services to WASH. The creation of a definition for hygiene and a list of hygiene related activities is therefore now proposed. Existing definitions of hygiene: WHO defines hygiene as “the conditions and practices that help to maintain health and prevent the spread of diseases”. In its Hygiene Framework, WaterAid defines hygiene as “personal and household practices such as handwashing, bathing, and management of stored water in the home, all aimed at preserving cleanliness and health” (WaterAid, 2012). This last definition is focused on household hygiene, however, whereas it should also encompass practices in the community and in public places, such as in schools and health facilities. Water Aid’s hygiene framework identifies various areas of hygiene behaviour that have a significant impact on the transmission of water and sanitation-related diseases. These are: • Safe disposal of human excreta (including that of children and infants); • Water source protection and use (from water source to transportation, storage, and point of use); • Personal hygiene (handwashing with soap at critical times, as well as body, face and clothes); • Food hygiene (cooking, washing, storing, preventing cross contamination); and • Domestic and environmental hygiene (disposal of solid waste and animal excreta, control of wastewater and rainwater, cleanliness of the house and its surroundings). In addition, other frameworks also include menstrual hygiene management as part of personal hygiene. Some of these areas fall outside the WASH sector, for example food hygiene, animal hygiene, and solid waste management. Some of these areas are already included in water or sanitation service classification systems, such as safe disposal of human excreta, and water source protection and use. The TrackFin methodology therefore proposes to clearly identify the scope of hygiene activities and their allocation between sub-sectors. The proposed list of activities falling within the “hygiene” category is as follows: • Hygiene promotion programmes by government or service providers, for households, communities and in public places such as schools and clinics: This includes hardware and software interventions, including handwashing campaigns, sanitation promotion and hygiene education, menstrual hygiene management, distribution of hygiene products, and chlorine distribution; and 44 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative • Personal and household-level hygiene activities related to water and sanitation: This includes handwashing, bathing, washing clothes and washing material/equipment (soap, tippy taps, bathroom); chlorine for point of use water treatment. This item was removed from the “water” category. Food hygiene, animal hygiene, and solid waste management are excluded from this category. Improving the definition of hygiene services will require further research and consultation, preferably conducted collaboratively by institutions involved in the provision of these services, with the aim of adopting and mainstreaming an international definition and classifications. 45Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types Objectives: This note presents existing internationally-accepted classification systems for WASH uses, actors and financing types that have been used as reference points for developing the TrackFin system. Classifications of WASH service use, service providers and financing units were adapted from SEEA-Water, while the classification of financing types is an adaptation from the OECD 3Ts (Tariffs, Taxes and Transfers). MN 2.1. Classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units This section covers the classifications used by SEEA-Water. These are based on internationally accepted statistical conventions, and were used as the basis for developing the TrackFin classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units. Classification of WASH service users: Existing international classification systems do not refer to water uses but rather to water users. This is the case of SEEA-Water, which classifies water users based on the ISIC classification system (see Table 6 – Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain for more detail). Table 7 below summarizes how WASH service users are classified in the SEEA-Water methodology. Categories of water service users in SEEA-Water Explanation and matching categories Specialized producers – intermediate consumption • ISIC 36 water producers • ISIC 37 sewerage services producers ISIC 36 and ISIC 37 producers are identified as users only if they themselves consume the water and sanitation services they produce Other producers (ISIC 1–3, 5–33, 41–43, 35, 38, 39, 45–99) – intermediate consumption Includes producers involved in other types of activity that consume water and sanitation for industrial or commercial purposes Households Domestic use General government • Can be disaggregated into central and local government Institutional use Rest of the world International users; for water supply and sanitation, this is not directly relevant Table 7. Classification of water services users in the SEEA-Water system Classification of WASH service providers: SEEA-Water classifies producers into “relevant ISIC categories, regardless of the kind of ownership, type of legal organization and mode of operation. Even when activities for water collection treatment and supply (ISIC 36) and sewerage (ISIC 37) are carried out by the government, they are therefore classified as far as possible in the specific division (ISIC 36 and 37).” It also shows in separate tables water and sewerage services self-provided by households, and water-related collective consumption services provided by government. Table 8 below sets out the different categories of water service providers used in SEEA-Water. Categories of water service providers Specialized producers: • ISIC 36 water producers • ISIC 37 sewerage service producers Other Producers (ISIC 1–3, 5–33, 41–43, 35, 38, 39, 45–99) Households (as producers for their own use) General government (as a producer of water-related collective consumption services) • Can be disaggregated into central and local government Table 8. Classification of water services providers in the SEEA-Water system 46 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Classification of WASH financing units: To identify the sources of financing, SEEA-Water refers to “financing sectors”. These are the entities actually bearing the cost, and are characterized by type of ownership, which includes: General Government, potentially disaggregated into central and local government; Not-for-profit institutions serving households; Corporations; Households; Rest of the world. These financing sectors are shown in Table 9 – Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system below. Categories of financing sectors General government • Can be disaggregated into central and local government Not-for-profit institutions serving households Corporations • Specialized producers: (ISIC 36 water producers; ISIC 37 sewerage service producers) • Other Producers (ISIC 1–3, 5–33, 41–43, 35, 38, 39, 45–99) Households Rest of the world Table 9. Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system In the same way, financing units in WASH accounts are classified by type of institutional sectors, as this provides the best response to policy questions on the origins and channelling of funds received by service providers. MN 2.2. Classification of WASH financing types This section presents two existing classification systems that identify financing types: the OECD 3Ts classification, which refers to financing types as “financing sources”, and SEEA-Water. The OECD 3Ts system was used as the principal basis for the TrackFin classification of financing types. WASH sector financing sources according to the OECD: the 3Ts Since the Camdessus report on water financing (Winpenny, 2003), the water sector has referred to three main sources of finance for the water sector as the “3Ts”, i.e. tariffs, taxes and transfers, to which must be added repayable financing sources. These sources of finance can be combined to cover the costs of water service provision, as summarized by the OECD in Fig. 9 below (OECD, 2010). Figure 9. Sources of finance for the WASH sector Source: (OECD, 2010), Innovative financing mechanisms for the water sector. Private funds Public funds WATER SERVICE PROVIDERS’ FINANCES COSTS Operating costs Maintenance costs Investment costs (rehabilitation and new) Financing gap REVENUE Tariffs Taxes Transfers REPAYABLE FINANCE Equity Bonds Commercial loans Concessionary (incl. grant element) Repayments Bridge the financing gap MARKET BASED REPAYABLE FINANCE 47Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level The OECD defines these sources of finance as follows: • Tariffs are funds contributed by WASH service users to obtain the services. Users generally make payments to service providers for access to and use of the service. Where a service is self-provided, for example, if a household builds and operates its own household latrine, the equity invested by the household in the form of cash, material or time – “sweat equity” – would also fall under tariffs. • Taxes refer to funds originating from domestic taxes that are channelled to the sector via transfers from any level of government – national, regional or local. Such funds would typically be provided as subsidies for capital investment or operations. “Hidden” subsidies may include tax rebates, soft loans (i.e. at a subsidised interest rate) or subsidised services such as electricity. • Transfers refer to funds from international donors and charitable foundations (including NGOs, decentralized cooperation or local civil society organizations) typically originating from other countries. These may take the form of grants, guarantees, or concessionary loans (i.e. through the grant element included in a concessionary loan, in the form of a subsidised interest rate or a grace period). WASH sector investments tend to be capital-intensive and ‘lumpy’ by nature, characterized by relatively large investments with a long asset life. It is therefore seldom possible to finance all necessary investments up-front. If additional financing cannot be raised, either by reducing costs or by increasing the 3Ts, it is standard practice for the financing gap to be “bridged” with a mix of repayable financing types. These may include the following:1 • Bank loans, including commercial finance, microfinance and concessionary loans. The latter are loans from donors that would include a grant or transfer element in the form of an interest rate below market rate, or a grace period; • Equity provided by investors with the expectation that it would be repaid and would earn a rate of return on the capital invested. In going concerns, equity may be provided over very long periods of time and may therefore not be repaid. A hidden form of public subsidy (or transfer) may consist of making an equity investment with no expectation of repayment or return; and • Other financial instruments, such as bonds, whereby a debt title is sold in the market to a large group of bond investors. Bond issuers may include municipalities –“municipal bonds” – or public and private companies – “corporate bonds.” Evaluation of the relevance of the OECD 3T typology for WASH accounts The OECD 3T typology is relevant to WASH accounts in the sense that it categorizes the flows of funding according to their origin and nature (for example, distinguishing between revenue from services, and external subsidies). This terminology has become well known and accepted in the sector. Its value is in conveying in simple terms a number of key concepts about WASH sector financing, such as the understanding that full cost- recovery from tariffs should not be the only objective and that sustainable cost recovery from a mix of the 3Ts is an acceptable alternative. Concerns regarding this typology were, however, raised in previous consultations: • Some sector stakeholders expressed concern that this typology is principally recognized by international organizations and external support agencies such as donors or NGOs. Its ownership by developing country actors is still in progress. • The terminology can be confusing in the context of some developing countries. As WASH accounts are intended for use by policy-makers, the classifications adopted need to be straightforward and easily understood, without allowing for any misinterpretation. 1 For large, capital intensive service providers individual loans may be repaid, but the total debt level may not reduce as loans are ‘rolled-over’ or renewed to maintain the same balance between debt and equity finance. 48 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Additional concerns have been raised about the 3T terminology, including the following points: • The term tariff is understood in common language as the tariff paid by users to utilities. However the OECD typology includes in this category payments made by households for self-provision. These two types of financing are substantially different, with different data sources. Thus the two types of financing should be clearly separated if possible. • Under the item transfer, the OECD typology includes “funds from international donors and charitable foundations (including NGOs, decentralized cooperation or local civil society organizations) that typically come from other countries”. In several countries, however, such as India or many Latin American countries, the term transfer often refers to central government budget allocated to local government in decentralized settings. This is part of what the OECD terminology refers to as taxes, although this term is relatively vague and can be misunderstood in developing countries. Given the interpretation differences that could arise around the OECD terminology, it was adjusted to provide the basis for the TrackFin classification of financing types. These are the equivalent of what the OECD would refer to as “financing sources.” WASH sector financing types according to SEEA-Water: Financing units and sectors SEEA-Water does not consider financing types as such. But the financing sectors identified by SEEA-Water (as defined in Table 9 – Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system above) comprise categories of financing types not explicitly considered by the OECD 3T terminology. These include transfers from not-for-profit institutions serving households (which might be in kind or in cash, and may originate from domestic voluntary sources as opposed only to international transfers). International transfers from the rest of the world, which might not be described as Official Development Assistance (such as transfers from non-OECD donors, including from BRICS), might also be included. TrackFin classification of financial types The TrackFin classification of financing types broadly aligns with the 3T terminology, but provides additional disaggregation and reconciles with the SEEA-Water terminology. It is presented in Table 10 – TrackFin classification of WASH financing types below, showing where it matches the OECD 3T and SEEA-Water classifications. 49Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level TrackFin financing types Definition Alignment with OECD typology of financing sources Alignment with SEEA- Water categories of financing sectors FT1 Tariffs for services provided Payment by users to service providers for access to and use of a service. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT1.1 Domestic tariffs for services provided, FT1.2 Non-domestic tariffs for services provided. TARIFFS Part of funding via “Corporations” FT2 User expenditure on self-supply Funding from users to invest in or provide the service themselves. Self- providing users have to pay an initial investment up-front (in a well, a private water production system, or a private latrine) for access to the service, and must then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves; this can be in form of cash, material or time. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply, FT2.2 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply. Households and “Corporations” FT3 Domestic public transfers Public transfers from government agencies (central or local government) to WASH actors. These are often subsidies from taxes or other sources of government revenue. This category includes only grants and excludes concessionary loans that are included in FT6 Repayable financing. TAXES Governments FT4 International public transfers Voluntary donations (or grants) from public donors and multilateral agencies that come from other countries. Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and entirely included in FT6 Repayable financing. TRANSFERS Rest of the world FT5 Voluntary contributions Voluntary donations (or grants) from international and national non- governmental donors including from charitable foundations, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and entirely included in FT6 Repayable financing. Not-for-profit institutions serving households FT6 Repayable financing Sources of finance from private or public sources that ultimately need to be repaid, such as loans (including concessionary loans and guarantees), equity investments, or other financial instruments such as bonds. This category can be divided into two sub-categories: FT6.1 Concessionary repayable financing, and FT6.2 Non-concessionary repayable financing. REPAYABLE FINANCING Part of funding via “Corporations” Table 10. TrackFin classification of WASH financing types 50 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies Objectives: This note provides guidance on the methodologies required to track financing types (i.e. sector revenue) and costs on a comparable basis. It argues that a cash flow approach should be used wherever possible. It also outlines a possible longer-term development, which would entail using an economic approach to estimate financial flows. MN 3.1. Rationale for estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis The underlying philosophy of the Financial Flow Approach is to achieve the recording of financial flows on a yearly basis, i.e. the actual cash flows to cover costs that come in and out of the sector. In theory, financial flows computed using the Financing Type Approach (to estimate sector revenue) and the Cost-based Approach (to estimate the costs incurred by the sector) should balance, as represented in Fig. 10 below. REVENUECOSTS C4 – Repayment of repayable finance C4 – Financial costs (interest, dividends) C6 – Taxes C5 – Support costs C1 and C3 – Investment expenditure (new and rehabilitation ) C2 – Operating and small maintenance expenditure FT6 – Repayable financing (loans, equity) FT5 – Voluntary contributions FT4 – International Public Transfers FT3 – Domestic Public Transfers FT1 and FT2 – Tariffs and user expenditure on self-supply Figure 10. Costs and revenue to be computed for the Financial Flow Approach In practice, however, differences in accounting treatment of financial flows are likely to introduce slight differences between financial flows using these two methods of computation. Financial flows on the cost and revenue sides do not necessarily happen simultaneously, and the point in time at which they are recorded is significant. How financial flows are computed depends on the accounting methods used by the different actors from which data is collected, i.e. on whether the cash flow or the accrual accounting method is used, as described in more detail in Box 14 below. Box 14. Accounting methodologies and financial statements Financial transactions can be recorded through two accounting methods: • Cash flow accounting records cash flows received and disbursed when payment is made (or received); • Accrual accounting records a transaction when economic value is created, transferred or extinguished. This means that an economic event is recorded at the time the transaction occurs rather than when payment is made (or received). In the case of tariffs for network water supply services, the cash flow method records these based on bills collected, i.e. the amount of cash paid by users to service providers in the accounting period. By contrast, the accrual accounting method records tariffs based on revenue calculated when bills are sent to users, i.e. the tariffs that are due rather than tariffs actually paid. The three main financial statements prepared by most companies above a certain size compute financial transactions in different ways: • The Cash Flow statement records the flows of cash in and out of a company’s bank account for a certain time period. It is based on the cash flow accounting method. • The Income and Expenditure statement (or the Profit and Loss account) records the wealth-creating revenue and the wealth-destroying charges of a company for a certain time period. It is based on the accrual accounting method. • The Balance Sheet is a picture of the value of assets and liabilities of a company at a fixed point in time. 51Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level The data obtained from different types of stakeholder with different accounting systems can either be computed on a cash basis or on an accrual basis. For example, governments or donors disbursing funds to the sector are likely to use a cash flow approach and to record such funds when payment is made, whereas service providers above a certain size are more likely to use accrual accounting methods. They may also be less likely to publish cash flow statements, or compilations of cash flow statements at sector level are less likely to exist. Using the accrual method, as recommended by the System of Health Accounts and in line with the System of National Accounts, would construct a more accurate picture of sector financing, as transactions would be recorded when they result in wealth creation. However, the challenges of compiling WASH accounts at the national level based on accrual accounting are likely to be the same as those encountered in the health sector, namely that it is not possible to get into the detail of each financial statement collected from service providers. More detail is given in the box below. Accounting methods used in the System of Heath Accounts and challenges The SHA Manual points to the methodological difficulties associated with seeking to use an accrual method. “This [System of Health Accounts] Manual recommends the accrual method, in which expenditures are attributed to the time period during which the activity took place, rather than the cash method, in which expenditures are registered when the transaction that paid for the activity took place. However, it is recognized that cash accounting may still be applied in some countries or in some parts of the health system. Health accountants may find a variety of accounting practices in their data sources. Good practice should involve converting everything to an accrual basis to the extent possible”. Source: A System of Health Accounts (OECD, 2011:111). As the objectives of TrackFin are to track funding flows, and given the importance of government and donor funding in the sector, the cash flow approach is recommended wherever possible. Tariffs should therefore be recorded based on the actual cash received (not billed) from users for services provided. Where cash flow statements from utilities are available, cash flows should be used. If these are not easily available, however, information from Income & Expenditure statements can also be used. Repayable financing should be accounted for at the time and value that the cash flow is received by the service providers, assuming it is used in the same year. Repayments and costs of capital should also be recorded as expenditure. More guidance on the treatment of loans is given in Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach. The box below presents a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of using a cash flow approach to estimate financial flows. Box 15. Advantages and disadvantages of using the cash flow approach to estimate financial flows Advantages • Easier to compile as many data sources record expenditure based on cash flows • Less risk of mixing different accounting methods • Shows the actual expenditure and revenue in that year, taking into account expenditure that was not paid and the revenue not collected • Shows flows of capital expenditure (which would not appear using an accrual method) Disadvantages • Shows repayable financing received and thus does not show whether “actual” revenue to the sector is sufficient to cover expenditure MN 3.2. Using an economic approach as a possible alternative Because it is based on cash flow accounting, the proposed cash flow approach to estimating financial flows does not provide information about whether the sector is solvent, i.e. whether non-repayable revenue (real revenue) is sufficient to recover the full costs, including capital maintenance costs, required to keep fixed assets functioning. This approach therefore does not reveal whether or not the sector is financially sustainable in the long-run. To address these concerns, economic regulation usually relies on an economic approach, based on accrual accounting, to estimate the financing requirements of service providers. Applying this approach at sector level would be an interesting way to assess the financial sustainability of the sector as a whole. Box 16 below indicates how this economic approach might work. 52 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 16. A possible economic approach to estimating financial flows in the WASH sector An economic approach could be used to estimate the revenue required to recover the full costs of the life-cycle of service provision. This economic approach would capture operating and maintenance costs, large capital maintenance expenditure and financial costs and taxes, but would exclude net capital expenditure and include only the depreciation of assets. It would show if, in the long-term, the sector is generating sufficient revenue to cover the full life-cycle costs and the repayable finance. An economic approach would estimate the financing requirements of the sector based on projected costs, including the following: • Operation and maintenance recurrent costs. • Capital maintenance costs (for capital maintenance expenditure). A very crude measure of these capital maintenance costs can arguably be depreciation, as depreciation can be seen as “what needs to be set aside to replace past investments.” However, whether depreciation amounts can adequately reflect what needs to be spent on capital maintenance would largely depend on asset valuation methods. In most cases, when depreciation is set based on historical asset values, corresponding depreciation amounts are likely to be insufficient to cover real capital maintenance requirements. A regulator such as Ofwat has sought to address this by introducing specific capital maintenance costs when estimating utilities’ revenue requirements (to be covered through tariffs). Attributing such values can, however, be difficult and controversial, and are usually not estimated in most water sectors. • An expected return on the asset base (estimated by applying a Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) to the projected asset base, which includes projected new investments). This provides a sound basis for budgeting and tariff setting as it allows the smoothing out of future revenue requirements. Estimation of the revenue requirement in this way could be compared to the actual revenue for the sector (from tariffs, users’ non-tariff contributions or non-repayable transfers) to assess whether or not the sector is sustainably financed. REVENUEREVENUE REQUIREMENT Net financial costs (interest, dividends) Taxes Depreciation and amortization of fixed assets Large capital maintenance expenditure Operating and small maintenance expenditure Voluntary contributions International Public Transfers Domestic Public Transfers Tariffs and user expenditure on self-supply Figure 11. Costs and financing types recorded by the economic approach Using the economic approach is not recommended at this stage. It would add further complexity and elements to the requirements for estimating revenue that are likely to be very difficult to compile. Moreover, as this approach has to be applied at service provider level, it is not certain whether expenditure can simply be added together across service providers to create a sector picture. As service providers can be public, private, corporate, or government organizations, and even communities, it may not be possible to estimate all expenditure based on accrual accounting. An additional methodological challenge lies in the estimation of large capital maintenance expenditure and depreciation of fixed assets, which would need to be done based on an ideal lifetime of assets and estimation of their current value using IFRS standards. A simplified model for estimating large capital maintenance expenditure could be developed based on the current UK Ofwat approach. 53Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach Objectives: This note provides guidance on tracking financial flows in the WASH sector using the Financing Type Approach. It draws on the experience of the System of Health Accounts in estimating financing types. The note indicates what the potential sources of information and data might be for each type of financing, identifying challenges and possible solutions in each case. MN 4.1. Collecting data by financing types As explained in the main Guidance Document, there are numerous types of financing that can be drawn upon to finance the sector. Identifying information on each type can be done in various ways, as outlined in Table 11 below. The most appropriate method for gathering data on financing types has to be decided on a country- by-country basis, depending on data availability. Additional guidance on information gathering for each type of financing is provided below the table. Categories of financing types Data sources and collection methods Tariffs for services provided (FT1) • Use existing sources where available, such as IBNET, national regulators or service providers’ associations, and strategic financial planning exercises at national level • For main service providers, obtain turnover data per WASH service; in decentralized countries, organize a survey of formal service providers • Organize an inventory and survey of other service providers (including small-scale informal providers) to assess their overall tariff revenue User expenditure on self-supply (FT2) • For households: – Rely on existing household survey data on coverage – Organize ad hoc household surveys to assess their investments in self-provided water or sanitation • For other user types, it can be difficult to obtain data. Water basin authorities or environmental protection agencies might collect data on self-supply from industries and should be consulted Domestic public transfers (FT3) • Rely on national and local government financial accounts. These may be consolidated in the main public financial information system recording public expenditure, or could be held by the Ministry of Finance. • Rely on national and local government actual expenditure data collected by National Statistics Offices (NSOs) • Collect expenditure reports from main governmental WASH programmes • For central ministries and public agencies: Create specific questionnaires to collect primary data on transfers received and provided • For decentralized public bodies (such as local governments): Create a specific questionnaire to collect primary data, at least from a sample • For main service providers: Create a specific questionnaire to collect primary data from a sample on transfers received International public transfers (FT4) • Obtain data from the OECD DAC database • Collect data on transfers received from national and local government financial accounts and main service providers • Collect data on transfers sent by creating specific questionnaires to collect primary data from multilateral and bilateral donors Voluntary transfers (FT5) • Collect data on transfers received from national and local government financial accounts • Collect data on transfers received by creating specific questionnaires to acquire primary data from a sample of NGOs and other charitable organizations Repayable financing (FT6) • Rely on surveys of the commercial banking sector • Collect data on repayable financing provided by creating specific questionnaires to acquire primary data from main lenders (government agencies and development banks, multilateral and bilateral donors) • Collect data on repayable financing received by creating specific questionnaires to acquire primary data from main borrowers (main service providers) Table 11. Gathering data on financing types 54 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative FT1: Tariffs for services provided Information on tariffs paid to formal WASH service providers exists at a disaggregated level (i.e. at the level of each service provider) but obtaining this information usually requires careful examination of the service providers’ financial accounts and tariff schedules. Following the Cash Flow Approach (see Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies) actual tariffs paid by users and collected by service providers should be tracked, including subsidies and taxes on products. This approach differs from that used in the SNA, which recommends calculating the “output” or total amount of sales, shipments or turnover following the accrual accounting methods (referred to as the economic approach in the Guidance Document). It can be expressed either in terms of producers’ prices or basic prices. The differences are due to subsidies and taxes on products. Basic prices include subsidies on products and exclude taxes on products. Producers’ prices exclude subsidies on products and include taxes on products. Some countries or organizations have gathered data on average tariffs in a given country or in different cities,1 while other organizations gather and present data on tariff structures at country level. However, few if any countries consistently and regularly collect data on the total amount of revenue generated through tariffs paid by users for services provided. The TrackFin methodology requires gathering data of this kind at both aggregated and disaggregated levels: • Aggregate information on revenue from tariffs: This is the aggregate of all revenue generated from all types of service at the level of service providers, based on what is usually referred to as “turnover from sales of water/ sanitation services.” It is extracted from the profit and loss accounts of service providers, preferably relying on existing databases in the case of multiple providers. • Disaggregated information on revenue from tariffs: In most cases, disaggregated information on the distribution of revenue from tariffs between various services (water, sanitation and other services), between various types of users (households, businesses or industries, institutions) or various regions can be obtained from commercial data. This requires a specific visit, or sending a questionnaire, to each service provider, unless this has already been computed in a database. Where the provision of WASH services is highly decentralized, there may be a large number of service providers. Informal providers may account for a large share of the market. To overcome these potential difficulties, the WASH accounts team can seek to obtain data from: • National water sector economic regulators (for example, NWASCO, the National Water Supply and Sanitation Council in Zambia, PURC in Ghana, and WASREB in Kenya); • National utility associations such as ABCON2 in Brazil; • Global surveys and databases that collect information on tariffs, such as the International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities (IBNET) benchmarking platform managed by the World Bank, which includes a water tariff database developed in 2011; and • Strategic Financial Planning exercises for the sector, sometimes carried out under the auspices of international organizations such as the OECD or the World Bank.3 1 An example is the OECD data for a set of cities and countries around the world (OECD, 2009. Managing Water for All – An OECD perspective on pricing and financing. Paris: OECD Publications.) 2 “ABCON: Associação Brasileira das Concessionárias Privadas de Serviços Públicos de Água e Esgoto”: The association of private and public concessionaries for water and sewerage. 3 The following OECD publication gives an overview of tools that can be used to improve financial management in the sector, including strategic financial planning tools. http://www.oecd.org/env/resources/ meetingthechallengeoffinancingwaterandsanitationtoolsandapproaches2011.htm 55Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 17. Regulatory data on tariffs of service provision from national regulators Data on tariff structures may be available from the national regulator of water and sewerage. For example, the Office of Water Services (Ofwat) is the economic regulator of the water industry in England and Wales. Every year, Ofwat monitors and approves each company’s water and sewerage charges to check that they respect the price limits set. Results were published yearly, and are now available online. These price limits are set by the regulator every five years by assessing in detail the operators’ business and financial models. To conduct price reviews, they rely on financial models that capture all financial flows, including revenue from tariffs and other sources, and sources of repayable financing. The regulator builds into the price limits, and therefore the tariffs charged to customers, the cost of servicing the debt and equity by estimating the value of the regulatory fixed assets base. All this information is made publically available online, except for any information deemed commercially sensitive. To create WASH accounts, financing types must be tracked by use. For served use, the revenue from tariffs should be tracked by user types, differentiating at a minimum between domestic and non-domestic users. If the total revenue only is available in the service providers’ financial statements, the WASH accounts team should collect additional data on the average tariff charged to each user category, and the volume consumed by each user type, in order to allocate revenue to their financing units. When recording the data, this category can be further disaggregated into additional sub-categories such as: FT1.1 Domestic tariffs for services provided and FT1.2 Non-domestic tariffs for services provided. As stated above, tariff surveys are unlikely to estimate total revenue from tariffs but are more likely to include data on average tariffs or tariff structures. The WASH accounts team should therefore process this data, using complementary datasets on the number of customers and their respective consumption. This could, however, become a somewhat complex exercise when tariffs are structured around consumption blocks, in which case some approximations may be necessary. In the case of informal service providers, it is unlikely that information on their revenue from tariffs is readily available. Where informal providers serve a substantial share of the market, surveys based on a representative number (and their customers) should be conducted in order to obtain data on the revenue from tariffs that they receive. The tariffs they charge are likely to be higher than those of formal operators, but the volumes consumed will inevitably be lower, so information on tariffs as well as volumes consumed should be collected for a representative sample. Extrapolation from the resulting data should be based on the average number (and size) of informal service providers, but should exclude households, which are covered under FT2 User expenditure on self-supply. The additional effort of collecting information on tariffs paid to informal providers would only be justified in countries where this expenditure is significant. FT2: User expenditure on self-supply The second financing type emanating directly from users is referred to as user expenditure on self-supply.1 This financing type principally captures investment in water self-supply solutions (private or community wells, small private water production systems, water tanks) and household level sanitation. If possible, the category User expenditure on self-supply should be disaggregated into at least two sub- categories: FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply and FT2.1 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply, to clearly distinguish whether expenditure by households or non-domestic use is being tracked. Potential challenge: Distinguishing between household expenditure on self-supply and non-domestic expenditure on self-supply • For completeness, this category includes all user expenditure on self-supply, including investments and operation and maintenance made by non-domestic users, such as industries or institutions with their own water supply. This can include building small systems for water required in industrial processes or for distributing drinking-water on their production sites. Some industries, such as mining, can be major investors. If these users do not distribute their water as a service to customers, the expenditure should be recorded as self-supply. • It may be difficult to track non-domestic expenditure on self-supply as there is very little information publicly available. Some information may be found in surveys administered to industries by water basin agencies, or an environmental protection agency that issues water abstraction licences. 1 Note that in the OECD 3T terminology, these are included in “tariffs.” They are separated in the WASH accounts classification because they represent very different financial flows that have to be recognized in their own right, and because the methodology for their estimation is different. 56 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative It is important to track this financing type as it can represent a substantial proportion of investment in water and sanitation, not only by users (particularly households), but by the country as a whole. Yet it is not normally tracked, in large part because doing so is difficult. This is discussed below. Estimation of user expenditure on self-supply lies at the intersection of the Financing Type and the Cost-based Approaches, as it captures both financing from users as financing units and expenditure from users as service providers. Two categories of cost are relevant to user self-expenditure: (C1) investment costs, and (C2) operating and maintenance costs (see the cost classification in Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing service with the Cost-based Approach). Data collection methods for each are likely to be different. In seeking to assess expenditure specifically from households, the WASH accounts team should identify which methodology can yield the best results on the basis of data availability. In most countries, it is unlikely that estimates of household expenditure on self-supply will exist or be readily available. Some household surveys may include questions on household WASH expenditure, but these will typically focus on monthly operating expenditure. They will not always distinguish between served and self-provided supply, so would therefore include both tariffs and household expenditure on self-supply. To address this issue, the average expenditure of rural households can be used as a proxy. Rural households are less likely to be connected to a piped water supply, although this varies greatly from one country to another. They are not a sufficiently reliable data source to allow estimation of household expenditure on self-supply as described in the Box 18 below. This view was expressed by the WASH accounts team in discussions with the NSOs in Brazil and Morocco. These NSOs agreed to consider revising the WASH-related questions in their future household surveys. To derive estimates on expenditure in the absence of reliable data, it is therefore necessary to rely on existing survey data or to conduct ad hoc surveys. The data collection methods for C1 and C2 will be different, as discussed below. Average expenditure can be estimated for main activity types, for example on a latrine (by type of latrine), a water point (borehole), or a water tank. The methodology and assumptions used should be properly documented in an annex to the WASH accounts final report. While households may allocate resources for self-supply both in cash and in kind, only monetary expenditure should be included in the WASH accounts. This is to ensure international comparability of estimates. It holds for both investments and operations and maintenance expenditure, and is in line with current guidance from the System of National Accounts. The latter also contribute to the System of Health Accounts, as detailed in the box below. Learning from the health sector: Estimating the costs of self-provision Whereas the actual costs of self-supply to households are estimated (such as investment or operating costs), free labour provided by households to build latrines should not be included. This is in line with the System of National Accounts, which does not include non-monetary contributions. It is also in line with System of Health Accounts practice. The value of these in-kind activities for self-supply can still be estimated and provided as a reference point, but it cannot be shown as part of the total expenditure used for comparison of WASH expenditure with other economic aggregates or for international comparisons. Estimating household investment in self-supply: In the absence of reliable survey data, household investment can be estimated by combining estimated changes in domestic water and sanitation coverage rates, and estimates of average investment costs in self-provision (for example, the average cost of investing in a household latrine). At a minimum, surveys should provide the number of households with access to unimproved and improved WASH services. The annual increase in this number permits the calculation of household investments in WASH, although some challenges are likely to remain. When coverage data is updated on a regular basis, it is possible to track investment by households over time. For example, the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Drinking Water and Sanitation (JMP) currently publishes coverage figures every other year, based on data from national household surveys such as DHS, MICS, WHS, LSMS, and population and housing censuses. These take place every two to five years, and in some cases could possibly be conducted more frequently. In many countries, however, reliable coverage information 57Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level is not gathered on an annual basis, so it would not be possible to track household annual expenditure on self- supply. This gives rise to the methodological challenges highlighted in the box below. Potential challenge: Using coverage data to estimate household expenditure on self-supply • If coverage data is not updated on an annual basis, household expenditure on self-supply can be estimated from coverage estimates for two available dates, and estimating the trend in coverage increase between those two dates to derive annual trends. If the most reliable information is the census, the dates may be five, 10 or 15 years apart. • If there is no increase in national coverage data (as was the case in Ghana) or if the overall trend in coverage via self-supply solutions is negative (as was the case in Brazil), a more disaggregated level of coverage data should be identified. This is because the overall negative trend may mask an increase (and therefore investment) in specific areas or regions. Where the overall trend in coverage is constant in percentage terms, some investment may also be taking place due to population growth as the number of people with access to improved services will be increasing, or because households are improving their existing facilities. Using the coverage trend does not allow estimation of investment in improvements between service levels and replacements. Coverage estimates should then be combined with information on average household investment and operation and maintenance expenditure by type of service, based on existing household surveys or project-related information. To enhance accuracy, and if coverage estimates are sufficiently detailed, these expenditure estimates should reflect the type of investment made by households and for what service (for example, the type of latrine). The box below provides additional examples of methodological challenges that arose in relation to this issue in Ghana and Brazil, and how they were (or could be) addressed. Box 18. Estimating household investment for self-supply (C1 costs for P5): Examples from the pilot exercise In Ghana, household investment in new rural sanitation facilities could not be estimated. Indeed, the percentage of people with access to improved sanitation in rural areas has remained at 8% according to the JMP figures for 2010 and 2012. It was therefore not possible to estimate the number of new households gaining access to sanitation, although there was a nominal increase. There also was an increase in shared sanitation from 42% to 44% in the same period, and it is very likely that a large proportion of this was paid for by households. In that event, one solution is to estimate an average investment per rural household gaining access to a new improved latrine, and an average investment per rural household gaining access to a shared improved latrine. This can be done through a bottom-up estimation that requires costing the latrine components, material and work needed (monetary and non-monetary costs), and the average number of people using the latrine. The actual number of new people gaining access to sanitation should then be estimated based on the total population number and its increase. For example, the number of rural households gaining access to improved sanitation each year between 2010 and 2012 was equal to (8% × number of rural households in 2012 - 8% × number of rural households in 2010)/(2012–2010). This equals 8,000 households a year. The same method can be applied to households gaining access to shared sanitation. In Brazil, even though data on the number of existing sanitation facilities was available, the investment trend could not be estimated because the overall variation of the percentage of people using self-provided WASH services is negative. This is because there are more households closing down latrines to switch to network suppliers than households building new latrines. An increase in the number of facilities occurred only in a few municipalities, where the network did not grow as quickly as population growth, or in rural areas. However, it is negligible compared to overall investment in the sector. Source: Final report on WASH accounts, Brazil, 2014. Final report on WASH accounts, Ghana, 2014. Given the methodological challenges highlighted above, estimating these expenditures lends itself better to the Fixed Asset Stock Approach rather than the Financial Flow Approach as discussed in Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks. Based on existing coverage figures, this approach allows estimation of the value of the total asset stocks in which households have invested. For simplicity, it may be preferable to value this asset stock at replacement value, as estimating an historical value would require information on the date of construction. This is not likely to be available unless specific surveys are conducted for this purpose. Operation and maintenance expenditure must also be estimated. The boxes below show examples of how operation and maintenance costs for household expenditure on self-supply were estimated, providing a useful indication of how this can be done for the first round of the exercise. These estimates can be improved using the methods described above. 58 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 19. Estimating households’ operation and maintenance costs (C2 costs for P5) for self-supply: Examples from Brazil and Morocco In Brazil, household operation and maintenance (O&M) expenditure on self-supply for water and sanitation was estimated using the number of self-provided households reported by the National Statistics Bureau (IBGE) census,1 and the average expenditure per household for water and sanitation obtained from their Household Budget Survey – POF of IBGE2 (2009). It was assumed that the expenditure recorded by households was recurrent rather than investment. Given that O&M expenditure by urban households includes tariffs paid to formal providers, the average O&M expenditure of rural households was considered as the reference and applied to all self- provided households, including urban. In order to improve this estimate in the next exercise, it was recommended that more detailed questions on household expenditure on self-supply be included in the IBGE household budget survey questionnaire, including separating recurrent expenditure from investment, as well as expenditure by served and self-supplied households. In Morocco, it was only possible to estimate household self-supply expenditure on O&M. For sanitation, estimated expenditure per household was provided by the 2007 ENNVM HCP census for both rural and urban areas. The total expenditure was not estimated in relation to the number of self-provided households (i.e. those with no access to the sewerage network), but based on the number of self-provided households that reported making cash payments for operating their WASH services. This group represented 20.6% of the self-supplied urban population and 8.6% of the self-supplied rural population. The expenditure per household was estimated at 1336 DH per year for rural households, and 921 DH per year for urban households. Household expenditure on self-supply of water was estimated only for rural households not served by the network, given that 100% of the urban population is served by the network or by water standpipes. The average expenditure per household was estimated at 600 DHR per year. It was estimated that 100% of self-supplied households were making cash payments. Source: Final report on WASH accounts, Brazil, 2014:32,35. Final report on WASH accounts, Morocco, 2014:35. If average expenditure figures on both investment and operation and maintenance for different types of service are not available, ad hoc household surveys to assess their investment level should be conducted. Using mobile phone technologies can greatly facilitate surveys of this kind, and can reduce the cost of data gathering and the risk of error. They have already been used extensively to gather information on water points (referred to as “water point mapping”) including information on the geographic location, related investment costs, and functionality of rural hand-pumps. This kind of information, particularly in relation to investment cost, is critical to filling data gaps in household investment in self-supply. The SHARE research consortium in the UK has developed a prototype Sanitation Investment Tracker — a mobile phone application designed specifically for conducting this kind of survey.3 FT3: Domestic public transfers Domestic public transfers are public funds transferred by government agencies (either at central or decentralized level) to WASH sector actors. Such funds would typically be provided as subsidies for capital investment or operations. This category includes only “pure” grants and excludes repayable financing and concessionary loans, which are included in FT6 Repayable financing. Explicit subsidies (grants) are a priority area for the tracking exercise. It is also important to recognize that there may be “hidden” kinds of subsidies. These could include tax rebates or subsidised services such as electricity. As these hidden subsidies may be very difficult to identify and measure in financial terms, it would be sufficient to mention the existence of hidden subsidies rather than to seek to quantify them for the first round of WASH accounts. Attempting to quantify hidden subsidies could be done at later stages of methodological development. Data on public transfers channelled to the WASH sector should be collected from a wide range of stakeholders and sources, including national and local governments or other public financing units. The latter may include common funding baskets, if a sector-wide approach to pool funding is adopted. This should be based on the mapping of sector financial flows conducted in Step 2.2. 1 2010 Census and PNAD 2011 and 2012. 2 2009 Household Budget Survey – POF. 3 Information on the Sanitation Investment Tracker (SIT) is available on the SHARE website (www.shareresearch.org) here: http://www.shareresearch.org/Resource/Details/sit_note_1. 59Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level In some cases, aggregated data at the national level can be found in established tools for tracking and planning financial resources. They can also be found in programme budget reporting systems. For example, the Total Sanitation Campaign in India had a solid system of reporting, both for public financial flows and for achievements. These tools can be used to some extent, although independent spot-check verifications might be needed. See also the Brazilian example in Box 10, Section 2.3.3. FT4: International public transfers This category includes only voluntary donations from external public donors and multilateral agencies. These funds can be contributed in the form of grants or guarantees. Other forms of repayable financing from international donors, such as concessionary loans, are excluded from this category and are shown in FT6 Repayable financing. Data on international public transfers can be sought from the following sources: • The OECD International Development Statistics databases: These databases track most transfers in the form of official development assistance (ODA) from donor countries and international organizations (bilateral and multilateral cooperation). This is the best source of international public transfer data and offers the possibility of tracking grants and (concessionary) loans separately. However, there are a number of caveats. Firstly, data does not always match more detailed data obtained at the national level. Some degree of triangulation is therefore likely to be needed. Secondly, only since 2010 has the OECD/DAC database started differentiating spending on water from spending on sanitation, and no further disaggregation between services is currently available. Finally, the database covers only international public transfers from members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC). This comprises 29 developed countries and tracks funding from emerging donors such as the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Turkey, separately. It does not currently include important non-OECD aid flows such as those from China, Arab states, or India. • National and local government financial accounts: These can be used to complement and refine data from OECD databases at the national level. In the event of conflicting information, however, it is essential to state which source has been given priority (which will depend on reliability). The Ministry of Finance should have aggregated reports on transfers from donors, but it may not differentiate between grants and concessionary loans. • Public donor and multilateral agency financial accounts: It may be necessary to send a questionnaire to all major donors to collect more detailed information on international public transfers. This may be information on their use (for which sector, service, service providers) and on their nature (grants or concessionary loans). Potential challenge: Collecting data on ODA and the issue of concessions The OECD database tracks ODA from donor countries and international organizations according to the following definition: “Financial flows to countries and territories on the DAC which are: • provided by official agencies, including state and local governments, or by their executive agencies; and • each transaction of which: a) is administered with the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries as its main objective; and b) is concessional in character and conveys a grant element of at least 25%, calculated at a rate of discount of 10% (except for capitalized interest included in rescheduling of ODA loans which is recorded as ODA, regardless of the grant element of the rescheduling.)” To allocate the expenditure between FT4 International public transfers, and FT6 Repayable financing, it is therefore necessary to distinguish repayable loans from pure concessional finance (100% of grant element). Details on the conditionality of the financial flows can be found on the OECD databases and corroborated with national level information. Source: http://www.oecd.org/dac/38429349.pdf. FT5: Voluntary transfers Voluntary donations may come from international and national non-governmental donors, including from charitable foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Only donations that are 100% pure grants are included in this category. All forms of repayable financing (including concessionary loans and guarantees) are included in category FT6 Repayable financing. In many developing countries, voluntary organizations frequently contribute to funding the water and sanitation sector both in cash and in kind (for example, by digging a well or providing equipment). Such transfers are often not reliably recorded, 60 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative so there is little clarity over their actual contribution to sector financing. To obtain data on voluntary transfers, the WASH accounts team could consult the following: • National and local government financial accounts: Some governments have started collecting information on voluntary transfers to the water and sanitation sector, with the objective of ensuring better coordination of such financial flows. This now occurs in Bangladesh, for example, where NGO financing is recorded in the public sector budget, thereby greatly simplifying the task of collecting financial information on their contribution. This type of initiative, if deemed successful, could be replicated in other countries to improve coordination and facilitate the task of obtaining and recording information on such flows. • Surveys of NGOs and other charitable organizations concerning their investments: Given the current lack of transparency on WASH spending by the voluntary sector, some international NGOs have taken the initiative of recording their donations in a more reliable manner. Washfunders is an example. Other initiatives, such as that developed by Interaction, the largest coalition of US-based NGOs, seek to map NGO-funded projects at country level (see example for Haiti). However, this information is not specifically gathered for water and sanitation and is only currently available for a very small number of countries. FT6: Repayable financing This category includes all types of repayable financing, including concessionary loans or guarantees. Information on repayable financing to the sector is very limited, but some can be found in existing databases: • The OECD-CRS database contains information on concessionary lending; • The International Financing Review compiles data on commercial loans or bonds; and • The World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database reports the amount of capital investment committed by private operators at the start of a public private partnership contract. It is commonly used to track private investment in infrastructure. Although private operators would not typically bring “new” financing to the sector as they are not financing types as such, they can temporarily bridge the financing gap. If possible, this category should be sub-divided into two sub-categories, FT6.1 Concessionary repayable financing and FT6.2 Non-concessionary repayable financing, as the two types are very different in nature. Approaches to this are set out below. Potential challenge: Separating concessional from non-concessional repayable financing The allocation of repayable financing flows between these two sub-categories can be made in two ways: • Flows can be roughly characterized as concessional or non-concessional according to the ownership status of the lender. A repayable flow coming from a public sector agency could be characterized as concessional, while a repayable flow from a private sector agency could be termed non-concessional. However, some public sector agencies can themselves be involved in providing loans at market rates so this method of classification is very imperfect. • To obtain a more refined estimation of these flows, data can be obtained on the lending conditions for specific loans where there are doubts about the category in which they fall. Concessional loans include a grant element in the form of a subsidised interest rate or a grace period. The OECD definition of concessional can be used to allocate the flows to the FT6.1 and FT6.2 sub-categories. Concessionary repayable financing would include repayable flows that convey a grant element of a least 25%, calculated at a rate of discount of 10% (except for capitalized interest included in rescheduling of ODA loans which is recorded as concessional, regardless of the grant element of the rescheduling). Source: http://www.oecd.org/dac/38429349.pdf. The WASH accounts team may, however, need to complement this information with ad hoc surveys, to better understand the extent to which development banks and commercial banks currently finance the water and sanitation sector and through what kind of instrument (for example commercial loans, bonds, equity issuance, or guarantees). The box below presents examples of the kind of data available in the pilot countries to estimate loans. All three countries were able to include loans to some extent, depending on data availability. Allocating the financing according to type of service and use was more challenging, even impossible, in some cases. 61Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 20. Estimating loans: Examples from country studies In Brazil, data on repayable financing disbursed by the government to service providers was collected from databases of the public banks and funding schemes that are the main sources of repayable loans – namely the Caixa Economica Federal (CAIXA), and the BNDES (Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social) – two state-owned banks. Data on repayable financing received from multilateral and bilateral agencies were obtained from the financial statements of state and municipal enterprises, and from private companies operating in the sector. This data could be partially allocated to types of service, providers, regions and by type of cost, but not by type of use. The allocation by service was made according to the relative share of investment by service available in the Sector National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). Only cash flows disbursed to final borrowers of funds were considered. Going forward, data gaps on repayable financing could be resolved by collecting better data from service providers through SNIS. In Morocco, data on loans was collected from service providers’ financial statements. It was not possible to cross-check this data with information from lenders (national commercial banks or international, multilateral or bilateral financial institutions) as there is no consolidated database. As a result, it was not possible to separate concessional loans from commercial loans. Only disbursements to borrowers (service providers) had been included (excluding financial charges as it was not possible to identify them separately in the financial statements). Going forward, this could be done by collecting detailed data from main lenders. In Ghana, information on loans from donors to the government was obtained from the Ministry of Finance. Information on loans to the main utility, GWCL, appears in their financial statements. It was considered unlikely that other service providers would have taken loans for water supply or sanitation, but this information is difficult to verify. It would require surveying all the private providers through the Private Utilities Association (PUSPA). Source: Final report on WASH accounts, Brazil, 2014:34. Final report on WASH accounts, Ghana, 2014:46. Final report on WASH accounts, Morocco, 2014. Reflecting financial flows that are by definition repayable in WASH accounts is not straightforward. Repayable financing differs in nature from other financial flows because it does not constitute revenue as such for the sector; it is only a means of bridging the cash flow gap with the requirement for subsequent repayment. Users usually have to absorb the cost of repayable financing through tariffs, unless a subsidy is provided to write off part of the debt. If a large proportion of sector revenue is derived from repayable finance, it shows that the sector is “borrowing” on future revenue. The cost of this borrowing will ultimately need to be covered by tariff increases or increases in transfers. However, WASH accounts’ aim is to show how and to what extent repayable financing is used as an instrument to finance the sector. Hence they are tracked as a distinct financing type. As explained in Section 2.3.3 of the Guidance Document, the objective of the Cash Flow Approach is to track flows of funding to the sector. Loans are therefore reflected in accounts as financing types at the moment they are received or spent by borrowers, although the actual revenue to pay them back is only received later. The repayment of loans and costs of capital should then be recorded as expenditure in the year when the expense occurs. Due to time differences between the receipt of a loan in the accounts, the timing of the expenditure for which loan funds are disbursed, and the repayment of the loan, it is more than likely that the expenditure and revenue will not balance. The receipt of loans should ideally be recorded in the year when the expenditure is made; since most loans are spent as soon as they are disbursed, in most cases this should not pose too many problems. This approach varies slightly from the System of Health Accounts, which follows the economic approach of the National Accounts (See Section 2.3.3). The box below indicates how the System of Health Accounts handles the treatment of loans. 62 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Learning from the health sector: Handling of loans in the System of Health Accounts Loans increase the funds available to a provider or financing agent (equivalent to financing units in the WASH accounts). In the Health Accounts, financing agents are defined as the units that channel finance to the sector by pooling funds from different sources and redistributing them to service providers. Loans are not included directly in the Health Accounts, because they affect the balance sheet (assets and liabilities) of the financing agent. What does appear in the SHA is the money that the financing agent releases into the health care system. Since most loans are spent as soon as they are disbursed, the distinction matters more for the purposes of attributing the funds to a financing type than for the level of health expenditure. Loan repayments do not appear in the Health Accounts because they represent a change in assets rather than a current expenditure for health. In effect, they are funds that were already registered in the Health Accounts when the disbursement was spent. On the other hand, it is appropriate to include interest payments made on outstanding debt as part of health spending, provided that the debt was directly related to the financing agent’s health activity. Most accounting systems separate loans and loan repayment from other transactions, so this treatment is not difficult to implement in practice. In systems where such separation is not made, health accountants should be vigilant for budget line items that indicate the infusion of new capital or the repayment of loans or retirement of other debt, and eliminate those entries from the total for the financing agent. From a policy perspective, it is important to show the effect of new loans or of loan repayments on a given financing agent or class of financing agents. This can be done in an exhibit table. This kind of exhibit can inform policy-makers without detracting from the presentation of the current state of the health care system’s ability to deliver care. Exhibit X. Changes in the financial position of financing agents Total Government Private Total national health expenditure Less: Net increase in health-related debt New loans for health From external organizations/entities Governments Development agencies NPISHs* Other From domestic lenders NPISHs* Other Less repayment of loans To external organizations/entities Governments Development agencies NPISHs* Other To domestic lenders NPISHs* Other Equals: Spending from own resources Less: Draws on own assets Equals: Spending from own resources *Non-profit institutions serving households Example of an exhibit table showing changes in debt related to the health system 63Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level MN 4.2. Potential challenges and how to address them MN 4.2.1 Data availability In general, availability of data on financing types (and certain financing types in particular) can be an issue. Where this is the case, it is important to be transparent about the issues faced and to represent them graphically. This can serve as a prompt for data providers to produce additional data if possible. The box below summarizes the data availability challenges that arose in Ghana, and the methods used to overcome them. Box 21. Data availability in Ghana The table below summarizes the financing types included in and excluded from the Ghana study and the reliability of the data (actual or estimated). Data available Data partly available plus estimates Estimates No data collected Financing types Availability of data Data availability challenges Methods used to overcome these challenges Tariffs for services provided Data for urban water available only from the national WASH service provider Ghana Water Company Limited (GWCL), and only in aggregates. Household expenditure on self-supply Data from 2013/2014 Ghana Living Standards Survey (GLSS) were not available at time of study. Estimations were made from the 2005/2006 GLSS survey based on average household expenditure. Domestic public transfers (central government) Data from the Ministry of Finance transfers to sector agencies were not obtained, but data on receipts from agencies were available. Domestic public transfers (local government) Total transfer from the Ministry of Finance to DACF for distribution to MMDAs. It was estimated that 15% of transfers were for water, sanitation and support services. International public transfers (grants from public donors or multilaterals) Data from development partners available from the Ministry of Finance, but only in aggregates. Voluntary contributions transfers Data not available. Repayable financing (loans) Data from development partners available from the Ministry of Finance, but only in aggregates. MN 4.2.2 Allocation of financing types per financing units, WASH uses and services Allocating financing types to different financing units and services is likely to be problematic. For example, domestic public transfers are not systematically allocated to different types of service, particularly where funding for water and sanitation forms part of overall transfers from central to municipal governments. Records on public transfers do not usually specify the amounts spent on WASH activities, let alone disaggregate them between sub-sectors. To overcome this challenge, it may be necessary to define financing allocation keys in order to reconstruct the portion of funding flows allocated to WASH services. These allocation keys can differ in precision, depending on the level of information available. One potential method is to estimate the costs relative to different use or different services based on the Cost-based Approach described in Section 2.3 of the Guidance Document and Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing the service with a Cost-based Approach, and to use these to derive allocation keys. Allocating the expenditure figures to classifications is an iterative process. A back and forth approach between the results from the two approaches is required to complete the allocations. The box below presents an illustrative example of how to use allocation keys. 64 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 22. Example: How to use allocation keys to allocate spending across categories Where amounts are not clearly specified, it may be easier to allocate financing types to services and uses through the use of allocation keys, using expenditure data obtained from service providers. The following is a hypothetical example: The Ministry of Water (MoW) gave a grant to a utility that provides both water and sanitation services. It is not possible to ascertain from MoW records what the grant was used for. The cost-based data collected from the service provider has to be reconciled with this financing flow and used to allocate the MoW funds to sub-sectors. This allocation can be based on real data or on estimates: • If the utility holds records on the use of grants received (this is quite unlikely but is assumed for the purpose of this example), the grant can be allocated to sub-sectors based on its actual use. • If it is not possible to allocate the expenditure of this specific grant to a sub-sector, an estimate can be made. In this case, the same ratio can be applied to the funding received through this grant as that of the total funding allocation of this service provider. The arrows in the figure below shows what ultimately needs to be done with each financing flow. In this case, a national authority (FU1) provided funding of USD 100 to the sector through two types of service providers (P1 Government providers, and P2 Network corporate providers). It provided USD 40 to P1 and USD 60 to P2. P1 then disbursed USD 25 to water services (S1) and USD 15 to sanitation services (S2). P2 disbursed the entire USD 60 funding on sanitation services. The WASH accounts team would collect two kinds of data: • From the Financing Type Approach: The allocation of funding from FU1 to P1 and P2 (recorded in WASH accounts Table 7 (PXFU); and • From the Cost-based Approach: The allocation of funding from P1 and P2 to S1 and S2 (recorded in WASH accounts Table 3 (SxP). The two sets of information then need to be reconciled to allocate the funding from FU1 to S1and S2 (and recorded in WASH accounts Table 6 (SxFU). Overall, from FU1 funding, USD 25 goes to water services (S1) and USD 75 to sanitation (S2). Figure 12. Example of a financing flow allocation to categories of providers and services Financial information per use can be estimated both from the Financing Type and Cost-based Approaches: • At the level of financing types to know how much of the funding comes from different types of use and users; and • At the level of expenditure to know how much is spent by service providers for each type of use. The box below provides detailed guidance on how to estimate both flows according to type of use. FU1 $60 P1 P2 S1 S2 FT1 $100 $60$40 $25 $15 65Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 23. Estimating flows per use: Financing types (revenue) and expenditure per type of use In the Financing Type Approach, when data is not directly available, allocation of financing per type of use can be made through estimates, using the percentage of revenue collected from each type of user, for example according to tariff. This can be calculated from the average revenue by type of use and the number of connections for this category. This approach does require the existence of detailed operational information per type of user and use. Data on self-supply of non-domestic users is unlikely to be available. In the Cost-based Approach, expenditure for each type of use can be estimated from the percentage of water volume consumed by each category of user. In Brazil, it was only possible to estimate expenditure per type of use for served domestic use (U1). Data on other types of served use (i.e. non-domestic: industrial, commercial and institutional) was aggregated, and it did not prove possible to obtain the parameters that would enable disaggregation. In the Financing Type Approach, revenue from served domestic users was estimated using the average revenue per domestic connection and the number of domestic connections. For the Cost-based Approach, expenditure on served domestic use was estimated using the volume of water consumed by households. It showed that 88% of resources were spent on services in this category. Self-supply represents 2.2% of expenditure. The remaining non-domestic served uses (institutional, industrial, commercial) represents 9.8% of expenditure. Further disaggregation proved impossible. Based on a sample of accounts from service providers, it was estimated that commercial served use represented most of the remaining expenditure. In Brazil, water resource legislation and management tools do not include the category of self-supply for commercial and industrial uses. These categories are usually monitored by service managers and are not included in public policies. They are monitored only in the context of integrated management of water resources, or in the case of sewage, the environmental policy and environmental management system. MN 4.2.3 Avoiding double counting and tracking how financial flows are channelled across the sector It is essential to avoid double counting when using the Financing Type Approach, particularly if resources are channelled through several different financing units. As explained in the Challenge Box in Section 2.2.2, financing can be allocated by an international donor to a national government and then channelled from the national government to local governments before finally being disbursed to a service provider. In that case, it is important not to count the financial flow twice, i.e. at source (at the level of the donor or the national government as the financing unit), and at the point where funds are disbursed to service providers (at the level of the financing unit through which funds are channelled, which in this case would be the local government). For the purpose of computing overall expenditure in the WASH sector, financial flows should be computed at the level of the financing unit through which they enter the sector. A key principle is that one flow only should be recorded as one “financing type.” Donor funding channelled to a local government through the national government, for example, should always be recorded as FT4 International public transfers. This is also why FT1 Tariffs for services provided, is deemed to originate from FU1 Users (i.e. the financing unit that has injected revenue into the sector) rather than from FU5 Network service providers. Applying this rule consistently should ensure that there is no double counting in overall expenditure. This being the case, the only financing injected by FU5 Network service providers, would be reinvested profits or equity investments, and would generally be recorded as FT6 Repayable financing. However, financial flows also need to be recorded in other ways to enable various key policy questions to be investigated. These would include investigation of what the funds are used for and how they are channelled through the sector. Each financial flow should therefore be “coded” in more detail, to track whether it has been: • Directly disbursed to service providers • Channelled through another financing unit • Received from another financing unit and disbursed to service providers. This is an area where the availability of data collection and analysis software would make a significant difference. 66 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Ascertaining what the total expenditure has been spent on would generally be achievable by relying on the Cost- based Approach, rather than the Financing Type Approach. Information on how funds are channelled, on the other hand, will need to be computed from financing type data, and the careful coding of how the financial flow has gone from the financing unit where it entered the system, to the financing unit that made the disbursement decision, and finally to a service provider. Box 24. Example: How to avoid double counting of financial flows The situation: A donor provides general budget support to the Ministry of Finance (MoF). These funds are then channelled via the MoF through local governments, which disburse them to service providers. For the purpose of this example, they are disbursed to an NGO to finance hygiene promotion and a non-network corporate service provider for sanitation. The figure below illustrates this situation. Figure 13. Illustrative example Service providers (P2) NGO (P4) Non-domestic users“Served” households Central government (FU2) Bilateral and multi- lateral donors (FU8) Sanitation tax International public transfers (FT4) Domestic public transfers (FT3) Domestic public transfers (FT3) Tariffs (FT1) Self-financing (internally generated funding from property tax, business rates etc.) Local government (FU4) How can this situation be reflected in the WASH accounts framework? • The donor, the MoF and the local government are financing units. More specifically, the MoF and the agency are financing units acting as financing channels. The NGO (P4) and the non-network corporate service provider (P2) are the service providers. • Funds between the donor and MoF would be marked as “channelled”. Funds between MoF and the local governments would be marked as “channelled”. Funds between the local governments and the service providers would be marked as “received and disbursed”. • The flow is an international public transfer (FT4) because it ultimately originates from an international donor. What should be presented? Two elements are important: • The overall picture: Funding is received from international donors as international public transfers. • The detailed picture: This funding is channelled via the MoF to a local government, which makes the spending decision. How can results be presented? • To produce WASH accounts compiled at sector level and show the overall picture: – The principle recommended above is applied. Flows are tracked at the level of the financing unit where funds enter the sector. In this case, the funding should be recorded at the level of the donor. The funds would therefore be recorded as FT4 (international public transfers) originating from a FU8 (bilateral and multilateral donor). Yet more information from the level of the local government and service providers is needed to allocate the funds to different types of service provider, services, cost, and use. – The tables FTxP and FTxS show that the international transfer from the donor is disbursed to NGOs and corporate service providers for sanitation and hygiene services. – The table FUxP shows that bilateral and multilateral donors provide funding to P2s and P4s. • At a deeper level of analysis, to show the details of financing units channelling the financing, and making the funding decision: – It would be useful to provide more detail on the financing and expenditure of the local government. For this financing unit specifically, WASH accounts can show that the international public transfers received from donors are channelled via the MoF. Local governments also have self-funding sources from internally generated resources – for example local taxes. 67Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Answering questions of this kind requires tracking many simultaneous transactions, and cannot realistically be done for all transactions and financing units in the sector. Instead, it is recommended that the WASH accounts team select those financing units for which it is critical to know where funding has originated and through what channels it has been assigned. This policy question is probably most critical for local governments, as it is essential to understand what funding they receive and by what means. A more detailed examination of local government funding might show that it receives international public transfers (FT4) through the national government (FU1) and not directly from the donor (FU8). Box 24 offers solutions for examining specific financing units. 68 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach Objectives: This note addresses existing cost classifications in the WASH sector that were called on in drawing up the TrackFin classification note. It also provides methodological guidance for estimating the cost of WASH services using the Cost-based Approach. It recommends that at the very least, distinction should be made between capital expenditure and operations and maintenance expenditure, and potentially large capital maintenance expenditure. Support costs for policy and programme development should also be tracked separately if possible, although this may prove difficult at an aggregate level. MN 5.1. Classifying costs For the purpose of data comparability across countries, the same cost categories and commonly agreed methodologies should be used to estimate and classify costs. MN 5.1.1. Existing cost classifications in the WASH sector At the international level, there are no standard cost classifications used in both urban and rural WASH sectors. In the urban sub-sector, country-level regulators define cost items in a specific way. An example is Ofwat in England and Wales, which has defined cost categories in order to set consistent prices for all water and sewerage companies. International utility benchmarking exercises, such as IBNET hosted by the World Bank, seek to benchmark operating costs (defined as the unit operational cost per cubic metre of water produced or sold), but do not attempt to benchmark investment costs. As IBNET puts it, “they tend to differ widely from one year to another due to the lumpiness of the investments.” As a result, the IBNET toolkit suggests measuring the capital intensity of a utility based on the gross fixed asset value (a fixed asset stocks indicator) per capita served.1 However, they also state that, “Unfortunately there is often limited information available about asset values and until more emphasis is placed on this item, the values derived must be treated with caution” (see Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks for more information about how asset values can be derived). The WASHCost project led by IRC of the Netherlands has defined a cost typology for the rural and peri-urban sector that seeks to capture the entire life cycle cost of investing in WASH services.2 The cost definitions developed by WASHCost were inspired by the cost categories typically used for urban water and sewerage services, and were extended to the rural water and sanitation sectors. This classification identifies typically neglected cost items that are not adequately budgeted for, such as capital maintenance expenditure or expenditure on direct (or indirect) support. For example, the methodology explicitly identifies “software” costs—that is, expenditure on a range of activities required to ensure that such services are delivered effectively.3 These support activities are extremely broad and varied in scope; they range from the costs of managing the sector at the level of the ministry (staff costs for planning, budgeting, interaction with international donors, monitoring and evaluation, and technical assistance) to the costs of capacity-building or hygiene education activities at the local level. The distinction between “hardware” costs (investments and associated studies) and “software” costs (associated “soft” support activities) has now become standard in the WASH sector and has been used, for example, in recent analysis of the value for money of DFID WASH investments in rural water (see www.vfm-wash.org for more information). However, cost classifications of this kind in the rural water sub-sector tend to be used more for project planning and budgeting than for tracking costs at a national level. Indeed, some of the cost categories in the WASHCost classification (such as capital maintenance expenditure, cost of capital or expenditure on direct and indirect 1 http://www.ib-net.org/en/texts.php?folder_id=117&mat_id=97&L=1&S=3&ss=4 2 http://www.ircwash.org/washcost 3 Trémolet, Kolsky & Perez (2010) also explicitly accounted for software costs when deriving the costs of providing on-site sanitation at the household level. 69Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level support) are not consistently tracked in most countries at present. Most government or NGO-led programmes do not typically account for support costs associated with capital expenditure separately, or for expenditure on direct or indirect support. This review of existing cost classifications in the WASH sector clarified the need for a TrackFin classification that could be applied across both urban and rural water sectors, but would remain in alignment with currently available information on costs at national level in most countries. This classification is set out below. MN 5.1.2. TrackFin classification of costs The TrackFin classification of costs is presented in Table 12 below. The terms cost and expenditure are used interchangeably in the Guidance Document. Cost is generally used in relation to utilities, while expenditure refers to governments or households. Type of costs Definition C1 Investment costs including hardware and associated support Initial capital costs of putting new services in place, including “hardware” such as pipes, toilets, and pumps, and one-off associated “software” costs, such as for detailed design/engineering studies or associated training and consultation. C2 Operating and maintenance costs Routine maintenance and operation costs to keep services running (wages, fuel, or any other regular purchases). Operating costs are the recurrent expenditure involved in providing WASH goods and services: labour, fuel, chemicals, materials, and purchases of bulk water. Maintenance costs are the routine expenditure needed to keep systems running at design performance, but does not include major repairs or renewals which are not recognized as recurrent. C3 Large capital maintenance costs Occasional large maintenance costs for the renewal, replacement and rehabilitation of a system beyond routine repair and replacement costs. These essential expenditures are required before system failure occurs and need to be planned and budgeted for. If this cost cannot be separated from capital expenditure (C1), it should be included with this category and explicitly identified as such. C4 Financial costs This includes capital repayments and the cost of capital, including borrowing costs (interest on the loan) and the cost of equity (dividends if a return is paid to shareholders). C5 Support costs Includes expenditure on direct and indirect support: • Direct support includes expenditure on both pre-and post-construction support activities directed to local-level stakeholders, such as training for community or private sector operators, users or user groups. • Indirect support includes the cost of planning and policy-making at government level, including strengthening the skills and capacities of professionals and technicians. These costs have a direct impact on the long-term sustainability of projects. C6 Taxes Includes taxes and fiscal contributions levied from service providers, such as: • Taxes on production (corporate tax on profits, property tax, leasing tax for renting fixed assets, taxes for occupation of public grounds or in relation to employees). • Usage charges related to (or earmarked for) the sector such as royalties, levies or duties for the use of water or the discharge of wastewater into water bodies. • Other charges on production levied for earmarked uses, such as social contribution. Table 12. TrackFin classification of costs This classification distinguishes between capital expenditure (including large maintenance costs) and operating and minor maintenance costs. This information should ideally be collected from each service provider. 70 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative MN 5.2. Potential sources of cost data Potential sources of cost data vary depending on which agencies incur the costs. Table 13 Gathering data on costs of service provision below lists potential sources of cost by type of service provider. Categories of service providers Data sources and collection methods P1 Government agencies • Public expenditure accounts presented to national parliaments • National budget • Annual budget for each relevant financing unit • Supplementary information if needed to determine cost allocation (such as number of staff per department, or percentage of their time dedicated to a sub-sector) P2 Network corporate providers • Service providers’ annual financial statements (balance sheet and profit and loss accounts) • Supplementary information to determine cost allocation if needed: – Number of staff per department, percentage of their time dedicated to a given service – Number of customers per service, unit cost of production, average investment cost per type of investment – Investment programme (by category of investment spending) – Activity-based costing reports – Any recent tariff study undertaken to estimate costs of production, historically and going forward P3 Non-network corporate providers • Survey of a sample of small independent providers to determine their total production costs P4 NGOs and community-based organizations • Annual financial statements • Detailed costing/cost benchmarks for a number of representative projects P5 Self-provided users • Household survey • Detailed costing/cost benchmarks for typical household investments Table 13. Gathering data on costs of service provision A number of methodological issues relative to the estimation of these costs can be anticipated. Further guidance is provided below. C1: Investment costs Annual flows of capital expenditure (and large capital maintenance) can usually be estimated from both the service providers’ cash flow statement and balance sheet. The asset base included in the balance sheet evolves from one year to the next on the basis of new investments (also referred to as “gross capital formation” in the System of National Accounts), which would be reflected as an increase in assets and depreciation of existing assets (also referred to as “consumption of fixed capital” in the SNA). Any change in the asset base value would then need to be distributed between C1 and C3 Large capital maintenance, by triangulating this finding with the information obtained from the cash flow statement on C1. Based on the balance sheet, it is therefore possible to estimate how much the service provider has invested every year. Where different types of service are offered (such as water and sanitation), allocating the costs by service will require data on their recent and planned investment programme. Allocation could be made based on actual investment (particularly if the utility itself has made any such allocations) or by using estimated ratios — for example 40% investment for water, 60% for sanitation — if this is not the case. The aim, over time, is to reflect as much actual allocation as possible. Related support expenditure, if it is a one-off expenditure incurred specifically to support this hardware investment (such as supporting design studies or planning) should be included in the total costs of the investment. A note of caution: There are a number of reasons why capital investment flows may not be a robust indicator of an actual trend in investment, as discussed in more detail in Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks. Estimating capital investment flows may therefore need to be complemented by estimation of fixed asset stocks. 71Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level C2: Operating and maintenance costs Operating and minor maintenance costs can be derived from the cash flow statement of service providers. In the event of joint service provision for water and sanitation, the costs need to be allocated to the different services. If the utility does not already do this based on actual costs, allocation keys should be used. This calls for additional information, including on individual cost factors such as energy, chemicals, and spare parts, and on the number of staff per service. Using the share of revenue by service as an allocation key is unlikely to be helpful and could introduce distortions. As cross-subsidies between water and sanitation are common, tariff revenues from sanitation may in reality be much lower than the actual costs generated by the services. When applying a Cost-based Approach, it will be necessary to analyse costs to arrive at the true cost of each service. This involves reliance on recent tariff studies or pre-existing information to gain a clear understanding of the relative share of operating costs that can be allocated to different services. Doing this can be time consuming, and may be only possible for a small sample of utilities. C3: Large capital maintenance cost Large capital maintenance expenditure is the cost of renewing, replacing, rehabilitating, refurbishing or restoring assets to ensure that services continue at the level of performance that was first delivered. Capital maintenance typically occurs more infrequently than minor maintenance classified under C2, but is considerably more costly. Examples include replacing components; cleaning/re-excavating wells and storage tanks; and rehabilitating network pipes. Annual expenditure on large capital maintenance can usually be estimated in the same manner as for C1 Investment costs — that is from both the service providers’ cash flow statements and balance sheets. In some cash flow statements, service providers may not separately record C3 Large capital maintenance, and C2 Operating and maintenance costs. It will then be necessary to compare annual balance sheets to estimate how the asset base has evolved over time. Any change in value would then need to be distributed between C1 and C3 by triangulating this finding with the information obtained from the cash flow statement in C1. C4: Financial costs Financial costs, estimated from financial accounts, typically comprise three main elements: • Capital repayments, or the principal of the debt associated with capital investment; • The cost of capital, or the cost of repaying the interest of the debt associated with capital investment. This is the cost of renting the capital and can usually be identified separately in financial accounts; and • The return on equity capital, paid as dividends to shareholders (or other benefits) in the case of for-profit companies. Given the potential difficulties in estimating the return on equity capital, and the profit element for not-for-profit companies, the System of Health Accounts uses different approaches as discussed in the box below. Learning from the health sector: Distinguishing between for-profit and not-for-profit/government service providers The System of National Accounts (and the System of Health Accounts) make a distinction in evaluating the costs of market and non-market providers. In the case of market (for-profit) providers, the value of the goods and services they produce is estimated in relation to the revenue they receive from the sale of their goods. This is done by compiling information on the total amount paid for the goods and services at the point of consumption. Data that values their output in the country’s national accounts may therefore be viewed by these providers as very beneficial. In the case of non-market (non-profit or government) providers, the value is estimated in relation to the cost of production, as these goods and services are not necessarily sold at a price that reflects the true cost of production. Costs are typically calculated as actual expenditure on inputs such as staff remuneration (including all benefits) and supplies. This includes budgetary expenditures on salaries, supplies, and other inputs. It may also include goods and services — such as free electricity — provided to those facilities by other government agencies 72 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative C5: Support or software costs Support, or software costs can be collected at the aggregate level, for example the expenditure of the Ministry of Water or other sector institutions. Specific service providers may also incur these costs as part of a specific programme. Expenditure on indirect support, such as for policy development, sector planning, budgeting, and related issues, can be estimated at the national level. Information on these costs may be obtainable directly from the National Accounts, which contain categories on support services to the water and sanitation sector (see Table 1, which contains the recommended classification of WASH services). In the case of support costs directly related to the provision of a particular service, it may be difficult to disaggregate them from other types of investment and operating costs classified under C1, C2 and C3. If recurrent in nature, they are likely to be included in either C2 Operating and maintenance costs, or if they are one-off costs incurred through a specific capital investment project, in C1 Investment costs. In the longer term, further development of expenditure reporting systems may facilitate the separation of support costs for specific investments and programmes, and enable them to be tracked as a separate cost category, or at least a subset of C5. Support costs might also be elicited from NGOs and other entities (including government) that support service delivery, or at the level of providers that use NGOs for this purpose. These costs are typically hard to track, however. In the case of NGOs, gaining access to their consolidated costs can be difficult, and they seldom separate hardware and support or ‘software’ costs. The best approach would therefore be to make estimations on the basis of a representative sample of NGOs, and for a representative number of programmes. C6: Taxes As defined by the SNA (SNA, 2008:143), taxes are compulsory, unrequited payments, in cash or in kind, made by economic agents to government units.1 There are two types of taxes: 1. Taxes on products (D21): These are taxes on goods and services resulting from their production, sale, transfer, leasing or delivery, and payable per unit of the product. These taxes can include: • Value added tax (VAT) • Taxes and duties on imports excluding VAT • Export taxes • Taxes on products, excluding VAT. 2. Other taxes on production (D29): These are taxes paid for the ownership or use of land, buildings or other assets, as well as on labour employed in the production process. See box below for more details. 1 They are described as unrequited because the government provides nothing in return to the economic agent making the payment, although governments may use the funds raised in taxes to provide goods or services to other units, either to the community as a whole or individually. 73Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 25. Other taxes on production in SNA Other taxes on production exclude those incurred as a result of engaging in production. They exclude tax on the profit or other income received by the enterprise, and are payable regardless of its profitability. They may be payable on land, fixed assets, or labour employed in the production process, or on certain activities or transactions. Other taxes on production can include the following: a. Taxes on payroll or workforce; b. Recurrent taxes on land, buildings or other structures: These are payable regularly, usually each year, for the use or ownership of land, buildings or other structures utilized by enterprises in production, whether owned or rented (GFSM2001, 1131; OECD, 4100); c. Business and professional licences: Taxes paid by enterprises for a licence to carry out a particular business or profession, such as taxi and casino licences. In certain circumstances, licences to use a natural resource are treated not as a tax, but as the sale of an asset. If, as a condition for granting a licence, the government carries out checks on the suitability or safety of the business premises, on the reliability, or safety, of the equipment employed, on the professional competence of the staff employed, or on the quality or standard of goods or services produced, the payments are not unrequited and should be treated as payments for services rendered, unless the amounts charged for the licences are out of all proportion to the costs of the checks carried out by governments (GFSM2001, 11452; OECD, 5210); d. Taxes on the use of fixed assets or other activities: Taxes levied periodically on the use of vehicles, ships, aircraft or other machinery or equipment used by enterprises for purposes of production, whether such assets are owned or rented. These taxes are often described as licences, and are usually fixed amounts that do not depend on the actual rate of usage (GFSM2001, 11451-11452 and 5.5.3; OECD, 5200); e. Stamp taxes; f. Taxes on pollution: Taxes levied on the emission or discharge into the environment of noxious gases, liquids or other harmful substances. They do not include payments made for the collection and disposal of waste or noxious substances by public authorities, which constitute intermediate consumption of enterprises (GFSM2001, 11452; OECD, 5200); and g. Taxes on international transactions. Source: SNA 2088:148 Section 7.97. The System of Health Accounts tracks taxes in a similar manner, as discussed in the box below. A second category, “Other items of spending” has been added to include charges that fall outside taxes on production and products. Learning from the health sector: Tracking taxes The System of Health Accounts Manual focuses on the final consumption of health care goods and services, with valuation at purchasers’ prices (i.e. including taxes on products). The aggregate current health expenditure combines in a single figure the monetary value of the final consumption of all health care goods and services by residents of a given country during a given period. In SHA 2011, taxes paid by service providers are included in the factors of provision classification. Taxes are included in FP.5 Other items of spending on inputs. This item includes all financial costs, such as interest payments on loans, taxes and so on. It includes: • FP.5.1 Taxes: Following the SNA definition, taxes are compulsory, unrequited payments, in cash or in kind, made by economic agents to government units. They are described as unrequited because the government provides nothing in return to the economic agent making the payment, although governments may use the funds raised in taxes to provide goods or services to other units, either collectively to the community as a whole or individually. • Item FP.5.1: Taxes comprise taxes on production and taxes on products. As the name implies, taxes on products are payable per unit of product. The tax may be a flat amount, depending on the physical quantity of the product, or it may be a percentage of the value at which the product is sold. • FP.5.2 Other items of spending: Other spending items include all transactions related to items not classified elsewhere. Transactions recorded here include property expenses, fines and penalties imposed by government, interest rates and costs for the use of loans, and non-life insurance premiums and claims. A major difference with the WASH sector is that charges (or royalties) must also be included. Numerous taxes are paid on WASH goods and services, varying between countries. The main kinds of tax collected are: a) from end-users on the sale of WASH goods and services, and b) from service providers. The first is classed as a financing type in WASH accounts and included in the tariff paid. Only the second should be included in the cost classification; these are recorded as a cost for WASH service providers in the Cost-based Approach. 74 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative It is assumed that taxes on intermediary consumption (taxes on products) would already be included in other expenditure categories. Pilot testing of the methodology demonstrated that it is impossible to disentangle taxes on products from the main expenditure (see box on Brazil below). Taxes tracked should therefore include: • Taxes paid by service providers on production: – Corporate taxes (corporate tax on profits, property tax, leasing tax for renting fixed assets, taxes for occupation of public grounds, taxes on compensation of employees) – Earmarked taxes paid by service providers. An example would be a tax for collecting water or a pollution tax for discharging wastewater into the environment. These are paid to the state or public institutions and used for specific purposes, including social contributions. • Other usage charges paid by service providers: – Charges for abstraction of water or discharge of wastewater paid to the state or public authority for the management of water resources. The licence fee depends on the volume of water collected. It is passed on to users on the basis of the volume of water consumed. Earmarked taxes and fees are often passed onto end-users as a separate item on their bills. The box below gives an example from Brazil, showing the importance of tracking different types of tax as they can represent a significant cost for the sector. Box 26. Example from Brazil: The importance of tracking taxes In Brazil, the current tax policy greatly affects the cost of WASH services, so it is crucial to include taxes when calculating the total cost of services. Services are taxed according to the legal nature of the provider rather than the nature of the service. The cost of services are therefore not affected in the same way for all providers, which in turn affects user tariffs. This approach does not take into account that WASH is a public service and should be accessible to all. Taxes levied should therefore be included in the analysis to observe their effect on prices and equity, and to compare them to domestic public transfers. This will increase understanding of the net inflow of public subsidies to the sector. WASH services are taxed when provided under concession by private companies, directly by public corporations, or by joint ventures between states and municipalities. These companies serve about 80% of users in the country and taxes can account for up to 15% of the cost of WASH services. Taxes include charges levied directly from end-users on the cost of services and paid to the government, as well as taxes on profit. This revenue is largely channelled to the federal government. The federal government then redistributes it to public services (including WASH) in the form of domestic public transfers (grants). The main finding was that in the period 2010–2012, taxes paid to the government by WASH service providers represented on average 4.8% of the total expenditure on WASH services, compared to domestic public transfers, which represented 7% of the total financing revenue to the sector. This shows that the net inflow of public subsidies is actually lower than it seems. It did, however, increase between 2010 and 2012 as domestic public transfers to the sector rose with Brazilian National Plan for Basic Sanitation (Plansab). 75Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks Objectives: This note indicates why it is important to estimate fixed asset stocks for the sector in parallel with estimating financial flows. It shows how this facilitates linkages with existing accounting conventions such the System of National Accounts. It highlights potential methodological challenges and suggests ways of addressing them. MN 6.1. Why is it important to estimate fixed asset stocks? There are several limitations to tracking financial flows, as set out below: • Tracking investment flows can potentially generate misleading results, as they typically vary from year to year. For example, if a country is building a large asset at national scale, such as a dam or a pipeline, capturing the nominal value of that investment for each year the asset is under construction would show up as an investment peak followed by much lower investment levels. At global level, this may be interpreted as the country having “deprioritized” investment once this large asset has been built. In reality, the asset would be producing benefits so investment needs are subsequently lower. • Capturing the entire value of an investment in a given year does not allow for differences in the lifespan of investments to be reflected. Following the example given above, reflecting the entire value of a new asset with an anticipated lifespan of approximately 50 years only in the year of initial investment fails to capture the benefits that this asset delivers over a long period. • Some significant investments, such as FT2: User expenditure on self-supply, may be difficult to track where no data is available on annual investment flows for this type of expenditure. Information may, however, be available on service coverage at different points in time. This information is likely to come from periodic household surveys rather than annual investment flows. To complement the tracking of investment flows, it can be useful to estimate the value of existing fixed asset stocks and track how it evolves over time. This has numerous advantages: • It permits all sources of investment to be tracked on a comparable basis, thereby overcoming the problem of insufficient data on annual capital investment flows for significant investors, such as household investment in on-site sanitation. This approach was taken by the World Bank-led Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic report (AICD) for estimating current investment in the sector (Banerjee & Morella, 2011). Using this approach, it was found that households are the most significant investors in the WASH sector in sub-Saharan Africa. • It allows the consideration of asset performance. It would be possible, for example, at a subsequent stage of methodological development, to exclude the value of non-functional assets, which can be significant. Estimates indicate that up to 40% of manual hand-pumps in sub-Saharan Africa are non-functional at any given time (Sutton, 2005). • It can provide a sounder basis for estimating future costs, in particular the costs of attaining the SDGs. For example, the WHO global costing exercise first produced in 2004 and updated in 2012 is currently based on a relatively crude estimate of the total asset stocks (Hutton, 2012). This combines JMP coverage figures with the best available estimates of unit costs, based on the service ladder. Taking the value of this asset stock, a ratio is applied to derive projected operation and maintenance costs. Good unit cost values are not, however, always available at the national level so these estimates would be strengthened through more reliable estimates for asset stocks. • It is in line with the United Nations System of National Accounts, the standard methodology used by governments to compile and track information on economic activity. According to the UN Statistics Division, National Statistics Offices (NSOs) in each country should already be compiling information on asset stocks for all economic activities, including for water and sanitation. The total value of fixed assets is defined as “stocks of fixed assets” in SNA 2008, and evolves over time in line with gross fixed capital formation. 76 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table 14 below summarizes the SNA definitions that can be used or referred to in WASH accounts. Definition Consumption of fixed capital Cost of the decline in value of the producer’s stock of fixed assets as a result of physical deterioration, foreseen obsolescence or normal or accidental damage in the accounting period. It corresponds to “depreciation” in business management terminology. It should reflect the use of capital as a factor of production. It includes the use of buildings, equipment and other capital goods such as vehicles. It excludes rentals paid on the use of equipment or buildings, and fees, commissions, royalties, etc. payable under licensing arrangements, which are included as the purchase of services. Gross fixed capital formation Total value of the fixed assets that service providers have acquired during the accounting period (less the value of the disposal of these assets) and that are used repeatedly or continuously for more than one year in the production of services and goods. This corresponds to investments made in that year. Opening stocks of fixed assets Value of fixed assets at the start of the period (usually an accounting year). Closing stocks of fixed assets Closing stocks = opening stocks + gross fixed capital formation – consumption of fixed capital + other changes in volume of asset + holding gains/losses on assets Where: • Other changes in the volume of the asset are those not due to transactions, such as changes in classification, discoveries, and natural disasters; and • Holding gains/losses on assets are the changes in the price of assets. Source: System of National Accounts (2008). Table 14. Terminology used in SNAs to evaluate changes in fixed asset stocks MN 6.2. Potential methodological challenges with this approach and ways to overcome them This methodology has not been explicitly adopted in previous exercises seeking to track financial flows to the WASH sector. This is doubtless because there are a number of methodological difficulties in adopting the Fixed Asset Stock Approach, which require further consideration. These include the following: • For a number of reasons, existing information on fixed assets is often very poor in the WASH sector. Few entities have developed a comprehensive and reliable asset register. Ownership of assets is frequently unclear, and there is frequent confusion over who has paid for them and who effectively owns them. If this methodology were widely adopted, however, it could provide added incentives to WASH service providers to improve asset registries and create a useful tool for improved asset management. • Existing information may not always distinguish between water and wastewater. Some utilities currently split the valuation of their assets between water and wastewater, but this is by no means universal. Again, the adoption of a more systematic approach to valuing fixed asset stocks could provide incentives for utilities to split the values of water and wastewater in their balance sheets. • Most importantly, to obtain comparable fixed asset stock values, it would be necessary to agree on a common methodology for valuing assets across the sector. There are a number of existing methodologies for valuing assets, but these can produce very different values, especially if the asset base combines assets that have been built at different times. Alternative methodologies for valuing fixed asset stocks are presented in the box below. Different service providers may use different rules, even within the same country. 77Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 27. Alternative methodologies for valuing fixed asset stocks Valuing assets at their current book value (or as they are recorded in the service providers’ balance sheet): This is likely to be the simplest method for asset valuation, at least initially, as the values can be taken directly from companies’ balance sheets. The book value is based on the original expenditure less any depreciation incurred since the asset was purchased, plus any capital maintenance expenditure incurred. Applying this method can lead to distortions, however, as different service providers may use different conventions for valuing assets in their balance sheets. Some may value assets at their historical cost (adjusted for depreciation and in some cases for inflation), while others may adjust the value based on their replacement value. Valuing assets at their historical cost: This methodology estimates the cost at the time the asset was built, adjusted for depreciation and inflation. In the case of many utilities, water and sewerage assets were acquired a long time ago, although they are still delivering benefits. Their historical value would therefore be very low, although they continue to provide services. Other utilities might opt to update the value of assets in their books. Valuing assets at their replacement value, also referred to as the Modern Equivalent Asset (MEA) value: This approach identifies the cost of replacing the given asset by its modern equivalent at today’s cost, i.e. investing in an asset equipped with the latest technology but providing the same level of service. This provides figures closer to actual values, but conducting this kind of “revaluation” exercise can be complicated, costly and time-consuming. It is therefore seldom undertaken unless there is a clear motivation for doing so, such as the introduction of private sector participation which would call for valuing the asset base before contracting it out. Asset valuation methods vary from one country to another. Ofwat (2005) compared methods for valuing capital bases in six different countries while comparing their regulatory systems as a whole. In England and Wales, values for capital employed are based on a value estimated at the time of privatization in 1989, adjusted for subsequent depreciation and new investment. Companies also report MEA values: The estimated cost of assets of equivalent productive capability to satisfy their remaining service potential, less accumulated current cost depreciation. Australian companies report current replacement costs in a similar way to companies in England and Wales. Source: (Ofwat, 2005), “International comparison of water and sewerage service” The System of National Accounts (2008) also formulates recommendations for valuing assets and reflecting them in balance sheets. These can serve as a useful reference, while bearing in mind the following points of caution: • Information on the initial investment in a particular asset should be obtained: To successfully track financing types to the sector, it is important to identify the actor(s) that financed the initial construction. In the case of water utilities, for example, investment funds may come from internally generated revenue, government subsidies or international transfers. • For investment by households, a number of assumptions should be formulated: Deriving the value of the fixed asset stock in which households have invested over time can be done based on the number of existing facilities multiplied by the unit cost of these facilities, minus government subsidies.1 Given the typical lack of information about when the investments were made, this is equivalent to valuing household assets based on the MEA approach. For consistency, it might be preferable to use the MEA approach for all other asset types as well, although this could be difficult to achieve if the method has not previously been applied. The box below shows how this method was applied in Brazil. 1 An additional complication is that in national accounts, households are not considered to be “investors”; instead, they purchase consumer durables (which would be classified as investments if purchased by an establishment). For households, the consumer durable is recorded as consumed the moment it is purchased. It is therefore important to record the purchase of consumer durables by households and estimate the lifetime of the equipment. The treatment of these household investments will need to be discussed and agreed with statistics experts and with the System of National Accounts. 78 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 28. Example from Brazil: Estimating fixed asset stocks of service provides and households Estimating fixed asset stocks in Brazil was possible thanks to the aggregation of financial information on asset investments from service providers in the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). Significant work was still required on the data, which were drawn from a range of different service providers and presented in different formats. Nor were asset stocks valued in the same way. Due to differences in methods, it was only possible to estimate the stock of fixed assets for formal service providers. This information is recorded in their balance sheets, which are available in SNIS for corporate private service providers only, and not for public service providers, local authorities or public organizations. SNIS records the asset value at depreciated historical prices. These values were used to estimate the asset stock of all formal providers at their historical value, which was then adjusted with the sectoral price index to adjust for annual inflation. This was done by calculating an average unit fixed asset stock per connection and per household. The total stock was calculated as Total Assets (-) Current Assets (-) Long-Term Assets. An additional challenge was that in 1995, asset valuation changed from a method based on the historical value of assets to one based on the acquisition value of assets. The current average book value of assets acquired after 1995 therefore had to be estimated using their acquisition value. Only one state-owned company (SABESP) in São Paulo that turned public very recently re-evaluated its assets using their replacement values. This methodology could be applied to other service providers in the future, as it gives a more accurate value of asset stocks. The stock of fixed assets for self-provided households was calculated based on estimated unit costs of equipment per household (septic tanks, water tanks and wells) and the reported number of self-supplied households from the population census. However, it was not possible to estimate asset stocks of water resource management infrastructure for municipalities whose information is not held in the SNIS. These omissions may represent around 5% of existing total asset stocks. In conclusion, given the methodological difficulties entailed in estimating fixed asset stocks, the WASH accounts team will need to test the feasibility of alternative methods and the potential errors or biases in doing so. Countries that undertake the exercise of valuing asset stocks should state clearly which method has been used, and whether it has been consistently applied across service providers or asset types. It may be possible to do so only on a sample basis. Valuing fixed asset stocks may be more complex when first attempted, as the initial value of the asset base needs to be determined, but will become comparatively easier for subsequent iterations. It will require the identification of existing assets, and their value, for each service provider. This will also help to define reference values for other types of cost such as operating costs and capital maintenance costs. These can be estimated as a percentage of asset values if no other reliable estimate can be gathered at a reasonable cost. A further step in the refinement of the methodology could be to adopt a full Fixed Asset Stock Approach for the sector, tracking not only assets but also liabilities (i.e. the loans that have been provided to finance such assets) in order to derive a value for the net fixed asset stock. This is recommended by the International Monetary Fund (2001) in its Government Finance Statistics Manual.1 1 (International Monetary Fund Statistics Department, 2001) available at: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/gfs/manual/pdf/all.pdf 79Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators Objectives: This note sets out the tables used to prepare WASH accounts. A summary list of all tables is presented in Step 3 of the Guidance Document. Preparing these tables enables a full picture of WASH sector financing to be created for policy use. This Methodological Note contains the structure of the tables together with an explanation of each, and the list of indicators that can be derived from them. MN 7.1 How are the WASH accounts tables constructed? WASH accounts tables display information on the consumption, production and financing activities of a country’s WASH sector. Reporting the data and estimates in a uniform way, using standard tables, facilitates comparison across countries. The rows and columns of WASH accounts are based on the classifications presented elsewhere in this methodology, including: • Table 1 – TrackFin classification of WASH goods and services; • Table 2 – Definitions: Uses of WASH services, WASH sector actors and financing types; and • Table 12 – TrackFin classification of costs. In addition, some of the proposed tables include a breakdown by region or service areas, some are included in the table below. This summarizes all classification types (and labels) used in WASH accounts. Classifications Definition WASH services (S) WASH services and products provided by WASH service providers and consumed by users. See Table 1 for more on classification. Uses of WASH services (U) Type of use of WASH goods and services. See Table 2. WASH service providers (P) Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH goods and services. See Table 2. Financing units (FU) Institutional entities that provide or mobilize funding to the sector to pay for WASH services. They may allocate funds directly to service providers or channel them through intermediary institutions. See Table 2. Financing types (FT) The sources of funding prior to distribution through financing entities. See Table 2. Costs (C) Type of cost (or expenditure type) borne by service providers for the provision of WASH services. See Table 12. Service areas (A) Areas where WASH services are provided and consumed (urban, rural or central). Geographic regions (R) Regions where WASH services are provided and consumed. Geographic nominations will vary from one country to another. Table 15. Classifications used in WASH accounts WASH accounts tables are constructed to track the financial flows between these dimensions. The classifications can be applied to individual costs, producing expenditure tables for a single dimension (such as by type of WASH use, service providers, or financing type). Additional information can be gained from cross-classification involving two or more dimensions. Many combinations of two or three-dimensional tables can be created. The choice of tables depends on their relevance to the country, and the feasibility of creating them. A selection of two-dimensional tables is presented here. Recommended common WASH accounts tables Additional explanation of each proposed WASH accounts table, and the information they generate, is provided below. For ease of reference and to facilitate comparison, each table is assigned a number and a code indicating the type of information it contains. The convention used is that the headings refer first to the row classification, and then to the column classification. For example, Table WA 1 (SxA) presenting the allocation of expenditure by main WASH service (S) and service area (A) is referred to as the SxA table, with WASH services (S) appearing in rows and service area (A) in columns. 80 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area: This table shows total expenditure on each main type of WASH service by service area as defined by the country. According to country-specific policy needs, countries can decide to develop also an SxR table for WASH expenditure by main WASH service and country-defined geographic region. Areas A1 Urban A2 Rural A3 Central Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total Table 16. WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of service and use: This table shows financing units’ expenditure on the various types of WASH service and use. This table provides a summary presentation of the demand for WASH services in the country, identifying who is consuming what type of service. This is done by type of use rather than by type of users. Table 17. WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH use and service WASH uses (U) U1 U2 U3 U4 Main WASH services (millions of currency units) Served domestic use Self-provided domestic use Served non-domestic use Self-provided non-domestic use Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total 81Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Table WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of service and provider: This table shows service providers’ expenditure on different types of WASH service. It clarifies “Who provides what?” It also provides a summary presentation of the WASH supply market in the country, identifying who the providers are, and how spending to the sector is channelled through different providers. It displays the relative importance of each type of provider on the market. Table 18. WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH provider and service WASH providers P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Main WASH services (millions of currency units) Government agencies Network corporate providers Non-network corporate providers NGOs and community-based organizations Self-provided users Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total Table WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of provider and financing type: It addresses the question, “Where does the money come from?” presenting the different sources of revenue by financing type for each service provider. It allows resource flows within the WASH sector to be followed, via the columns displaying the funding origin to the rows displaying its recipients and users. The table also shows the relative importance of each type of revenue stream in financing each type of provider’s activities, and in the sector overall Table 19. WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by financing type and WASH provider Financing types FT1 FT2 FT3 FT4 FT5 FT6 WASH providers (millions of currency units) Tariffs for services provided User expenditure on self-supply Domestic public transfers International public transfers Voluntary contributions Repayable financing Total P1 Government agencies P2 Network corporate providers P3 Non-network corporate providers P4 NGOs and community- based organizations P5 Self-provided users Total 82 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by service type and financing type: This table shows the financing path to the provision of WASH services. It addresses the question, “Who finances what?” presenting the different sources of revenue (financing types) for each service. Resource flows to the WASH sector can be followed from the columns displaying the origin of the funds to the rows displaying the activities on which they are spent. Table 20. WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of financing and type of WASH service Financing types FT1 FT2 FT3 FT4 FT5 FT6 Main WASH services (millions of currency units) Tariffs for services provided User expenditure on self-supply Domestic public transfers International public transfers Voluntary contributions Repayable financing Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total 83Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Ta bl e 2 1. W A 6 ( Sx FU ) – W AS H ex pe nd itu re by fi na nc in g un it an d W AS H se rv ice Fi na nc in g un its FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 M ai n W AS H se rv ice s (m illi on s o f c ur re nc y u nit s) Us er s Na tio na l au th or iti es Re gio na l au th or iti es Lo ca l a ut ho rit ies Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs Ec on om ic an d q ua lit y re gu lat or s Bi lat er al an d m ult ila te ra l do no rs NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s Ba nk s a nd fin an cia l ins tit ut ion s To ta l S1 W at er su pp ly se rv ice s S2 Sa nit at ion se rv ice s S3 Su pp or t se rv ice s t o t he W AS H se cto r S4 W at er re so ur ce m an ag em en t re lat ed to wa te r a nd sa nit at ion se rv ice s S5 Hy gie ne se rv ice s To ta l Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by service and financing unit: This table shows how much is spent by each financing unit on which service. It describes how overall financing units allocate their resources. It addresses the question, “Who funds what?” 84 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Ta bl e 2 2. W A 7 ( Px FU ) – W AS H ex pe nd itu re by W AS H pr ov id er an d fin an cin g un it Fi na nc in g un its FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 W AS H pr ov id er s ( m illi on s of cu rre nc y u nit s) Us er s Na tio na l au th or iti es Re gio na l au th or iti es Lo ca l a ut ho rit ies Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs Ec on om ic an d q ua lit y re gu lat or s Bi lat er al an d m ult ila te ra l do no rs NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s Ba nk s a nd fin an cia l ins tit ut ion s To ta l P1 Go ve rn m en t ag en cie s P2 Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs P3 No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs P4 NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s P5 Se lf- pr ov ide d us er s To ta l Table WA 7 (PxFU) – WASH expenditure by provider and financing unit: This table shows how much is spent by each financing unit on which type of service provider. It highlights the financing path to the provision of WASH services. It addresses the question, “Who funds who?” 85Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Ta bl e 2 3. W A 8 ( FT xF U) – W AS H ex pe nd itu re by fi na nc in g ty pe an d fin an cin g un it Fi na nc in g un its FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 Fi na nc in g ty pe s (m illi on s o f c ur re nc y u nit s) Us er s Na tio na l au th or iti es Re gio na l au th or iti es Lo ca l a ut ho rit ies Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs Ec on om ic an d q ua lit y re gu lat or s Bi lat er al an d m ult ila te ra l do no rs NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s Ba nk s a nd fin an cia l ins tit ut ion s To ta l FT 1 Ta riff s f or se rv ice s pr ov ide d FT 2 Us er ex pe nd itu re on se lf- su pp ly FT 3 Do m es tic pu bli c tra ns fer s FT 4 In te rn at ion al pu bli c tra ns fer s FT 5 Vo lun ta ry co nt rib ut ion s FT 6 Re pa ya ble fin an cin g T ot al Table WA 8 (FTxFU) – WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit: This table shows the types of financing through which overall financing units allocate resources to the sector. 86 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table 24. WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider WASH providers P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Cost type (millions of currency units) Government agencies Network corporate providers Non-network corporate providers NGOs and community-based organizations Self-provided users Total C1 Investment costs including hardware and associated support C2 Operating and maintenance costs C3 Large capital maintenance costs C4 Financial costs C5 Support costs C6 Taxes Total Table WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider: This table shows how different types of provider allocate resources to cover different types of cost. It answers the question, “What types of cost are funded and by whom?” Table 25. WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH service Main WASH services S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Cost type (millions of currency units) Water supply services Sanitation services Support services to the WASH sector Water resource management related to water and sanitation services Hygiene services Total C1 Investment costs including hardware and associated support C2 Operating and maintenance costs C3 Large capital maintenance costs C4 Financial costs C5 Support costs C6 Taxes Total Table WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH service: This table shows the type of cost on which resources are spent to provide each WASH service. 87Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Table 26. WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider WASH providers P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Asset stocks (millions of currency units) Government agencies Network corporate providers Non-network corporate providers NGOs and community-based organizations Self-provided users Total AS1 Closing stocks of fixed assets Total Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Asset stocks by type of WASH provider: This table presents the stock of assets for each type of provider. This permits the evaluation of asset stocks for the sector as a whole, reflecting what has been invested over time by each type of service provider (including household self-service). MN 7.2 What are WASH accounts indicators? WASH accounts indicators are key figures on sector expenditure derived directly from the WASH accounts tables. These indicators are directed principally to national policy-makers, but also serve to facilitate international reporting. Due to difficulties in comparing national currency units, the use of ratios is recommended where possible (such as the ratio of WASH spending to GDP), in order to avoid the distorting impact of currency exchange rates. However, some indicators, such as total expenditure on the WASH sector at the national level, and total expenditure on WASH per capita, can be presented in currency units. The conversion from local currency into international dollars using current exchange rates or a PPP exchange rate needs to be considered and documented. Table 27 below presents the main indicators that can be elaborated in response to a country’s policy questions. Benchmarking and presenting indicators in context Certain indicators would benefit from comparison with actual levels of GDP. For example, a figure showing the percentage of WASH sector expenditure as a percentage of GDP does not provide an indication of the relative size of GDP from one country to the next. It is therefore preferable to chart the percentage of WASH expenditure on the x-axis and show GDP per capita on the y-axis. This shows whether there is any form of GDP impact on WASH sector spending. 88 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table (T) Indicator (I) that can be derived Table WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by service and service area Total expenditure on the WASH sector at the national level Total expenditure on WASH in the country as share of GDP Total expenditure on WASH per capita Total expenditure on WASH as a percentage of total public spending Total expenditure on urban and on rural drinking-water as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Total expenditure on urban and on rural sanitation as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of service and use Total expenditure per type of service use Table WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of service and provider Total expenditure per type of WASH service Total expenditure per type of WASH provider Table WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of provider and financing type Total expenditure per type of financing type Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of service and financing type Total domestic public transfer expenditure and as a percentage of total WASH financing Total international public transfers expenditure and as a percentage of total WASH financing Total user expenditure as a percentage of total WASH financing Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by service and financing unit Table WA 7 (PxFU) – WASH expenditure by provider and financing unit Table WA 8 (FTxFU) – WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit Total expenditure channelled through regional and local authorities as a percentage of WASH public expenditure Table WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and provider Table WA 10 (CxS ) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and main service Total investment cost as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Total operating and maintenance cost as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Total large capital maintenance cost as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Investment cost as a percentage of total water supply expenditure Operating and maintenance cost as a percentage of total water expenditure Large capital maintenance cost as a percentage of total water expenditure Investment cost as a percentage of total sanitation expenditure Operating and maintenance cost as a percentage of total sanitation expenditure Large capital maintenance as a percentage of total sanitation expenditure Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider Total WASH fixed asset stocks per capita Table 27. WASH accounts indicators 89Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Annex A. Glossary Note that terms in italics are defined elsewhere in the glossary. Bond A method of borrowing used by private companies, governments or municipalities consisting of the issue of fixed interest securities, repayable by a specified date. Certain government bonds have no fixed redemption date, and can be sold at their prevailing market price. Closing stocks of fixed assets Closing stocks = opening stocks + gross fixed capital formation – consumption of fixed capital + other changes in volume of asset + holding gains/losses on assets Where: Other changes in the volume of the asset are those that are not due to transactions, such as changes in classification, discoveries and natural disasters. Holding gains/losses on assets are the changes in the price of assets (SNA 2008). Commercial loan A loan extended by commercial banks or development finance agencies at commercial rates, i.e. interest rates that reflect market conditions. Compensation of human resources (employees and self-employed professional remuneration) Total remuneration paid by an enterprise to an employee in return for work performed during the accounting period. It includes wages and salaries and all forms of social benefits, payments for overtime or night work, bonuses, allowances, as well as the value of in-kind payments such as the provision of uniforms for medical staff. This category also includes the remuneration of non-salaried self-employed professionals (SNA 2008). Concessionary loan (or ‘soft loan’) A loan provided on concessionary lending terms, which may include a lower interest rate than the market rate, a longer repayment period or a grace period. Consumption of fixed capital Cost of the decline in value of the producer’s stock of fixed assets as a result of physical deterioration, foreseen obsolescence or normal or accidental damage in the accounting period. It corresponds to “depreciation” in business management terminology. It should reflect the use of capital as a factor of production. It includes the use of buildings, equipment and other capital goods such as vehicles. It excludes the rentals paid on the use of equipment or buildings, and fees, commissions, royalties, etc., payable under licensing arrangements, which are included as the purchase of services (SNA 2008). Domestic public transfers Public transfers from government agencies (central or local government) to WASH actors. These are often subsidies that come from taxes or other sources of government revenue. This category includes only grants and excludes concessionary loans, which are included in FT6. Equity investments A form of finance in which investors take an ‘equity stake’, meaning that they purchase shares in an entity. This enables them to share the risk of that entity (through fluctuations in the share price) in return for the prospect of sharing its profits (through dividend payments). The higher the investment risk, the higher the expected level of return. 90 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Factors of production Factor inputs used by providers to produce the goods and services consumed or the activities conducted in the system. Included are: the costs of production (intermediary consumption + gross valued added + Compensation of human resources + Other taxes less subsidies on production + Consumption of fixed capital); Gross fixed capital formation; and Changes in the stock of assets. (SNA 2008). Financing Act of providing funding. Financing types Financial flows that circulate between financing units and service providers, characterized by their origin and nature. Financing units Institutional entities that provide funding to the sector. They mobilize funding to pay service providers for WASH services. They may allocate funds directly to service providers or channel them through other financing units. Funding Monetary value of the funds provided to support a given activity. Grant A form of development aid without repayment obligations. Grants might be untied or carry explicit or implied political and commercial obligations. Grants are usually provided by IFIs, governments, foundations and specific funds with different policies, procedures and technical products. A grant can be blended with other kinds of finance to produce a suitable financing package for a particular project. Gross Domestic Product GDP derives from the concept of value added. Gross value added is the difference between output and intermediate consumption. GDP is the sum of gross value added of all resident producer units plus that part (possibly the total) of taxes on products, less subsidies on products, that is not included in the valuation of output. GDP is also equal to the sum of the final use of goods and services (all uses except intermediate consumption) measured at purchasers’ prices, less the value of imports of goods and services. Finally, GDP is also equal to the sum of primary incomes distributed by resident producer units (SNA 2008). Gross fixed capital formation Total value of the fixed assets that service providers have acquired during the accounting period (less the value of the disposal of assets) and that are used repeatedly or continuously for more than one year in the production of services and goods (SNA 2008). Gross valued added Gross value added = output – intermediate consumption. Gross value added is a measure of the contribution to GDP made by an individual producer, industry or sector. It is the value of output less the value of the goods and services, excluding fixed assets, consumed as inputs by a process of production (intermediate consumption). Once the value added has been generated, it can be decomposed in the primary factors for generation of income, according to the following formula: (Gross) value added = (gross) operating surplus + compensation of employees + taxes – subsidies (SNA 2008). 91Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Guarantees A contract by a third party (C) to underwrite a financial commitment entered into by two parties (A and B). Guarantees can be used by national governments to reduce the risks of borrowing and bond issues by their sub-sovereign bodies, and by international agencies to increase the creditworthiness of developing country institutions and support specific projects within them. Intermediate consumption (materials and services used) Total value of goods and services used for the provision of goods and services (not produced in-house) bought in from other providers and other industries of the economy. All the materials and services are to be fully consumed during the production activity period (SNA 2008). International public transfers Voluntary donations (or grants) from public donors and multilateral agencies that come from other countries. Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and entirely included in FT6 – Repayable financing. Microfinance institutions Refers to schemes for extending credit, savings, insurance, money transfers and other financial products to small business, farmers and other low-income borrowers who cannot get access to normal bank loans. Net value added Net value added = Gross valued added – consumption of fixed capital = output – intermediate consumption – consumption of fixed capital Net value added is obtained from Gross value added less the Consumption of fixed capital that occurs when the reduction in the value of the fixed assets used in production during the accounting period results from physical deterioration, normal obsolescence or normal accidental damage (SNA 2008). Official Development Assistance (ODA) Grants or loans to countries and territories on the DAC List of ODA Recipients (developing countries) and to multilateral agencies. They may: (a) be undertaken by the official sector; (b) have promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective; (c) provide concessional financial terms (if a loan), having a grant element of at least 25%. The OECD DAC database at present only tracks ODA flows from OECD member countries but is looking to develop coverage of other non-OECD donors. Operating and maintenance expenditure Routine maintenance and operation costs to keep services running (e.g. wages, fuel or any other regular purchases). Operating expenditures is the recurrent (regular, ongoing) spending to provide WASH goods and services: labour, fuel, chemicals, materials, and purchases of any bulk water. Maintenance expenditure is the routine expenditure needed to keep systems running at design performance, but does not include major repairs or renewals not recognized as recurrent (WASHCost). Repayable financing Sources of finance from private or public sources and that ultimately have to be repaid, such as loans (including concessionary loans and guarantees), equity investments or other financial instruments such as bonds. This includes concessionary repayable financing and non- concessionary repayable financing. Service providers Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH services, including government institutions that provide support. 92 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Subsidies A subsidy is a grant given generally by the government to economic actors in various forms, such as a cash transfer, a tax reduction or inputs at lower prices (such as free land). A subsidy can be given to economic actors as an incentive to deliver goods and/or services that benefit society. A subsidy can also be provided to households below the poverty line to enable them to access basic goods and services. Subsidies are sometimes provided to support utility infrastructure projects and may include ‘hardware subsidies’ (to reduce the initial capital investment costs), ‘operating subsidies’ (to cover losses incurred during service operation) or ‘software subsidies’ (to cover the software costs associated with the infrastructure development, such as for project preparation, capacity building and training). A hidden form of public subsidy may consist of making an equity investment with no expectation of repayment or a return. Support or software costs Cost of software activities associated with infrastructure development, such as project preparation, capacity building, training, community mobilization and behavioural change activities. Includes expenditure on direct and indirect support. Expenditure on direct support (ExpDS) includes expenditure on both pre- and post-construction support activities directed to local-level stakeholders (for example, training for community or private sector operators, users or user groups). Expenditure on indirect support (ExpIDS) includes the cost of planning and policy-making at the governmental level, including strengthening the skills and capacities of professionals and technicians. These costs have a direct impact on the long-term sustainability of projects. Tariffs (in the OECD 3T typology) Funds contributed by users of WASH services for obtaining the services. In the OECD 3T typology, tariffs include two types of funding: • Tariffs for services provided; and • Households’ out-of-pocket expenditure on self-supply. The WASH accounts terminology proposes to separate these two types of funds to avoid confusion. Tariffs for services provided (in WASH accounts) Payments made by users (domestic and non-domestic) to service providers for access to and use of the service. Taxes Includes taxes and fiscal contributions levied from service providers: • Taxes on production (corporate tax on profits, property tax, leasing tax (“taxe professionelle”) for renting fixed assets, taxes for occupation of public grounds, or for the remuneration of employees. • Usage charge related to (or earmarked for) the sector such as the payment of royalties, levies or duties for the use of water, or the discharge of wastewater into water bodies. • Other charges on production levied for earmarked uses, such as social contribution. Taxes (in the OECD 3T typology) Funds originating from domestic taxes that are channelled to the sector via transfers from all levels of government – national, regional or local. Such funds would typically be provided as subsidies for capital investment or operations. “Hidden” forms of subsidy may include tax rebates, concessionary loans (i.e. at a subsidised interest rate) or subsidised services (such as subsidised electricity). 93Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Transfers (in the OECD 3T typology Funds from international donors and international charitable foundations (including NGOs, decentralized cooperation or local civil society organizations) that typically come from other countries. These funds can be contributed either in the form of grants, concessionary loans (i.e. through the grant element included in a concessionary loan, in the form of a subsidised interest rate or a grace period) or guarantees. The WASH accounts terminology proposes to separate international public transfers and voluntary transfers to avoid confusion. User expenditure on self- supply Funding provided by users to invest in or provide the service themselves. Self-provided users pay an initial investment up-front (in a well, a private water production system, or a private latrine) for access to the service and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. This can be in form of cash, material or time, but only cash payments are included in WASH accounts. This category can be further disaggregated into several sub-categories, such as FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply, or FT2.2 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply. Voluntary contributions Voluntary donations (or grants) from international and national non- governmental donors including from charitable foundations, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and are entirely included in FT6 Repayable financing. 94 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Annex B. Bibliography AMCOW, EUWI, UNDP. (2006). Getting Africa on track to meet the MDGs on water and sanitation - A status overview of sixteen African countries. AMCOW. Banerjee, S., & Morella, E. (2011). Africa’s Water and Sanitation Infrastructure – Access, Affordability, and Alternatives. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. Barnett, C., & al. (2001). The Application of National Health Accounts Framework to HIV/AIDS in Rwanda. Special Initiatives Report No. 31. Bethesda, MD: Partnerships for Health Reform Project, Abt Associates Inc. Camdessus, M. and Winpenny, J. (2003). Financing water for all. World Water Council, Secretariat of the 3rd World Water Forum and Global Water Partnership. De, S., & al. (2003). Has Improved Availability of Health Expenditure Data Contributed to Evidence-Based Policymaking? Country Experiences with National Health Accounts. Health Systems 20/20. (2011). Mali NHA policy Impact. Health Systems 20/20. Hernandez, P. (2012). Health Accounts: A review of 20 years of experience, Presentation for the 2012 Stockholm World Water Week. Hutton, G. (2012). Global costs and benefits of drinking-water supply and sanitation interventions to reach the MDG target and universal coverage. Geneva: WHO. International Monetary Fund Statistics Department. (2001). Government Finance Statistics Manual. IMF. Maeda, A., & al. (2012). Creating Evidence for Better Health Financing Decisions: A Strategic Guide for the Institutionalization of National Health Accounts. The World Bank. McIntyre, D., & al. (1995). Health Expenditure and Finance in South Africa. South Africa: Health Systems Trust and the World Bank. OECD, Eurostat, WHO. (2011). A System of Health Accounts. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Benefits of Investing in Water and Sanitation: An OECD perspective. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2010). Innovative financing mechanisms for the water sector. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2009). Managing Water for All – An OECD perspective on pricing and financing. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Meeting the Challenge of Financing Water and Sanitation: Tools and Approaches. Paris: OECD Publishing. Ofwat. (2005). International comparison of water and sewerage service. Ofwat. Partners for Health Reformplus. (2002). Using NHA to Inform the Policy Process- NHA Global Policy Brief. Bethesda, MD: Abt Associates Inc. SNA 2008. (2009). System of National Accounts 2008. New York: United Nations. Snehalatha, M., & al. (2011). Looking Beyond Capital Costs - Life Cycle Costing for Sustainable Service Delivery -A Study from Andhra Pradesh, India. Hyderabad: WASHCost (India) Project, Center for economics and social studies. Sutton, S. (2005). The sub-Saharan potential for household level water supply improvement. Rural Water Supply Network. The World Bank . (2010). Harnessing National Health Accounts to Strengthen Policymaking – Compendium of Case Studies. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Trémolet. (2012). Small-scale finance for water and sanitation. Stockholm: EU Water Initiative and Share. 95Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Trémolet, S., & Binder, D. (2010). Evaluating the effectiveness of public finance for household sanitation in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Trémolet, S., & Rama, M. (2012). Tracking national financial flows into sanitation, hygiene and drinking water. Geneva: WHO. United Nations Statistics Division. (2012). International recommendations for water statistics. New-York: United Nations Publications. United Nations Statistics Division. (2012). System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water. New-York: United Nations Publication. WaterAid. (2012). Hygiene framework. London, UK: WaterAid. WHO. (2012). UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) 2012 report. Geneva: WHO. WHO. (2014). UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level. Geneva: WHO. Relevant websites IBNET: https://www.ib-net.org/ National Health Accounts: http://www.who.int/nha/en/ SEEA-Water: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeaw/ SNIS (Brazil): http://www.snis.gov.br/ UN Statistics Division – International classifications registry: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regct.asp?Lg=1 VFM-WASH: www.vfm-wash.org WASH Cost: http://www.ircwash.org/washcost Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ inside back cover ] For more information: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/glaas/trackfin/en/ Contact: glaas@who.int ISBN 978 92 4 151356 2
Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level TrackFin Initiative GUIDANCE DOCUMENT UN-Water GLAAS UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative: tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level ISBN 978-92-4-151356-2 © World Health Organization 2017 Some rights reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo). Under the terms of this licence, you may copy, redistribute and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided the work is appropriately cited, as indicated below. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. If you adapt the work, then you must license your work under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If you create a translation of this work, you should add the following disclaimer along with the suggested citation: “This translation was not created by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original English edition shall be the binding and authentic edition”. Any mediation relating to disputes arising under the licence shall be conducted in accordance with the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization. Suggested citation. UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative: Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Cataloguing-in-Publication (CIP) data. CIP data are available at http://apps.who.int/iris. Sales, rights and licensing. To purchase WHO publications, see http://apps.who.int/bookorders. To submit requests for commercial use and queries on rights and licensing, see http://www.who.int/about/licensing. Third-party materials. If you wish to reuse material from this work that is attributed to a third party, such as tables, figures or images, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright holder. The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned component in the work rests solely with the user. General disclaimers. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WHO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted and dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by WHO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by WHO to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall WHO be liable for damages arising from its use. Design and layout by L’IV Com Sàrl, Villars-sous-Yens, Switzerland. GLAAS visual identifier design by Ledgard Jepson Ltd, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, England. Printed by the WHO Document Production Services, Geneva, Switzerland. TrackFin initiative: A brief overview Effective financing for drinking-water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) is essential for the sustainable delivery of services. The UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) indicates that there are substantial gaps in our understanding and tracking of financing to the WASH sector. Financial reporting is often insufficient to enable sound, evidence-based planning and budgeting decisions. To help rectify these shortcomings, WHO is leading the TrackFin initiative under the UN-Water GLAAS project. Its objectives are to define and test a globally accepted methodology to track financing to WASH at the national level. This methodology enables countries to track sector financing using standardized classifications, and to develop a set of WASH accounts and indicators presented in a format comparable across regions and countries. Its aim is to answer four basic questions: • What is the total expenditure in the sector? • How are funds distributed between the various WASH services and expenditure types, such as capital expenditure, operating and maintenance expenditure, and cost of capital? • Who pays for WASH services? • Which entities are the main channels of WASH funding, and what is their respective share of total spending? Expected benefits from this initiative include strengthening national systems for the collection and analysis of financial information for WASH sector policy-making and programming, and better understanding of how financial resources for WASH are allocated at both national and global levels. TrackFin is being developed in collaboration with leading country sector institutions, national statistical offices, finance departments, and international entities such as the UN Statistics Division, the OECD and the World Bank, and with support of a Technical Advisory Group comprising sector and finance experts. Building on experience in the health sector, WHO has developed this Guidance Document for use by institutions involved in monitoring and financing the WASH sector at the national level. The approach was successfully applied during pilot testing in Brazil, Ghana and Morocco, and lessons learned have been incorporated into a revised methodology. TrackFin will now be implemented in other countries, and repeated in the initial set of countries in order to gradually build up a set of comparable data. The TrackFin initiative is managed by a small secretariat hosted by WHO. Its purpose is to provide overall methodological guidance for the work at the international level, as well as training for countries interested in applying the methodology. In response to country requests, WHO can provide support to national stakeholders planning to prepare WASH accounts. For further information, please contact glaas@who.int. ii UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Contents TrackFin initiative: A brief overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi List of Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Why is a methodology needed to track WASH financing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii What is the TrackFin initiative? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Guidance Document objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Why should countries develop WASH accounts? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Target audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Overview of the methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Guidance Document structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi 1 Step 1. Get started . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Mobilize political support for WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Define WASH accounts’ scope and key policy questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Identify data requirements and plan the work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4.1 Identify available data and define a data collection plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4.2 Develop a detailed budget and work plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2 Step 2. Collect data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1 Define WASH sector boundaries in terms of services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.1.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.1.2 TrackFin classification of WASH services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.1.3 Tasks to be undertaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.2 Map service provision arrangements and financial flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.2 Trackfin classification of WASH uses, actors and financial flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.3 Tasks to be undertaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.3 Estimate financial flows and fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.3.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.2 Methodologies for collecting data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.3 Tasks to be undertaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3 Step 3. Analyse data and report findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3.1 Compile WASH accounts and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3.1.1 Create the WASH accounts tables and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.1.2 Select appropriate tables and verify data consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.2 Prepare WASH accounts reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3.2.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3.2.2 The WASH accounts final report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.3 Disseminate the policy analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4 Step 4. Prepare for the next WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.1 Rationale for further rounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.2 Formulate recommendations for the next WASH accounts in the country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.2.1 Plan for the next stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2.2 Provide feedback on the methodology proposed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 iiiTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 MN 1.1. Existing WASH service classification systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 MN 1.2. Approach to defining the TrackFin classification of services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 MN 1.3. Proposals for further developing the classification for hygiene services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types . . . . . . . 45 MN 2.1. Classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 MN 2.2. Classification of WASH financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 MN 3.1. Rationale for estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 MN 3.2. Using an economic approach as a possible alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach . . . . 53 MN 4.1. Collecting data by financing types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 FT1: Tariffs for services provided . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 FT2: User expenditure on self-supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 FT3: Domestic public transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 FT4: International public transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FT5: Voluntary transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FT6: Repayable financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 MN 4.2. Potential challenges and how to address them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 MN 4.2.1 Data availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 MN 4.2.2 Allocation of financing types per financing units, WASH uses and services . . . . . . . . . . . 63 MN 4.2.3 Avoiding double counting and tracking how financial flows are channelled across the sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 MN 5.1. Classifying costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 MN 5.2. Potential sources of cost data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 C1: Investment costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 C2: Operating and maintenance costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C3: Large capital maintenance cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C4: Financial costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C5: Support or software costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 C6: Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 MN 6.1. Why is it important to estimate fixed asset stocks? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 MN 6.2. Potential methodological challenges with this approach and ways to overcome them . . . . . . . 76 Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 MN 7.1 How are the WASH accounts tables constructed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 MN 7.2 What are WASH accounts indicators? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Annex A. Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Annex B. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Relevant websites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 iv UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative List of Figures Fig. 1. Overview of proposed methodology to track WASH financing at national level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Fig. 2. Organizational arrangements for developing WASH accounts under the TrackFin Initiative . . . . . . 3 Fig. 3. WASH accounts in relation to SEEA-Water Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fig. 4. Mapping financial flows based on consumption, production and financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Fig. 5. The value chain of WASH services under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) . . . . . . . . 12 Fig. 6. Mapping financial flows for WASH service provision: illustrative example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Fig. 7. Methodologies for estimating expenditure in the WASH sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Fig. 8. Framework for institutionalizing the production and use of WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Fig. 9. Sources of finance for the WASH sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Fig. 10. Costs and revenue to be computed for the Financial Flow Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Fig. 11. Costs and financing types recorded by the economic approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Fig. 12. Example of a financing flow allocation to categories of providers and services . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Fig. 13. Illustrative example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 List of Boxes Box 1. The System of National Accounts (SNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Box 2. Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Box 3. Examples of organizational arrangements from TrackFin pilot exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Box 4. How can WASH accounts data be used for evidence-based policy-making? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Box 5. The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEA-Water) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Box 6. Examples of existing information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Box 7. Key points to cover in the inception report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Box 8. Identifying and classifying WASH sector actors and financial flows: Example from Brazil . . . . . . 22 Box 9. Building a repository of data sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Box 10. Examples of data collection methods from the pilot exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Box 11. Reconciling differences between the Cost-based Approach and the Financing Type Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Box 12. Filling data gaps: Making assumptions and using allocation keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Box 13. Key WASH accounts indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Box 14. Accounting methodologies and financial statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Box 15. Advantages and disadvantages of using the cash flow approach to estimate financial flows . . 51 Box 16. A possible economic approach to estimating financial flows in the WASH sector . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Box 17. Regulatory data on tariffs of service provision from national regulators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Box 18. Estimating household investment for self-supply (C1 costs for P5): Examples from the pilot exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Box 19. Estimating households’ operation and maintenance costs (C2 costs for P5) for self-supply: Examples from Brazil and Morocco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Box 20. Estimating loans: Examples from country studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Box 21. Data availability in Ghana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Box 22. Example: How to use allocation keys to allocate spending across categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Box 23. Estimating flows per use: Financing types (revenue) and expenditure per type of use . . . . . . . 65 Box 24. Example: How to avoid double counting of financial flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Box 25. Other taxes on production in SNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Box 26. Example from Brazil: The importance of tracking taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Box 27. Alternative methodologies for valuing fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Box 28. Example from Brazil: Estimating fixed asset stocks of service provides and households . . . . . 78 vTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level List of Tables Table 1. TrackFin classification of WASH goods and services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 2. TrackFin classifications for WASH service use, WASH sector actors, and financing types . . . . 16 Table 3. Recommended WASH accounts tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 4. Link between WASH accounts information and policy questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Table 5. Summary of main international systems of classification of goods and services . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Table 6. Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Table 7. Classification of water services users in the SEEA-Water system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Table 8. Classification of water services providers in the SEEA-Water system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Table 9. Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Table 10. TrackFin classification of WASH financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Table 11. Gathering data on financing types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Table 12. TrackFin classification of costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Table 13. Gathering data on costs of service provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Table 14. Terminology used in SNAs to evaluate changes in fixed asset stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Table 15. Classifications used in WASH accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Table 16. WA 1 (SxA) WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Table 17. WA 2 (SxU). WASH expenditure by type of WASH use and service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Table 18. WA 3 (SxP). WASH expenditure by type of WASH provider and service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Table 19. WA 4 (PxFT). WASH expenditure by financing type and WASH provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Table 20. WA 5 (SxFT). WASH expenditure by type of financing and type of WASH service . . . . . . . . . 82 Table 21. WA 6 (SxFU). WASH expenditure by financing unit and WASH service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Table 22. WA 7 (PxFU). WASH expenditure by WASH provider and financing unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Table 23. WA 8 (FTxFU). WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Table 24. WA 9 (CxP). WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Table 25. WA 10 (CxS). WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Table 26. WA 11 (ASxP). Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Table 27. WASH accounts indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 vi UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Acknowledgements This report has been prepared by Sophie Trémolet and Marie-Alix Prat of Trémolet Consulting Limited (London), under the leadership and guidance of Bruce Gordon, Didier Allély-Fermé and Fiona Gore, as well as Jacqueline Sims and Betsy Engebretson of WHO. This is the second version of the Guidance Document, incorporating comments received from the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for the TrackFin initiative on the initial version, and from all participants at the interregional workshop held in Rabat, Morocco in September 2014. We are very grateful for comments provided during early stages of the exercise and at the inter-regional workshop. We thank the local WASH accounts team that led the testing of the initial version of the Guidance Document, namely: • In Brazil: Lauseani Santoni and Marta Litwinczik (Ministério das Cidades), João Batista Peixoto, Consultant, Brazil, with support from Teófilo Monteiro and Paulo Teixeira of PAHO/WHO; • In Ghana: Fred Addae and Suzzy Abaidoo, Ministry of Water Resources, Works and Housing, Kweku Quansah, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, Harold Esseku, Consultant, Phillipa Ross, Consultant, UK, with support from Akosua Kwakye, WHO; and • In Morocco: Samir Bensaid, Institut de l’Eau et l’Assainissement, Mokhtar Jaait, ONEE-Branche Eau, Morocco, Khalid Nadifi, Consultant, Morocco, with support from Hamed Bakir and Rola Aleman of WHO. Together with national stakeholders in all three countries, they made an invaluable contribution to developing the first set of WASH accounts and providing feedback on the methodology. In addition, we thank members of the Technical Advisory Committee for their useful suggestions, including Gérard Payen, United Nations Secretary General’s Advisory Board on Water (UNSGAB), Dominick de Waal and Guy Hutton, World Bank, Patricia Hernandez, WHO, Meera Mehta, CEPT, India, Catarina Fonseca, IRC, Richard Franceys, Cranfield University, Xavier Leflaive, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Alessandra Alfieri and Ricardo Martinez-Lagunes, United Nations Statistics Division. viiTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level List of acronyms and abbreviations 3Ts Tariffs, Taxes and Transfers (sources of finance) AICD Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic AMCOW African Ministers’ Council on Water CBO Community-based organization CLTS Community-led Total Sanitation COFOG Classification of the Functions of Government CPC Central Product Classification CRS Creditor Reporting System CSO Country Status Overview DAC Development Assistance Committee (OECD) GDP Gross Domestic Product GLAAS UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water IBNET International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development IEA Institut de l’Eau et de l’Assainissement, Morocco IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre ISIC International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities JMP WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation MDGs Millennium Development Goals MTEF Medium-term Expenditure Framework NEA National Education Account NGO Non-governmental Organization NHA National Health Accounts NSO National Statistical Office ODA Official Development Assistance OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PER Public Expenditure Review Ofwat Office of Water Services PPP Purchasing Power Parity PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper SWA Sanitation and Water for All SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SEEA System of Environmental and Economic Accounting SEEA-Water System of Environmental and Economic Accounting for Water SFP Strategic Financial Planning SHA System of Health Accounts SNA System of National Accounts UIS UNESCO Institute of Statistics UN United Nations UNSD United Nations Statistics Division UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UOE UNESCO/OECD/Eurostat USAID United States Agency for International Development WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WASH accounts Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Accounts WHO World Health Organization WSP Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank WSS Water Supply and Sanitation viii UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Introduction This Guidance Document sets out a methodology to identify and track financing to the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) sector. Referred to as WASH accounts, its purpose is to help countries track sector financing on a regular and comparable basis. Indicators drawn from the exercise are expected to support evidence-based policy-making. While the principal objective is to compile national level WASH accounts, the methodology can be applied at various levels, including the regional or city level. Further methodological development will doubtless be needed in future years, as more countries apply the methodology. The long-term aspiration of the TrackFin (tracking financing) initiative is to develop a common approach to obtaining reliable financial data. Achieving this will guide improved decision-making at the national level, and facilitate benchmarking within and between countries. Why is a methodology needed to track WASH financing? This methodology is based on the findings of the WHO and UN-Water GLAAS Working Paper “Tracking national financial flows into sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water” (Trémolet & Rama, 2012) published in July 2012. The paper stressed that effective financing for water, sanitation and hygiene is essential if the services necessary to save two million lives each year are to be delivered and sustained. To date, limited availability of financial data, coupled with inadequate monitoring systems, has impeded countries’ ability to assess progress and improve performance. The working paper concluded that the current understanding of financial flows to the WASH sector at the national level is limited. Against this background, there is common agreement that better understanding of financing to the WASH sector at the national level is critical for policy development and implementation. It is also important to encourage better and more equitable utilization of existing funds, and to attract additional financing. There is consensus, given the current deficiencies of financial data in the sector, that this is a difficult and challenging task. Even where data are available, an adequate level of disaggregation may not be possible. A methodology that could be used by a broad range of countries is therefore required. Demand for sound financial information in the sector has been confirmed at the highest political level, such as at the High Level Meetings organized by Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) in Washington DC in 2012 and 2014. On these occasions, several SWA member countries made commitments to improving financial tracking in the WASH sector. What is the TrackFin initiative? These calls for action provided the rationale for launching the WASH TrackFin initiative in August 2012. Its purpose is to develop and apply, over time, a common methodology for tracking financing to the WASH sector. This Guidance Document presents the TrackFin methodology as it currently stands, based on pilot results from Brazil, Ghana and Morocco obtained in 2014. TrackFin is currently managed by a secretariat hosted by WHO on behalf of UN-Water. It is closely linked to the GLAAS report, which tracks inputs to the sector, including financial contributions. The initiative will be developed jointly with leading sector institutions and experts involved in financial tracking, such as the World Bank, the OECD or UN Statistics Division. Work will proceed iteratively, starting with simple objectives and developing more complex approaches as more countries adopt the methodology and apply it at regular intervals. ixTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Guidance Document objectives This Guidance Document sets out a methodology to help countries produce WASH accounts. Its purpose is to track all expenditure in the WASH sector by all economic entities, including governments and public institutions, public and private organizations, NGOs, foundations, international and national donors, investors, and households. The methodology enables countries to answer four key questions: • What is the total expenditure in the WASH sector? • How are funds distributed to the different WASH services and expenditure types? • Who pays for WASH services and how much do they pay? • Which entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector? More specific policy questions may be answered depending on the level of detail generated. Data could, for example, be broken down to evaluate the distribution of WASH expenditure at the regional level, and to examine issues of equity. Early identification of specific questions that policy-makers would like to address is fundamental so that the data produced can be as policy-relevant as possible and capable of informing specific funding decisions. Why should countries develop WASH accounts? WASH accounts can help country decision-makers gather valuable information on current sector financing, track its evolution over time, and benchmark spending against other sectors or other countries. These accounts will provide detailed information on the origins of WASH funding and how that funding is used. The many benefits of this approach include the following: • Increased transparency over funding to the WASH sector: WASH accounts enable the tracking of expenditure across time, and the benchmarking of expenditure against sector targets or targets in other sectors or countries; • Ability to monitor the allocation of funding to sub-sectors and geographic regions according to need and in an equitable manner; • Ability to monitor the implementation of a financing strategy for the sector, leverage further investment, and support the institutions responsible for channelling funding to the sector; and • Ability to track whether commitments made by sector actors have been met. WASH accounts can also provide the foundation for robust and transparent communication with sector stakeholders, and the public at large, concerning the financial means deployed within the water sector. This facilitates comparison between financial investment in the sector and results achieved. Target audience The Guidance Document has been developed for governments and their advisers, especially in middle-and- lower-income countries. Its objective is to guide the preparation of WASH accounts to strengthen national policy-making and facilitate international reporting, such as for the GLAAS report. Country-level WASH accounts are also likely to interest bilateral donors, multilateral institutions, NGOs and philanthropic organizations seeking financial data to support programme planning at the national and international level. The methodology is intended for countries producing WASH accounts for the first time, in addition to those that have already prepared them. In the latter case, WASH accounts teams are strongly encouraged to build on existing work, especially with respect to sector mapping, identifying data requirements and sources, and improving the methodology for estimating expenditure. The Methodological Notes at the end of this Guidance Document contain detailed information on developing the methodology further over time. x UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Overview of the methodology The methodology is applied in a series of steps, as outlined in Fig. 1 below. STEPS DELIVERABLES NATIONAL STAKEHOLDER GROUP MEETINGS 1. Get started 1.1. Mobilize political support for WASH accounts 1.2. Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by institutions 1.3. Define the WASH accounts’ scope and key policy questions 1.4. Identify data requirements and plan the work 2. Collect data 2.1. Define WASH sector boundaries in terms of services 2.2. Map out service provision arrangements and financial flows 2.3. Collect data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks 3. Analyse data and report findings 3.1. Compile WASH accounts and indicators 3.2. Prepare WASH accounts report 3.3. Disseminate findings to policy-makers 4. Prepare for the next WASH accounts Inception report Start-up meeting Interim report WASH accounts validation meeting Final report Policy briefs Sector dissemination workshop Figure 1. Overview of proposed methodology to track WASH financing at the national level The WASH accounts final report should be approximately 60 pages (additional relevant detail can be annexed) including a set of 11 WASH accounts tables and an Executive Summary. The report should cover three main aspects: • Results of the analysis; • Policy recommendations based on the outcomes; and • Recommendations to the WHO Secretariat and expert group on improvements or modifications to the global methodology, based on challenges encountered and measures taken to overcome them. Countries are encouraged to gather existing data where possible, but where these are weak or non-existent, gaps should be filled by accurate estimates based on a combination of actual data and transparent assumptions. These assumptions can be refined in subsequent exercises, so as to gradually improve the level of precision in financial estimates. The methodology builds on existing international systems for tracking expenditure. These include the System of National Accounts (SNA) (see Box 1 below), and sector-specific systems such as the System of Health Accounts (SHA) for the health sector, or the Water Accounts for the water sector as a whole. It therefore implements the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water framework (SEEA-Water) designed by the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD). See Step 1.3, Box 5, for more detail on this system. xiTracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 1. The System of National Accounts (SNA) The System of National Accounts (SNA) is a broad structure for national economic accounting. This system was first adopted by the United Nations in 1952, and has since been revised and updated. The rules and structure of the SNA are contained in a manual entitled, “System of National Accounts 2008”. It is the internationally agreed standard set of recommendations for compiling measures of economic activity. The SNA comprises a set of coherent, consistent and integrated macroeconomic accounts, based on internationally agreed concepts, definitions, classifications and accounting rules. It provides an overview of economic processes, demonstrating how production is distributed among consumers, businesses, government, and other nations. It shows how income originating in production, modified by taxes and transfers, flows to these groups and how they allocate these flows to consumption, savings, and investment. It provides the definitions that underlie concepts such as gross domestic product (GDP). Specific areas of learning, and references to additional resources or Methodological Notes, are highlighted throughout the text using the following symbols. Learning from country experiences: The methodology was initially tested and subsequently revised in Brazil, Ghana and Morocco. Similar approaches may have been used in other countries. Where insights were gained from these experiences, they are highlighted in boxes showing the flag of the country concerned. Learning from the health sector: The methodology draws substantially on the System of Health Accounts (SHA) developed over the last 20 years in the health sector and currently used on a regular basis by more than 100 countries throughout the world. Learning that can be gained from the SHA is shown in a box bearing this sign. Coordinating with SEEA-Water: TrackFin is being developed in parallel with the rolling-out of the SEEA-Water system of water accounting, which aims at developing comprehensive Water Accounts over time by tracking both physical (hydrological) and financial flows. WASH accounts can be seen as a subset of these broader Water Accounts. Where SEEA-Water Accounts are developed, coordination between the two methodologies and dialogue between the teams should be encouraged. Boxes with this sign highlight areas where the SEEA-Water methodology should be taken into account to increase harmonization. Potential challenge: The development of WASH accounts is likely to give rise to a number of specific challenges. These challenges, and potential solutions, are highlighted in boxes with this sign. Methodological Notes: These provide more in-depth detail on the methodology, proposing alternative approaches to specific issues and giving suggestions for future development. They appear as annexes to the Guidance Document. Resources: These additional resources can be used by stakeholders seeking to apply the TrackFin methodology in the preparation of WASH accounts. They include practical tools, existing outputs from earlier stages of the TrackFin initiative, and a policy brief on WASH accounts for information purposes. They are available on the TrackFin website. Guidance Document structure The Guidance Document takes the reader through each step of the proposed methodology. The steps are as follows: • Step 1 – Get started: Sets out the initial steps needed to initiate the preparation of WASH accounts; • Step 2 – Collect data: Includes guidance on collecting and organizing the necessary data, calling on various methods capable of reflecting different circumstances; • Step 3 – Analyse data and report findings: Sets out how the WASH accounts and associated indicators should be compiled, and provides guidance on how the data can be interpreted and used for policy-making; and xii UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative • Step 4 – Prepare for the next WASH accounts: Summarizes what needs to be done by the WASH accounts team to extract and document lessons learned, share feedback on the international methodology, and to prepare for the next round. The sections are set out in the correct order of implementation. The WASH accounts team should familiarize themselves thoroughly with the Guidance Document prior to taking action, to ensure that they understand the overall process. To complement the guidance given here, a series of Methodological Notes has been developed. These Notes form an integral part of the Guidance Document, providing greater detail and alternative methodologies for specific areas, as shown in the box below. Annex A includes a glossary of key terms employed in this guide, while Annex B contains a list of useful references and websites. Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators Additional resources are available on the TrackFin website to support the preparation of WASH accounts. These are detailed in the box below. Policy Note: How can WASH accounts support policy-making? This is essential reading for any country currently considering whether to develop WASH accounts, and seeking to better understand their uses and benefits. It provides additional background on how WASH accounts can support policy-making; Summary overview of the methodology. This rapid overview of the methodology can be used by countries interested in applying the methodology, and by national stakeholders participating in elements of the process. This might include those providing data or receiving results, but who do not require in-depth knowledge of the entire methodology; A brief presenting the summary findings of the pilot exercises carried out in Brazil, Ghana, and Morocco. This covers lessons learned and provides an overview of the main results; Summary results of the TrackFin Initiative in the three pilot countries, with associated Powerpoint presentations; Standard Terms of Reference for the TrackFin champion and Focal Point, the national stakeholder group and the WASH accounts team; Outlines for the WASH accounts interim and final reports and executive summary; and A questionnaire designed to provide feedback on the methodology and any points for future methodological developments identified during the process. 1Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 1 Step 1 – Get started Step 1 – Tasks to be undertaken • Mobilize political support for WASH accounts – Mobilize support from high level members of government – Identify a country champion and a national TrackFin Focal Point – Convene a national level stakeholder group to oversee data collection and provide political support to the project • Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by national institutions • Identify the overall scope and key policy questions for WASH accounts – Organize a start-up meeting with members of the national level stakeholder group – Agree on a list of priority policy questions that the exercise aims to answer – Define a time period over which to gather information (2 to 3 years is optimal) - Agree on the geographic scope of the exercise and the level of geographic disaggregation • Identify data requirements and plan the work – Identify available data and define a data collection plan – Develop a detailed budget and work plan for data collection and analysis 1.1 Mobilize political support for WASH accounts The production of WASH accounts will most benefit countries if the outputs are ultimately used by policy-makers and sector stakeholders. The preparation of WASH accounts should, therefore, only take place in response to a clearly expressed policy demand. The first step consists of mobilizing support for the preparation of WASH accounts from high level members of the government, such as the ministries in charge of WASH services or the Ministry of Finance. This is essential to ensure the success of the exercise, and to overcome potential technical difficulties such as limited availability of information, weak information systems, or internal barriers to greater transparency. To that end, a champion for TrackFin within the ministries in charge of WASH needs to be identified. This person will lead the exercise, and will designate a TrackFin Focal Point responsible for establishing the WASH accounts team and overseeing the WASH accounts process (see Step 1.2 below). The champion is typically someone who has expressed the government’s intention to carry out the TrackFin initiative, either directly or in response to an invitation from the WHO TrackFin Secretariat or another agency. The champion will be responsible for obtaining support for the preparation of WASH accounts at the highest level of government. He/she will have clearly explained the expected benefits of undertaking the exercise to policy-makers in relevant sectors, such as the ministries in charge of WASH services, the Ministry of Finance, and the National Statistics Office. Policy Note: How can WASH accounts support policy-making? This note sets out the potential benefits of WASH accounts for decision-makers in more detail. It is essential reading for any country currently considering whether to develop WASH accounts, and seeking to better understand their uses and benefits. It is available on the TrackFin website. The TrackFin champion should then convene a national stakeholder group to oversee the production of the accounts. This group is responsible for appointing the TrackFin Focal Point and the WASH accounts team. The group will identify the policy questions that the WASH accounts aim to answer, define their scope, facilitate data collection, review outputs, and provide feedback to the Focal Point at critical moments of the analysis. Ideally, the TrackFin champion should chair the national stakeholder group. The national stakeholder group is central to the process. It provides the political support required and can help to ensure the participation of key stakeholders with data required for the compilation of the WASH accounts. It also 2 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative serves to strengthen links between the policy process and WASH accounts, institutionalizing their preparation so that the exercise can be repeated on a regular basis. This national stakeholder group can be established at different levels. It might include a TrackFin Steering Committee established at the decision-making level, as was the case in Morocco (see Box 2 – Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee below). It could also comprise a broader stakeholder group, including all parties likely to provide data for the exercise and to utilize the results. Final decisions on the national stakeholder group will depend on the number of institutions involved in the exercise and the level of engagement required to secure participation of key institutional actors. The national stakeholder group should ideally include representatives of the ministries in charge of WASH services, the Ministry of Finance, and the Department of Statistics, as well as of the main utilities, regulators, donors, NGOs and foundations active in the WASH sector. To the extent possible, the group should build on existing country-level WASH sector coordination platforms. Box 2. Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee In Morocco, the International Water and Sanitation Institute (IEA) housed in the National Office for Electricity and Water (ONEE) acted as the TrackFin Focal Point for the production of WASH accounts in 2014. To gain high level engagement with TrackFin’s objectives from all sector institutions, IEA set up a Steering Committee at the director level. This proved critical to gaining support and facilitating data collection. The Steering Committee was composed of directors from all key institutions, including the Ministry of Energy, Mines, Water and Environment, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of General Affairs and Governance, the High Commission for Planning, ONEE and IEA. In addition, a technical committee was set up with members of the same institutions in order to provide advice to the WASH accounts team on methodological and data collection aspects. Morocco benefited from having strong stakeholder involvement from the outset. The strong links between IEA and national sector stakeholders was very beneficial in setting up such high level coordination. This meant that the WASH accounts team could collect information rapidly and was able to complete the exercise in five months. Standard TORs for the TrackFin champion and the TrackFin Focal Point, as well as for the national stakeholder group, can be found on the TrackFin website. In addition, a package of information on TrackFin and WASH accounts (based on resources available on the TrackFin website) should be provided for dissemination to high level government members and key sector stakeholders. This will raise awareness about the benefits of tracking WASH financing and how the outputs can be used for policy. 1.2 Set up a strong WASH accounts team backed by institutions The Focal Point’s role is to organize and coordinate the WASH accounts team. This team will collect and analyse the data, and prepare all the outputs. As the Focal Point reports to the champion, he or she would preferably be a staff member of the ministry principally in charge of WASH services. Alternatively, the Focal Point could be hosted by a well-established public policy or research institution. The WASH accounts team should ideally comprise a relatively small number of people with a diverse and complementary range of expertise, including technical and policy experts from the WASH sector and representatives of the National Statistics Office. They will require good analytical and communication skills. Some members of the WASH accounts team should preferably be government personnel, to ensure capacity building at the national level and country ownership of the exercise. This team can either carry out the work itself or obtain the support of a national consultant, who would then form an integral part of the WASH accounts team. This was the case in the Brazil pilot exercise (see Box 3 below). Relying on external consultants may seem to be an effective way of ensuring that public sector employees are not diverted from their day-to-day responsibilities, particularly as data collection should ideally take place within a short timeframe. This approach does, however, require consultants to maintain close contact with the WASH 3Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level accounts team in order to minimize any risk that skills and expertise developed in the process accrue only to the consultant and are not institutionalized for national benefit. The WASH accounts team should be briefed by the Focal Point, and if necessary by the TrackFin Secretariat. The latter can also be contacted for on-going quality control, and for assistance with implementation of the methodology. Fig. 2 below summarizes the organizational arrangements necessary for the preparation of WASH accounts, and the Terms of Reference required at each level of intervention. LEVEL OF INTERVENTION RESOURCES AVAILABLE International level WHO TrackFin Secretariat Support and learning National director level National Stakeholder Group • TORs for the stakeholder group • TORs for champion and focal point National manager level WASH Accounts Team • TORs for the WASH Accounts Team TrackFin Champion TrackFin Focal Point Appoints Reports Figure 2. Organizational arrangements for developing WASH accounts under the TrackFin initiative Box 3. Examples of organizational arrangements from TrackFin pilot exercises In Brazil, the TrackFin champion was the Director of Institutional Coordination from the Ministry of Cities—the main ministry in charge of water and sanitation services. He appointed the manager of the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS), located in the National Secretariat for Environment in the Ministry of Cities, as the Focal Point. The WASH accounts team was composed of a local consultant and a staff member from the National Secretariat for Environment. In Ghana, the TrackFin champion was the Director for Water from the Ministry of Water Resources, Works and Housing. He appointed a Ministry of Water officer as the Focal Point. The WASH accounts team was led by the local consultant, and received support from the Focal Point. In Morocco, the TrackFin champion was the Director of the International Institute for Water and Sanitation (IEA), a research and learning institute housed within ONEE, the main provider of water and sanitation services. He appointed his Head of Research and Development as the Focal Point. The WASH accounts team included a local consultant, and received support from a technical committee composed of managers from the IEA, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Interior, the High Planning Commissariat, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of General Affairs and Governance, and the utility (ONEE). The technical committee, which was specific to Morocco, was conceived as the executive arm of the Steering Committee (see Box 2 – Piloting TrackFin in Morocco: The role of the Steering Committee above). Recommended standard TORs for the WASH accounts team can be found on the TrackFin website. 4 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 1.3 Define WASH accounts’ scope and key policy questions To ensure that outputs serve as evidence for decision-making, WASH accounts must be able to answer questions defined by policy-makers. The Focal Point for the exercise should start by either seeking views independently, or if possible, by organizing a workshop to obtain feedback on the issues set out below. This will help to define the exercise, and provide the basis for drafting more targeted Terms of Reference for the WASH accounts team (see Step 1.4 for more detail). As a minimum, WASH accounts should aim to answer four main questions: • What is the total expenditure in the sector? • How are funds distributed among the different WASH services and expenditure types? • Who pays for WASH services and how much? • Which entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector, and what is their share in total spending? Countries should aim to develop all WASH account tables and indicators required to answer these four basic questions. Beyond national level priorities, this will also be useful for international benchmarking purposes. Ways of using the information are summarized in Box 4 below and discussed in more detail, with relevant examples, in the accompanying Policy Note. The indicators required to answer these questions are specified in Step 3. Box 4. How can WASH accounts data be used for evidence-based policy-making? WASH accounts can make a significant contribution to evidence-based policy-making. They can help identify funding needs and priorities, and in the design of a WASH strategy, to plan expenditure at the national level based on agreed priorities. Regular tracking of actual spending on WASH services over time can help monitor the efficiency of these policies and ensure evidence-based funding allocation. • Total sector expenditure data enables the monitoring of funding trends over time, and benchmarking of funding to the WASH sector against other countries or sectors. Information on how WASH expenditure varies over time, and how expenditure compares to that in other countries and sectors can be used to raise awareness of the funding levels required to meet agreed targets. In subsequent stages, data on financial inputs in relation to outputs and outcomes can be used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sector financing. • Information on how WASH sector expenditure is distributed across regions, urban and rural areas, sub-sectors, services, service providers, and types of expenditure can be used as follows: – To identify inequities in the distribution of spending across regions and population groups; – To change the allocation of funds to sub-sectors, services, providers and programmes; – To plan national WASH policies and strategies; and – To monitor policy outcomes and effectiveness. • Information on how much is paid for WASH services, and by whom, can be used as follows: – To define financing strategies, such as the use of targeted subsidies or the leveraging of private funds, and to monitor the effectiveness of these strategies over time; – To coordinate donor aid and international transfers; and – To track commitments and targets expressed in financial terms. Data on actual spending on WASH can also be used to track government and donor commitment with respect to sector financing. Several governments have made commitments to the WASH sector at international level. For example, the eThekwini declaration in 2008 committed signatory African countries to establish specific public sector budget allocations for sanitation and hygiene programmes. Compiling this kind of indicator on a consistent, comprehensive and comparable basis is fundamental to tracking the implementation of such commitments. In addition, NGOs and foundations often make significant contributions that are not currently tracked; recording those flows in WASH accounts would facilitate comparison with expenditure by households and government. • Information on how funding is channelled, and via which actors, can provide essential information on who holds the “purse strings” and where influence may be needed to achieve reallocation of spending. For example, local governments often play an important role in channelling funds to local levels. Collecting data on local government spending on WASH can help evaluate the performance of decentralized financing policies. 5Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Countries are free to identify any additional policy questions they need answered; this implies the identification of additional specific indicators. Defining the appropriate level of data disaggregation at the outset is essential if the results are to inform decision-making. If, for example, regional distribution of spending is an area requiring policy attention, WASH accounts can be designed to analyse the share of WASH expenditure by region or by population group. Information of this kind can be used to identify whether inequities across population groups and regions could be reduced by reassigning public transfers to the most vulnerable areas. Data collection and the production of WASH accounts should, therefore, focus on the issues most critical to the country concerned, thereby also ensuring that the exercise is most cost-effective. Examples of potential policy questions that WASH accounts can address are found in more detail in the Policy Note, “How can WASH accounts support policy-making?” Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators. This contains a list of tables and indicators that can be created to address policy questions. The national stakeholder group and the WASH accounts team should familiarize themselves with these tables prior to starting work. The policy questions defined will drive the scope of the WASH accounts exercise, and the level of detail required for specific elements of analysis. It is therefore critical to agree on these questions before defining a data collection plan. To that end, the national TrackFin Focal Point should call a start-up meeting with the national level stakeholder group. At this meeting, the participants should agree on a list of priority policy questions and the level of detail required for the analysis. For example, would it be sufficient to collect information separately on water, sanitation and hygiene, or would a more detailed breakdown of spending by type of sanitation service be required? The WASH accounts team should also define the timeframe for the exercise. With respect to financial flow data, it would be preferable to gather data over a period of at least two to three full financial years, rather than only a single year. To ensure the greatest validity for subsequent policy decisions, the most recent data should be used. Finally, in order to avoid duplication, the national stakeholder group should identify other related initiatives with which collaboration should be encouraged. Some countries, for example, might be in the process of preparing Water Accounts based on the SEEA-Water methodology (see Box 5 below). If this is the case, the two initiatives should seek to harmonize methodologies to the extent possible, and to collaborate on data collection. The TrackFin initiative currently tracks financing specifically to water supply, sanitation and hygiene services rather than throughout the broader water sector. WASH accounts can therefore be seen as a sub-set of the broader Water Accounts based on SEEA-Water. As the latter may prove somewhat complex for water sector professionals to use, it would be advisable to identify what stage of development the Water Accounts have reached, and whether common terminology can be established. The Water Accounts, for example, use public accountancy terms from the 2008 System of National Accounts (SNA). In the countries where TrackFin was piloted, however, the development of SEEA-Water accounts was still at a relatively early stage of development. In Brazil, Water Accounts are under preparation, but the focus so far has been on tracking hydrological flows; tracking financial flows is not envisaged for several more years. Coordination between the two initiatives was sought, but opportunities to exchange information were limited due to mismatched timing. 6 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 5. The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEA-Water) The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEA-Water) prepared by the UN Statistics Division (United Nations Statistics Division, 2012) provides a conceptual framework for organizing hydrological and economic information in a coherent and consistent manner, thus overcoming the tendency to divide issues along disciplinary lines. SEEA-Water is a potentially important tool for policy-makers, as it provides them with indicators to monitor the interaction between the environment and the economy, a database to guide decision-making on sustainable development paths, and appropriate policy instruments for implementing them. SEEA-Water is based on the 2003 System of Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA) and was further elaborated to reflect the 2008 System of National Accounts (SNA). In 2007, the SEEA-Water framework was adopted as an international standard by the UN Statistical Commission, and countries were encouraged to implement it. In 2010, the International Recommendations for Water Statistics (United Nations Statistics Division, 2012) were adopted to assist countries in the implementation of SEEA-Water. For ease of application, SEEA-Water has been divided into four areas of policy application, presented in Fig. 3 below. WASH accounts are linked to the first quadrant, “Improving drinking-water and sanitation services”. Figure 3. WASH accounts in relation to SEEA-Water Accounts SYSTEM OF NATIONAL ACCOUNTS (SNA) TrackFin WASH Accounts I. Improving drinking-water and sanitation services II. Managing water supply and demand III. Managing water resources degradation/Improving quality of water resources IV. Adapting to extreme hydro- meteorological events Water security System of Environmental Economic Accounts for Water (SEEA-Water) The SEEA-Water framework comprises five categories of accounts: • Category 1: Physical supply and use tables describing the flows of water from the environment within the economy and back to the environment; • Category 2: Emission accounts describing the quantity of pollutants added to water as a result of production and consumption; • Category 3: Hybrid and economic accounts linking the physical accounts with monetary information from the national accounts, disaggregated for water and sanitation; • Category 4: Water asset accounts; and • Category 5: Quality accounts describing the quality of water and changes in quality; these accounts are still experimental. Of these, Category 3 (hybrid and economic accounts) is particularly relevant to tracking national financial flows to water and sanitation services as it aligns physical information with monetary information on supply and use. Referred to as “hybrid” because they combine different types of measurement units, these accounts can compare physical quantities with the corresponding economic flows. They include information on the various costs associated with water supply and use, such as water abstraction, purification, distribution and wastewater treatment. They also provide information on financing—for example, the amount users pay for wastewater treatment services, and the extent to which these services are subsidized by government or other entities. Information of this kind can assist official decision-making on cost recovery and water allocation policies, and can be used in economic models to evaluate the potential costs and benefits of creating new infrastructure. Hybrid and economic accounts can provide data on the following: • The costs of water supply and use; • The income generated by the production of services; • Investment in water-related infrastructure and the relevant maintenance costs; and • The user fees paid for water-related services, as well as subsidies received. To date, more than 50 countries have expressed an interest in compiling national environmental-economic accounting for water following the SEEA- Water framework. These are principally developed countries (European Union countries and Australia), but some developing countries are also starting to adopt the framework. These include Algeria, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Botswana, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, Panama, South Africa, Tunisia, West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Zimbabwe. At the national level, SEEA-Water is being implemented on a step-by-step basis. Only a small number of countries have been able to develop a complete set of Water Accounts comprising both physical and monetary data. The UN Statistics Division is encouraging countries to use this system of accounts by organizing regional workshops and capacity-building activities. Other institutions, such as the World Bank are providing financial support, in particular through the WAVES partnership.1 1 WAVES: Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services. Link: http://www.wavespartnership.org/en 7Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 1.4 Identify data requirements and plan the work Following the identification of policy needs, the Focal Point should draw up tailored Terms of Reference for the production of WASH accounts. These Terms of Reference should reflect the country context, existing knowledge about data availability, and the policy questions identified. The WASH accounts team should then carry out preliminary work to assemble available information, identifying data gaps and key issues in relation to the specific country context. They will also identify potential data collection strategies and estimation methods to address gaps and weaknesses, and present them at a national-level workshop to be attended by all members of the national stakeholder group, together with a broader range of relevant actors if feasible. 1.4.1 Identify available data and define a data collection plan Before launching the inception phase, the team needs to familiarize itself with the methodology. Step 2 in particular, and the associated methodological notes, present the type of data required and potential data sources. To keep the costs of the exercise down, countries should start by identifying relevant data already available through existing reports and information systems. Examples of potential documentation appear in Box 6 below. If data are not available, the team should identify a strategy for collecting or estimating the missing data. Data availability is likely to be a key constraint. The WASH accounts team should therefore initially aim for optimum accuracy within this constraint. In some cases, it might be necessary to collect primary data, particularly for the costs of certain services such as informal providers, or certain financial flows such as household investment in on-site sanitation. These are unlikely to be routinely collected. When new surveys are not possible, or are too expensive, formulating assumptions to derive initial estimates will be necessary, even if these assumptions are approximate. Step 2 of this Guidance Document proposes ways forward on specific data issues. As collecting new data has budgetary implications, these should be taken into account from the start. It is also important to consider trade- offs between different methods of data collection. Box 6. Examples of existing information • Household surveys, for example UNICEF’s Multi Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) • Access data from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) • GLAAS reports and survey responses • Information on the water sector from National Statistics Offices • The World Bank Water Sanitation Programme’s Country Status Overviews (sub-Saharan Africa only) • Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) documents and planned poverty reduction expenditure • Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks • National sector plans and policies • National budgets • Local government budgets (for decentralized WASH sectors, for a sample of localities) • Utilities’ financial accounts • Sector financing reports produced by the sector regulator (where these exist) • OECD Creditor Reporting System and data from the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) database • SWA Aid Effectiveness Working Group and Country Processes Working Group documentation • Data from the IBNET database on water and sewerage utilities performance • UN-Water Country Briefs • World Bank Public Expenditure Reviews (PERs) • Relevant studies of the United Nations Economic Commissions • Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic studies • WASH sector reports • Project-specific documentation • Reports on decentralization processes • Benchmarking reports from utility associations, governments (for example Brazil or India) or regulators (for example Kenya or Mozambique) 8 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Where there has already been some analysis of the WASH financing system, country profiles and reports on different segments of the system may indicate other data sources. The WASH accounts team should interview key informants in stakeholder institutions to identify the extent of data availability within those organizations. With respect to private operators and non-profit organizations, it will be important to seek out umbrella organizations such as NGOs and industrial associations, as these may have some consolidated information on their activities. International organizations should be contacted as they may have databases complementing or extending national sources, particularly on international aid issues. Potential challenge: Alignment with National Statistics Office (NSO) systems When identifying data sources, the WASH accounts team should assess the extent to which NSOs already collect financial data from the WASH sector at a level of detail permitting conclusions to be drawn for policy definition. It would be preferable to align with the NSO’s classification system to facilitate integration further down the line, but this may not always be possible. • If NSOs collect data on WASH, it is important to work with them to identify how this data can be extracted and used by sector actors. This will ensure that the data collection exercise is embedded in national systems and can be repeated at minimal cost. A key area of coordination will be to identify how NSOs and sector stakeholders can work together on WASH policy needs to produce data at the most appropriate level of disaggregation. WASH sector stakeholders can also learn from NSOs on data collection methods. • If WASH statistical data are insufficiently detailed, either because NSOs are performing poorly, or they do not collect data from a comprehensive set of WASH service providers, it will be necessary to initiate a sector-level data collection process. 1.4.2 Develop a detailed budget and work plan Once all available information has been mapped, the WASH accounts team should prepare an inception report. This will contain a work plan and detailed budget for producing WASH accounts. Recommended content for this report is presented in Box 7 below. Box 7. Key points to cover in the inception report The inception report should contain the following information: • Overview of the institutional arrangements established to manage TrackFin in the country • Summary of key results from the review of documentation available on WASH sector financing • Summary of discussions held at the inception meetings and the national stakeholder group start-up meeting, including: – Definition of the scope of the exercise in terms of duration (number of years of data collection) and geographic area – Identification of the key policy questions drawn up by the national stakeholder group • A detailed workplan and associated budget Annexes should include the minutes of the start-up meeting, a list of members of the national stakeholder group and the WASH accounts team with their Terms of Reference, and the list of wider sector stakeholders with their contact information. The inception report should be approved by the national level stakeholder group or by the TrackFin champion. The work should start with reasonable expectations in terms of the detail and complexity of the information produced, and the intention to improve it over time. The WASH accounts team and the national stakeholder group should agree on a realistic budget, taking into account the potential challenges indicated below. 9Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Potential challenge: Defining a budget and workplan for WASH accounts • WASH accounts should ideally cover the whole country, but could include detailed information for specific regions only, with data for other regions based on extrapolation. If there are substantial discrepancies between geographic areas, regions should be classified into types and data should be obtained from at least one region from each type, to provide an adequate basis for representative extrapolation. • If answering a key policy question requires disaggregation of data by region, the team should check the geographic boundaries of different data sources. Some organizations might aggregate data based on water basins, while others may use municipal boundaries. It would require significant work to reconcile differing geographic boundaries—probably requiring estimations and triangulation. • Depending on how the WASH sector is organized, data collection may need to be conducted separately in each sub-sector. In a developing country, the service provision and financing arrangements for urban water, urban sanitation, rural water and rural sanitation tend to differ. Hence each of the four sub-sectors should be considered separately, and the analysis may therefore need to be repeated in each, even though the methodological tools and approaches remain the same. Potential challenge: Contracting consultancy support for the WASH accounts team The timing of consultancy support can be difficult to handle and may vary between countries. The detailed scope and budget for the TrackFin exercise—and thus the budget for consultant assistance—will only be known when the inception phase has been completed (after Step 1.4). Ideally, the consultant should be involved from the outset. One potential solution is to prepare a flexible contract, agreeing on a fee rate and a number of workdays. The contract can then be amended and refined at the end of the inception stage to reflect any variation in scope. 10 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 2 Step 2 – Collect data This section sets out in more detail the framework for preparing WASH accounts. Its purpose is to serve as a practical guide for identifying, collecting and classifying financial data. To define the data collection plan, the WASH accounts team must be in a position to answer three main questions: • What WASH services are consumed and by whom? • How are these services provided and by whom? • How much do these services cost and how are they financed? Fig. 4 below draws on a figure developed for the SHA. It presents the main “dimensions” to examine in tracking financing to the WASH sector at the national level. These dimensions are the main classifications used to create WASH accounts. 1 Initial capital costs of putting new services in place, including ‘hardware’ such as pipes, toilets and pumps, and one-off support or ‘software’ costs, such as for detailed design/engineering studies or associated training and consultation. Costs (C) Costs of WASH goods and services produced • Investment costs including hardware and associated support1 • Operating and maintenance costs • Large capital maintenance costs • Financial costs • Support costs (also referred to as software costs) • Taxes Services (S) WASH services consumed Water supply services • Water supply through large network systems • Basic drinking-water supply Sanitation services • Sanitation though large network systems • Basic sanitation Support services to the WASH sector • Policy-making, legislation and regulation, planning, programme administration and governance • Capacity building Water resources management (related to water supply and sanitation services) • Water resources protection • River basin development Hygiene • Hygiene promotion programmes (including in schools and health care centres) • Household-level hygiene activities Service providers (P) Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH services • Government agencies • Network corporate providers • Non-network corporate providers • NGOs and community-based organizations • Self-provided users Uses (U) Type of use of WASH goods and services • Served domestic use • Self-provided domestic use • Served non-domestic use • Self-provided non-domestic use Financing Types (FT) Financial flows that circulate between financing units and service providers • Tariffs for services provided • Users’ expenditure on self-supply • Domestic public transfers • International public transfers • Voluntary contributions • Repayable financing What is being financed and by whom? Financing Units (FU) Institutional entities that provide funding to the sector • Users • National authorities • Regional authorities • Local authorities • Network corporate providers • Non-network corporate providers • Economic and quality regulators • Bilateral and multilateral donors • NGOs and community-based organizations • Banks and financial institutions What is being produced by whom and at what cost? What is being consumed by whom? Figure 4. Mapping financial flows based on consumption, production and financing types 11Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Using this framework, the following sections provide more detail on data collection for WASH accounts. They provide guidance on issues such as: • Step 2.1: Defining the boundaries of the WASH sector, i.e. defining which services are included • Step 2.2: Mapping service provision arrangements and financial flows • Step 2.3: Collecting data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks 2.1 Define WASH sector boundaries in terms of services The WASH accounts team should start by defining the boundaries of the WASH sector based on a list of potential services to be included in WASH accounts. This will be done through the tasks outlined below. Step 2.1 – Tasks to be undertaken • Become familiar with the classification of WASH services proposed in the Guidance Document and understand the rationale behind this classification; • Identify the classifications and categories of WASH services used in the country’s information systems, and the type of activities they include; • Analyse similarities and differences with the classification proposed in the Guidance Document (see Table 1 and Table 6 – Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain below) to establish whether the same categories can be used, and whether data are collected on this basis; • Identify the WASH services for which expenditure will be reported in WASH accounts; • State very clearly which activities are included or excluded under each category of WASH services; and • Collect data according to these categories where possible, or based on aggregated categories (for example, water supply services, sanitation services, construction services, support services). 2.1.1 Rationale Adopting and using a common classification of products, services and activities relevant to the WASH sector is essential. The definition of the WASH sector often varies from one country to another, so it is critical to clarify what is included or excluded in the country concerned.1 Defining WASH sector boundaries is essential for a number of reasons: • To identify the list of products and services for which costs and financing types will be tracked through WASH accounts: These products and services may be produced jointly with other water services. For example, some water supply companies may also be involved in managing water resources up-stream, or managing irrigation schemes for agricultural purposes. Other services may be seen as going hand-in-hand with the provision of WASH services, such as solid waste management, whereas other countries typically do not include solid waste management in the definition of sanitation services. Many countries also have difficulties in defining hygiene, and most do not comprehensively track WASH-related hygiene services. • To help ensure data consistency across different countries: The standard list proposed in this document can help countries identify the services that should be included, for example downstream sludge management, and others that should be excluded – such as building dams mainly for hydropower generation. If services they need to include are not part of this standard list, because data is tracked jointly with other WASH services in their national systems, these should be clearly identified so that the reason for differences across countries can be understood. • To define service categories within the WASH sector for which financing should be tracked separately: This is required to evaluate whether financing is currently being allocated to the most appropriate services or products. For the first round of WASH accounts, it may only be feasible to disaggregate financial flows for a limited number or type of services. At the very least, however, disaggregation between water and sanitation services should be shown. A long-term methodological objective is to show financial allocation to a variety of service categories, including hygiene, to create a more detailed and in-depth analysis. 1 The TrackFin initiative currently focuses on tracking financing to water supply, sanitation and hygiene services rather than the broader water sector. The standard list of services provided here therefore concentrates on these services. The list could potentially be expanded at a later stage, should the initiative take on a broader scope. 12 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Learning from the health sector The System of Health Accounts (OECD, 2011) defines the boundaries of health care activities from an international perspective, based on the functions of health care. Health expenditure is included in Health Accounts based on the following four elements: a) A transaction b) Which is linked to an individual’s consumption c) Whose primary purpose is health. The purpose of the spending determines the health care functions. This is defined as “the type of need that the transaction aims to satisfy or the kind of objective pursued” d) Which involves the application of qualified health knowledge, directly or through supervision. Activities included in the boundaries of the Health Accounts are those that aim to “improve, maintain and prevent the deterioration of the health status of persons and mitigating the consequences of ill-health through the application of qualified health knowledge”. Based on these criteria, health activities are classified into seven main categories of health care functions, which are themselves sub-divided into a total of 36 categories. These seven are: health promotion and prevention; diagnosis, treatment, cure and rehabilitation of illness; caring for persons affected by chronic illness; caring for persons with health-related impairment and disability; palliative care; providing community health programmes; and governance and administration of the health system. Countries choose what they can classify based on the nature of their national health statistical systems, the data available, and their ability to link an accounting framework to their classification. 2.1.2 TrackFin classification of WASH services Broadly defined, the WASH sector refers to the provision of water, sanitation and hygiene services. However, providing access to water and sanitation is only a subset of the services needed to manage the water and sanitation cycle sustainably while meeting the needs of all users. Fig. 5 below shows the WASH services required, beyond access, in order to ensure sustainability. This approach is reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which require a broader set of WASH services to be monitored, both upstream and downstream. Whether or not these services are available depends on the level of development of the water sector in a given country. In most developing countries, it is unlikely. Where providing access is a priority, for example, wastewater collection and treatment services are often very limited, but should become more prevalent through implementation of the SDGs. Figure 5. The value chain of WASH services under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) UPSTREAM ACTIVITIES • Production (augmenting and protecting water resources) • Water treatment, transport and distribution Source: Adapted from “Benefits of investing in water and sanitation: An OECD Perspective” (OECD, 2011), p.31. DOWNSTREAM ACTIVITIES • Wastewater transport , treatment and safe disposal SDGs provide access to: • water • sanitation • hygiene promotion Integrated water resource management Augment supplies Water storage Abstract water Treat water Transport water Distribute water Manage demand Provide consumer services Provide water Provide sanitation Promote behaviour change Transport sewage via networks Collect pit sludge Protect the resource Reuse sludge or treated effluent Dispose of sludge Develop natural treatment systems Treat wastewater Treat faecal sludge Transport wastewater or pit sludge 13Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level To support this broader approach and ensure that the overall WASH sector is operating adequately, additional functions such as planning, management and coordination functions will need to be carried out at ministerial level (or at regional level, in the case of federal systems). The TrackFin classification of WASH goods and service presented in Table 1 below covers the services required for sustainable provision of water and sanitation. The table lists the broad categories of services, activities included under those services, and for easy reference, the ISIC reference from the System of National Accounts. Its value is in clarifying the boundaries of the WASH sector at the national level and identifying the activities to be included or excluded when preparing WASH accounts. Code Category Activities included Included in S1 Water supply services Water supply through large network systems • Collection of rain water and water from various sources such as rivers, lakes, wells • Purification of water for water supply purposes, desalination of sea/ groundwater by treatment plants • Storage of water • Large scale transport/conveyance of water via pipelines • Distribution of water through mains (includes water pumping and transport via local water networks) • Management of water connections and consumer support activities ISIC 36 Basic drinking-water supply • Collection of rain water and water from various sources (rivers, lakes, wells) using hand-pumps, spring catchments, gravity-fed systems, rainwater collection and fog harvesting • Storage of water in tanks • Distribution of water through small distribution systems (pipes, wells or trucks) or local neighbourhood networks typically with shared connections/ points of use • Management of water access points and consumer support activities S2 Sanitation services1 Sanitation though large network systems • Construction of sanitation facilities in households and communities and connection to large sewage systems • Collection of sewage by large scale sewer systems including trunk sewers, sewage pumping stations, and drains • Sewage treatment and disposal, including residual sludge disposal ISIC 37 Basic sanitation • Promotion of sanitation, including demand promotion and sanitation marketing (excluding hygiene promotion if that can be disaggregated) • Construction of basic sanitation facilities in households and communities (latrines, septic systems) • Collection and transport of sludge from onsite facilities (pit emptying and cleaning services) • Treatment and disposal of sludge by faecal sludge treatment facilities S3 Support services to the WASH sector • Water and sanitation sector policy-making and governance, including: – Development of sector policies – Legislation: Definition and enforcement of drinking-water and discharge standards for municipal wastewater – Regulation of water and sanitation supply activities and service providers – Sector planning, including estimating future sector financial needs – Administration of water and sanitation programmes • Capacity building in water supply and sanitation ISIC 8412 S4 Water resources management (which relate to water and sanitation services) Water resources protection • Collection and use of quantitative and qualitative data on water resources • Creation and sharing of water knowledge • Conservation and rehabilitation of inland surface waters (rivers, lakes), ground water and coastal waters • Prevention of water contamination No existing category River basin development • Integrated river basin projects and related institutional activities; river flow control; dams and reservoirs S5 Hygiene services Hygiene promotion • Hygiene promotion programmes by government or service providers, including handwashing campaigns, menstrual hygiene management and chlorine distribution No existing category Household-level hygiene activities • Handwashing, bathing, washing clothes and washing material/equipment (soap, tippy taps, bathrooms) • Point-of-use water treatment. Table 1. TrackFin classification of WASH goods and services 1 Although solid waste is not a standard category in WASH accounts, a country might decide to include solid waste as part of TrackFin for a specific purpose. In this case, solid waste should NOT be included under S2. A new category should be created for solid waste. 14 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative There are a number of potential challenges in seeking to apply this classification. Potential challenge: Defining WASH sector boundaries • Water resource management activities do not typically fall under the existing definition of WASH services. Some of these activities are, however, implemented by water service providers and are essential for the sustainable provision of such services. Where possible, water resource management activities directly relevant to water and sanitation service provision should be included in the scope of the WASH accounts. Broader water resource management activities, such as the construction of dams for irrigation purposes, should be excluded. • Defining hygiene services. There is no internationally agreed definition for hygiene, and none of the existing international classifications identifies water and sanitation-related hygiene services as a specific product or service category. As a result, hygiene can mean very different things in different countries, which reduces comparability. Given the importance of hygiene in the SDGs, however, and the need to prioritize these activities, it is critical to define and track them as a separate category. Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems provides additional detail on existing international classifications (with a particular focus on Central Product Classification (CPC), International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) and Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) that were used as a basis for developing the WASH service categories presented in Table 1 above. This note explains how they work and where gaps need to be filled. It makes recommendations for the development of a more comprehensive classification of WASH services, particularly with respect to hygiene services. 2.1.3 Tasks to be undertaken The WASH accounts team should identify those services and activities that fall into the WASH sector definition. To the extent possible, data should be collected based on the TrackFin classification in order to facilitate comparison. The team should identify classifications of WASH services already in use in the country, and identify the extent to which these correspond to the TrackFin classification. It should then clearly set out how the classification for the WASH accounts was derived, and the extent to which it aligns with the TrackFin classification. Countries may also need to introduce further disaggregation for certain categories to reflect their own policy needs. For example, a country with a significant investment backlog in the area of rural sanitation may choose to adopt a higher level of disaggregation for these services; a country wishing to track funding to different types of sanitation services could define sub-categories for that purpose. In the first instance, it is unlikely that countries will be able to report financial information on sub-categories for all these services separately. Countries should attempt to report at least on financing to the high level categories of services such as water, sanitation and hygiene. Initially, however, even that level of detail may be challenging, particularly for hygiene, as described in the box below. Potential challenge: Tracking expenditure to hygiene activities • Funding for hygiene activities is difficult to separate from funding to broader water and sanitation services, as these services are commonly provided jointly. This is particularly problematic when dealing with large WASH programme expenditure, for which detailed data on activity spending is difficult to obtain. In this case, the WASH accounts team should conduct interviews with programme managers in order to estimate the percentage of total spending that goes to hygiene activities. They should also identify specific hygiene programmes, in particular those conducted by the Ministry of Health. 15Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 2.2 Map service provision arrangements and financial flows The team should then identify the main WASH sector actors and the financial flows between them. Step 2.2 – Tasks to be undertaken • Gain familiarity with the TrackFin classifications of WASH uses, actors and financing types, and understand the rationale behind them; • At country level, identify and classify WASH uses, actors and financing types – On the basis of data gathered in Step 1.4, identify the classifications of WASH uses, actors and financing types used in the country – Analyse similarities to and differences from the TrackFin classifications, and chart areas where the terminology corresponds – Define the classifications that will be used to create WASH accounts; and • Map WASH sector financing based on these classifications – Represent the WASH sector actors and financing types separately for each of the four sub-sectors as appropriate to the country context. 2.2.1 Rationale Identifying the main WASH sector actors and the financial flows circulating between them is essential to understanding what data needs to be obtained and from where. Making a graphic representation of financial flows, as shown in Fig. 6 below, can facilitate this process, ensuring that all actors and flows are recorded. It also assists in communicating the results. All countries should preferably use an identical or similar classification system for WASH sector actors and financial flows. This will facilitate international comparison and ensure that the information produced is consistent. At present, there is no standard classification of WASH sector actors. Country-level statistical offices and WASH sector officials use their own classifications, which vary depending on the structure of the WASH sector. The proposed TrackFin classification of WASH sector actors and financial flows is sufficiently broad to capture all or most sector organizations. It can be used as a guide to classify WASH uses, actors and financial flows at country level, thus facilitating the production of comparable data. The TrackFin classification is aligned with existing classifications used at the international level, but includes improvements aimed at overcoming certain identified weaknesses. Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types. This note presents the existing internationally accepted systems of classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types that were used as reference points in developing the TrackFin classifications. Classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units was adapted from SEEA-Water, while the classification of financing types elaborates on the OECD 3Ts terminology—Tariffs, Taxes and Transfers. 2.2.2 Trackfin classification of WASH uses, actors and financial flows The proposed classification distinguishes between: • Use of WASH services, i.e. who is consuming the services and how; • WASH sector actors, differentiating between WASH service providers and financing units; and • Financing types, characterized by the origin and the nature of the financial flows. The TrackFin classification focuses on tracking financial flows by type of use rather than user categories. This is principally because for policy purposes, financial flows should be tracked independently of how users obtain their services. Table 2 below presents the synthesized TrackFin classification. It encompasses all definitions for WASH sector actors, financing sources, and WASH service uses required by the proposed methodology. Further explanation is given in the text following the table. 16 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Code Category Definition U: Uses of WASH services Types of use of WASH goods and services U1 Served domestic use Household consumption through service providers, paid via a tariff. Includes water supply to households connected to the water and/or sewerage network, but also water taken from a public standpipe or obtained through other providers such as water tankers. U2 Self-provided domestic use Household consumption of self-provided water and sanitation services. Users pay an up-front initial investment (in a well or private latrine) for access to the service, and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. U3 Served non-domestic use Consumption by non-domestic users through purchase of water and sanitation from a service provider. This includes institutional users (government agencies such as ministries, hospitals, schools), voluntary organizations such as NGOs or community-based organizations (CBOs), foundations, and industrial and commercial users. The service providers are paid via a tariff. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: U3.1 Served institutional use, and U3.2 Served industrial and commercial use. U4 Self-provided non-domestic use Consumption of self-provided water and sanitation services by non-domestic users. This includes institutional users such as government agencies, ministries, hospitals, schools, voluntary organizations such as NGOs and CBOs, foundations, and industrial and commercial users. Users make an up-front initial investment for access to the service and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: U4.1 Self-supplied institutional use, and U4.2 Self- supplied industrial and commercial use. P: WASH service providers Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH services, including government institutions that provide support P1 Government agencies Government providers including public agencies such as ministries, hospitals, or schools, as well as self-providing municipalities (i.e. those operating the service directly rather than through a corporate entity). This would include government institutions providing support services to the sector in domains such as policy-making, planning, or regulation. This category can be further disaggregated into sub-categories such as P1.1 National authorities, P1.2 Regional authorities, and P1.3 Local authorities. P2 Network corporate providers Utilities that own and/or operate facilities for production and distribution of water and sanitation services through network systems for the public, as well as for bulk services. They may be either privately or publicly owned, mandated or independent, large, medium or small in size, providing either a public service or self-providing the service for their own use. P3 Non-network corporate providers Corporations that provide any small-scale WASH goods (e.g. bottled or sachet water) or services along the value chain through non-network systems. They usually involve low-skilled labour and a low level of initial investment. Taking various organizational forms from cooperatives to private ventures, they may be formal or informal. This category would include estate developers involved in infrastructure construction. P4 NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs) Non-profit organizations seeking to complement WASH public services. They usually have a formal structure and offer services beyond their own membership. In most cases, they are registered with national authorities. CBOs habitually operate within a local area. P5 Self-provided users Users providing services themselves. These may be domestic (household) or non-domestic (institutional, industrial or commercial) users. They pay an initial investment up-front for access to a well, private latrine, or a private system, and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: P5.1 Domestic self-provided users, and P5.2 Non-domestic self-provided users. Non-domestic self-provided users would include, for example, a mining company or other industry producing water for its own consumption. FU: Financing units Institutional entities that provide funding to the sector. They mobilize funding to pay WASH service providers. They may allocate funds directly to service providers or channel them through other financing units. FU1 Users Households that self-provide services such as on-site sanitation. They either pay up-front through initial investments (in a well or private latrine, for example) or purchase services from a variety of providers including water tankers. This category can be further disaggregated into sub-categories: FU1.1 Served users, FU1.2 Self-supplied users; FU1.1.1 Served domestic users, FU1.1.2 Served non-domestic users, FU1.2.1 Self-supplied domestic users, FU1.2.2 Self-supplied non-domestic users. FU2 National authorities Public authorities at central government level, including relevant ministries such as the Ministry of Finance or Ministry of Water, or national institutions. FU3 Regional authorities Public authorities operating at the regional level. FU4 Local authorities Public bodies operating in a smaller geographic area, such as a city, town, or district. FU5 Network corporate providers Utilities that own and/or operate facilities for production and distribution of water and sanitation services through network systems for the public, as well as for bulk services. They may be either privately or publicly owned, mandated or independent, large, medium or small in size, provide a public service or self-provide the service for their own use. FU6 Non-network corporate providers Corporations that provide any small-scale WASH goods (e.g. bottled or sachet water) or services along the value chain through non-network systems. They usually involve low-skilled labour and a low level of initial investment. They take various organizational forms from cooperatives to private ventures, and may be formal or informal. FU7 Economic and quality regulators Public authority responsible for overall supervision of the WASH sector in areas such as control of tariffs, water quality, and competition throughout the sector. FU8 Bilateral and multilateral donors Governments providing official development assistance directly to a country or through multilateral international institutions (UN, World Bank or regional development banks). Table 2. TrackFin classifications for WASH service use, WASH sector actors, and financing types 17Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Code Category Definition FU9 NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs) Non-profit organizations that seek to complement WASH public services. They usually have a formal structure and offer services beyond their own membership. In most cases they are registered with national authorities. CBOs habitually operate within a local area. FU10 Banks and financial institutions A financial institution that provides banking services, such as taking deposits and providing credit facilities and loans to individuals and/or small businesses and corporations. FT: Financing types Financial flows between financing units and service providers, characterized by their origin and nature FT1 Tariffs for services provided Payments made by users to service providers for obtaining and using the service. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT1.1 Domestic tariffs for services provided, FT1.2 Non- domestic tariffs for services provided. FT2 User expenditure on self- supply Funding provided by users to invest in or provide the service themselves. Self-provided users pay an initial investment up-front to gain access to the service (for example a well, a private water production system, or a private latrine). They then cover all operating and maintenance costs themselves. This can be in form of cash, material or time, but only cash payments are included in WASH accounts. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply, FT2.2 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply. FT3 Domestic public transfers Public transfers to WASH actors from central or local government agencies. These are often subsidies derived from taxes or other government sources of revenue. Includes grants, but excludes concessionary loans that are included in FT6 Repayable financing. FT4 International public transfers Voluntary donations or grants from external public donors and multilateral agencies. Concessionary loans are excluded and covered entirely in FT6 Repayable financing. FT5 Voluntary contributions Voluntary donations or grants from international and national non-governmental donors including from charitable foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Concessionary loans are excluded and covered entirely in FT6 Repayable financing. FT6 Repayable financing Sources of finance derived from private or public sources and requiring repayment. Examples are loans (including concessionary loans and guarantees), equity investments, or other financial instruments such as bonds. This category can be divided into 2 sub-categories: FT6.1 Concessionary repayable financing, and FT6.2 Non-concessionary repayable financing. 2.2.2.1 Classification of WASH uses WASH uses refers to how services are obtained and used. When differentiating between served and self-provided WASH use, an initial distinction concerns how services are obtained. They may either be self-provided – meaning that users organize their own services – or obtained from a service provider. The TrackFin classification refers to the latter as “served uses”. Many households or industrial users self-provide water and sanitation services, particularly when network services are too expensive or inaccessible, or when network service quality is unsatisfactory for reasons such as unreliable service hours or inadequate quality. In such circumstances industrial users may develop their own water supply. At the level of WASH accounts, it is important to track financial flows for these types of use separately, as “self-provided use” typically indicates users with different socioeconomic characteristics from those in the “served” categories. TrackFin recommends tracking financial flows by type of use rather than users (i.e. the consumers of WASH goods and services). This is because financial flows have to be tracked independently of how different users obtain or receive services. Indeed, users cannot always be attributed to a single category. Domestic users, for example, may obtain water from multiple sources, including through self-provided sources or different providers. Users may invest in a well, for example, through self-provision but may also pay a tariff for piped water supply. It is therefore difficult to define “user categories” capable of capturing such multiple modes of access to services, although it is essential for WASH accounts to distinguish between financial flows to different types of use. Types of use also differ according to purpose – principally domestic or non-domestic. Non-domestic purposes include institutional, industrial, agricultural or commercial purposes. As TrackFin is closely linked to the GLAAS report, which tracks overall resource inputs into the sector, it places special emphasis on identifying funding to WASH services for domestic use, schools, and health care facilities, in line with the objectives of the SDGs. The methodology recommends the inclusion of financial flows for all types of use likely to be jointly served, but requires that they be tracked separately. This means that domestic, institutional, commercial and industrial uses would be tracked, but agricultural, hydropower or environmental uses, which tend to be served through separate systems, would not. 18 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 2.2.2.2 Classification of WASH actors WASH sector actors are characterized according to the role they play in the provision and financing of WASH services. Actors are identified as follows: • Service providers that produce and deliver WASH services; and • Financing units that collect funds from various sources and transfer them to service providers, potentially via other financing units that pool and distribute the funding, These include households, domestic and foreign governments, private corporations, and non-profit organizations. Potential challenge: Classifying service providers • Service providers can be classified in many different ways, depending on their size, type of ownership (private or public, mandated or independent), or status (formal or informal). Because ownership is not necessarily relevant to public policy and is difficult to assign, splitting public and private operators is not recommended. It is also difficult to separate providers according to size. The TrackFin classification therefore focuses on the institutional sector that owns them (government, corporation or household). Corporate providers are simply divided between category P2 Network corporate providers, and P3 Non-network corporate providers, as they are financed differently. • Depending on policy needs, countries could further disaggregate the TrackFin classification and characterize service providers according to criteria such as public or private, formal or informal, utility size, mandated or independent, and so on. Where corporate providers are self-providing, this could be noted specifically in a sub-category. Potential challenge: Allocating actors to a single WASH category • Actors can play different but simultaneous roles in the WASH sector, so allocating them to a single category may be difficult. Households may simultaneously be categorized as both financing units (paying tariffs to a utility) and as self-providers. They may be investing their own resources while also receiving government subsidies. All financial flow information must be recorded and coded appropriately, with a single flow potentially recorded in different ways to reflect this multiplicity of roles. • Distinguishing between roles as service providers and as financing units: Service providers such as a utility (classified as P2 Network corporate providers) are seen as financing units only if they provide equity to the sector as private investors. They are not considered to be financing units generating funds through tariffs and reallocating these to the sector since they only collect tariffs from users. In this case, therefore, the financing unit is defined as FU1 Users. This issue was discussed during the pilot exercise, where Ghana and Brazil followed the proposed approach, but Morocco preferred to present service providers as a source of tariffs. Examples of how to interpret tables and graphs from WASH accounts using these classifications can be found in the reports by Brazil and Ghana on the pilot phase. 2.2.2.3 Classification of WASH financing types Financial flows can be characterized according to the nature and origin of the funding. Financing types are differentiated according to their origin. Sector funding may come from either private or public sources. Private sources include households through tariffs or their own investment, charitable donations, or private investment. Public sources are derived from taxes managed by national or foreign governments, in the form of public transfers through official development assistance. As financing types are not sector actors per se, it is important to identify separately the financing units that channel funding (see the challenge box below). Potential challenges: Aligning with existing classification systems • Different classification systems refer to financing types in slightly different ways. In the OECD 3T terminology, financing sources refers to the origin of the funding and the type of funds that can be mobilized. The SEEA-Water terminology refers to financing units (actors grouped by financing sectors) that provide sector funding. To add to the confusion, the SHA terminology refers to these financing units as financing sources. Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types provides more detail on the OECD 3T and SEEA-Water classifications, and identifies where the different classification systems use similar or identical terms. • In the TrackFin classification, financing type refers to financial flows, whereas financing units designates the actors from which funds are mobilized. Households (FU1.1) are financing units that potentially provide two types of financing to the sector: tariffs (FT1) and user expenditure on self-supply (FT2). National Authorities (FU2) can provide domestic public transfers (FT3) and concessionary loans, categorized under repayable financing (FT6). The broad financing types can be further disaggregated, for example to differentiate between various types of repayable financing (concessional or non- concessional) or between tariffs paid by households and those paid by non-domestic users. 19Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 2.2.3 Tasks to be undertaken The WASH accounts team will then identify and classify WASH uses, actors and financial flows, with the aim of mapping sector organization and financing.1 This mapping exercise may have to be undertaken for each of the four main subsectors, i.e. urban water, urban sanitation, rural water and rural sanitation, as the organization of each may vary substantially. For example, sanitation services may be provided jointly with or separately from water services. In many cases, there is no formal sanitation service provider and households have to invest in on-site sanitation and maintain the installations themselves. This is referred to as “self-supply”. The team should identify what existing classifications of WASH actors and financing types are in use by the NSO or the WASH sector itself. Where these exist and are in use, similarities to and differences from the TrackFin classifications should be identified. With this understanding, each country should then decide which classification(s) should be used to maximize the amount of data that can reasonably be collected in the given timeframe. The classifications selected should be clearly explained. To the extent possible, data should be collected according to the TrackFin classifications presented in Table 2. Depending on the structure of the WASH sector in the country, it may not be necessary to use all categories. Categories can also be adapted to facilitate further disaggregation if policy needs so require. A country with a significant investment backlog in the area of rural sanitation, for example, may need a greater degree of disaggregation for these services. 2.2.3.1 Identify and classify all WASH sector uses and actors This entails listing all actors in the WASH sector and gathering basic information on them. Guidance on this process is provided below. Identify WASH service uses The WASH accounts team should identify the different types of WASH service uses and identify data collection methods for each type, focusing particularly on domestic and institutional use. Separating WASH services by type of use according to purpose can raise some methodological challenges, as discussed below. Potential challenge: Separating WASH services by type of use according to purpose • WASH service providers encompass a wide range of user types, including industrial, commercial and institutional users. This is a key difference with the health sector, for example, where it is principally individuals who use services. • Disaggregating financial data by use (for example, to distinguish between domestic and institutional use) is likely to be time-consuming and in some cases impossible to achieve, as most municipal providers serve not only households and institutions but also other customers. • For self-provided use, distinctions are easier to establish as long as information is available on this type of user. Financial flows concerning self-providing households would be obtained from different sources, for example, than information on industrial users who self-provide water for production. • For served users, financing for providers primarily serving domestic and institutional users should be tracked as a priority, noting if possible the proportion of revenue and costs involved in relation to other users (such as commercial or industrial). To be more specific, financial flow data for different uses should be collected based on the tariff paid by the service consumers. It can be assumed, for example, that water sold at an industrial tariff has been provided for industrial uses. Tracking financial flows to other types of use, such as industrial use, is also important because industrial users may be providing cross-subsidies to households if the same service provider is involved. In this context, growth in self-provided industrial use might be a source of concern for the wider sector, as it could translate into reduced cross-subsidies to the domestic WASH sector. If, however, limited data are available on self-provided use, tracking domestic use is the priority. 1 Mapping financial flows must be distinguished (and kept separate) from mapping institutional arrangements. The latter show lines of responsibility and allocation of powers and functions, including policy- making, regulation, asset ownership, and service provision, whereas financial mapping mainly focuses on the actors and on tracking the origins of funding, how it flows, and where it goes. 20 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Countries may also use additional criteria to classify uses depending on the policy questions they wish to answer and the availability of data. Domestic uses can be further classified in the following ways: • Geographic region (R) – Regions, districts or central as defined by country, using central when relates to activities that cover all regions; • Service area (A) – Urban, rural or central, according to the country definition; using central when neither urban nor rural apply because both benefit, e.g. support activities of the state or an NGO, performed by a central or a decentralized actor; • Socioeconomic strata – Level of income, tariff scale. Identify service providers The WASH accounts team should identify service providers for all four main subsectors (urban water services, urban sanitation services, rural water services and rural sanitation services) and the services they provide. Data should be collected on main providers or main types of provider, focusing on: • Their characteristics and legal status (public or private ownership, enterprise or non-enterprise, formal or informal); • The WASH services they produce; • The types of use and users they cover (including numbers); • Geographic coverage and human resources; • The number of entities falling under this category. Potential challenge: Ensuring that all service providers are taken into account • Households’ role as self-providers must be fully recognized. In many sub-Saharan African countries there is no formal sanitation service provision. Households, and sometimes commercial users, invest in on-site water and sanitation solutions and maintain the installations themselves. This expenditure can represent a substantial share of total sector spending and should be included under category P5 Self-provided users. • Informal service providers should, where possible, be included in the mapping. Although the economic activities of informal actors may not be counted by statistical offices, they often represent a large proportion of WASH service provision in developing countries. Using the TrackFin classification, these would be classified as category P3 Non-network corporate providers. Financial flows to informal actors will probably need to be estimated as they are rarely officially recorded. The National Statistics Office can provide guidance on how informal activities in the WASH sector are valued. • Some companies that are not WASH service providers per se, but are involved in the cycle of WASH activities at some point, may be more difficult to classify. In Morocco, for example, a significant proportion of hardware investment in water and sewerage networks does not come from service providers, but from housing and real estate developers. These developers invest in networks and then pass on the management and operations of these networks to the main water utility. In the TrackFin classification, these housing developers are categorized under P3 Non-network corporate providers. Identify financing units The WASH accounts team should identify relevant financing units providing and/or allocating funds to the sector. Some financing units, such as central government institutions, do this from their own resources, while others channel funds provided to them by other institutions, drawing from different financing types. Category FU4 Local authorities, for example, may channel funds from category FU2 National authorities, or from category FU8 Bilateral and multilateral donors. These may also have their own sources of finance such as internally generated funds from local resources, property taxes, business rates, or sanitation taxes. Data on the characteristics and status of these entities, and on the organizations and programmes they finance, is therefore required to ensure complete understanding of whether they act as primary or secondary funding sources. If secondary, it indicates that they are only channelling funds. The challenge box below provides greater detail. 21Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Potential challenge: Avoiding double counting between financing units • To establish overall expenditure in the WASH sector, financial flows should be computed at the level of the financing unit through which they enter the sector. A key principle is that one flow should only be recorded as one financing type. Donor funding channelled to local government through the national government, for example, should always be recorded as FT4 International public transfers. This is also why FT1 Tariffs for services provided, is judged as originating from FU1 Users (i.e. the financing unit that has injected the revenue into the sector) rather than from FU5 Network service providers. Applying this rule consistently should eliminate the risk of double counting in overall expenditure. Accordingly, the only financing injected by FU5 Network service providers would be reinvested profits or equity investments, recorded as FT6 Repayable financing. • However, financial flows also need to be recorded in other ways to enable investigation of a range of key policy questions, such as what funds are used for and how they are channelled. Each financial flow should therefore be “coded” in more detail, to track its distribution in various ways such as: – Direct disbursement to service providers – Channelled through another financing unit – Received from another financing unit and disbursed to service providers. Additional guidance is provided in Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach. 2.2.3.2 Map WASH actors and financial flows Once the bulk of this information has been collected, the second task consists of mapping the organization and financing of the sector, showing how money flows between the different actors. Mapping financial flows visually is the best way of doing this, as presented schematically in Fig. 6 below for a hypothetical WASH sector. This figure is illustrative, and does not cover all possibilities. The figure can also be used to capture information on data availability. The WASH accounts team can visually demonstrate the differences between financial flows for which TrackFin is likely to have good and reliable data, and those where difficulties are anticipated. Bold lines could be used to indicate potentially reliable data, and dotted lines for flows where only broad estimates can be expected. Each type can also be assigned a number to facilitate identification of data sources and estimation methodologies at later stages. Donor governments and multilateral agencies Commercial lenders International and local NGOs and foundations Microfinance institutions Equity investors “Served” households (tariffs) Households, self-supply investments (part of tariffs) Central government Financing types Tariffs for services provided Private repayable financing Voluntary transfers International public transfers Domestic public transfers Households’ out-of- pocket expenditure on self-supply Institutional entities Financing units Service providers Service provision Service provision Figure 6. Mapping financial flows for WASH service provision: Illustrative example Service providers Local governments Regional governments 22 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 8 below illustrates the concepts presented above, taking Brazil as an example. It shows how actors and flows were identified and classified in order to map sector funding. Box 8. Identifying and classifying WASH sector actors and financial flows: Example from Brazil WASH service provision in Brazil has to be seen in the context of the overall political structure. The Brazilian Federation consists of a national (federal) government as well as subnational governments comprising 26 states, 5,570 municipalities, and a Federal District. The three levels of government are politically and administratively independent of each other. The municipalities are responsible for the organization, management and direct or indirect provision of local WASH public services in urban and rural areas. The federal government and state governments, in cooperation with the municipalities, implement water, housing and basic sanitation programmes. The federal government is also responsible for establishing general guidelines and regulations for the management of services by all levels of government, in coordination with the Ministry of Cities, which is responsible for water and sanitation. The Ministry of Cities also coordinates the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). This system has been rolled out at the federal level and captures a wealth of sector data on service providers throughout the country (91% of municipalities for water and 65.5% for sewage disposal). The Ministry of Health is also responsible for direct provision of WASH services to indigenous people in rural areas. There is no central national regulator for water and sewage disposal services, but water resources are centrally regulated. Service providers and financing units provide water and sewerage services in both urban and rural areas, so creating four sub-sector actor maps was not necessary. Service Providers In Brazil, 26% of municipalities provide water directly through local service providers, and 78% directly provide sewerage services. In addition, 26 regional providers supply water services at the state level to 64% of municipalities, and sewerage services to 22%. Six micro-regional providers serve a small number of municipalities. While most of these delegated service providers are public, some are private. These providers offer WASH services through a variety of supply arrangements including direct, indirect (delegated), jointly managed, centralized, decentralized, by consortia, and through concession contracts. NGOs and CBOs are involved in providing hygiene promotion. Households in rural areas that build their own sanitation facilities also act as service providers. Financing units (shown in bold) and financing types (shown in italics): • The main types of financial flow are tariffs paid by served users such as households, industries, and institutions. Users also provide expenditure for self-supply. • The main spending by the federal government is on public transfers (grants) from the federal budget and repayable financing managed through 1) the Fundo de Garantia por Tempo de Serviço (FGTS) funding scheme managed by the Caixa Economica Federal (CAIXA) – a state-owned bank, and 2) the Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES), with funding from the Fundo de Assistência ao Trabalhador (FAT) which is a public fund under the Ministry of Labour and Employment, and other smaller funds providing equity finance. • Some states also have specific programmes for the sector funded through public transfers from their own state funds, usually from royalties for oil exploration or from environmental fines and compensation (for example the states of Rio de Janeiro, Espirito Santo and Bahia) or from water resources revenues (Fehidro of São Paulo). Some state programmes are also financed with repayable financing from their own state development finance institutions such as the Development Bank of Minas Gerais (BDMG). These are important from a local perspective, but not very significant at national level. • Some remaining funding is received from multilateral and bilateral donors for the execution of works and institutional development. These include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the International Development Bank (IDB), KFW of Germany and the Japanese JICA /JBIC. The federal government has also received substantial funding from IBRD to implement the Water Sector Development Programme (INTERÁGUAS), focused on institutional capacity building and integrated planning for the water sector. These are mostly grants (international public transfers). • Since 2004, public private partnerships have been authorized by law and have increased in number, but even so private capital contributions from corporate providers (a form of repayable financing) to the sector remains low. • NGOs and CBOs also provide a small share of voluntary contributions to the sector. 2.3 Estimate financial flows and fixed asset stocks Collecting financial data is the core objective of the TrackFin methodology. Two main types of financial data should be collected: • Financial flow data: this estimates how much funding flows into the sector each year from tariffs, household expenditure for self-supply, domestic public transfers, international public transfers, voluntary transfers and repayable financing, and how much is “spent” on providing services; and 23Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level • Fixed asset stock data: this estimates how much has been invested by economic actors in building up WASH assets over the years. It provides the basis for asset management planning, which is critical for future financial planning. Step 2.3 – Tasks to be undertaken • Understand the approaches to estimating financial flows and fixed asset stocks and become familiar with the cost classification. • Identify the data required to answer the policy questions set out in Step 1.3. – Identify whether the National Statistics Office already collects data on WASH financing and if so, understand their methodology; – Identify whether any national database for the sector already collects financial information; – Create an overview of data sources available and propose data collection methods for missing data; and – Decide if financial flows and/or fixed asset stocks will be included in the scope of WASH accounts, depending on data availability. • Gather data on financial flows at the source, starting with the approach that allows the most comprehensive dataset to be created (either the Financing Type Approach or the Cost-based Approach). – Note that both approaches need to be applied in parallel as they provide complementary information essential to the allocation of costs to types of service. • Gather data on fixed asset stocks using the Fixed Asset Stock Approach (if this approach is also selected). • Enter the financial data into the WASH accounts database: – Create a data collection tool or define the structure of the database and data records in a way that facilitates regular, ongoing maintenance; and – Code all data entries using WASH accounts classification codes. • Reconcile the data, identify information gaps, and recommend/conduct any supplementary surveys. 2.3.1 Rationale To date, most financial tracking initiatives have focused on financial flows. This often originates from an emphasis on tracking public financial flows, as public budgets typically distinguish between “recurrent” expenditure and “development” expenditure (i.e. capital investment). As a result, data on development budgets from public agencies’ accounts are often used to provide an estimate of government capital investment. This Guidance Document argues that collecting data on fixed asset stocks, alongside data on financial flows, is important to gain better understanding of the overall value of assets. However, this is often difficult to achieve due to data deficiencies. It is therefore proposed that collecting data on fixed asset stocks should be attempted only if WASH accounts based on financial flows have already been computed at least once, and data sources have been well mapped in advance. Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks. This note provides the rationale for using the Fixed Asset Stock Approach as a complement to the Financial Flows Approach, and gives additional guidance on how this approach can be applied. It also refers to Brazil’s experience in doing so. 2.3.2 Methodologies for collecting data on financial flows and fixed asset stocks Collecting information on financial flows can be done through two approaches: • The Financing Type Approach consists of tracking flows from each financing unit to estimate the amount of money allocated to the sector and aggregate the estimates by financing type; and • The Cost-based Approach consists of tracking expenditures on different services to estimate what is being spent, and deriving total expenditure figures by aggregating the expenses by type of cost. The Financing Type Approach answers questions such as, “What are the main financing units for the sector,” and “What has been spent?” In most cases, this is likely to be the most straightforward approach to tracking public financial flows, as many public entities acting as financing units have a budget allocation for the sector and should be able to report on it. The WASH accounts team should seek to collect data on financing units’ actual expenditure from their financial reports and the data sources indicated above. They should also collect revenue data from service providers’ cash flow statements. This approach alone is often not sufficient, however, 24 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative when seeking to track how funds are spent—their distribution between water and sanitation, for example—or to gather information on certain sources of finance such as household spending. For the reasons stated above, it is often necessary to combine the Financing Type Approach with a Cost-based Approach to evaluate the costs of providing services. This should be done based on the proposed TrackFin typology of costs, distinguishing at a minimum between capital expenditure (including large maintenance costs, which should be accounted for as a separate item), operating costs, and minor maintenance expenditure. Combining the two approaches improves the quality of information and facilitates the level of detail required to create WASH accounts capable of responding to key policy questions. An alternative approach, consisting of collecting data on fixed asset stocks, is referred to as the Fixed Asset Stocks Approach. This method estimates the value of existing asset stocks in the sector and is in line with the System of National Accounts, although potentially more difficult to apply. Data for this approach also need to be obtained at the level of service providers, focusing on their assets (and potentially liabilities) rather than on their revenue and expenditure. These approaches and the way they may be combined are presented schematically in Fig. 7 below. Figure 7. Methodologies for estimating expenditure in the WASH sector FIXED ASSET STOCK APPROACH Fixed asset stock values COMBINED APPROACH Calculate national WASH expenditure and allocate by: Geographic regions WASH uses Expenditure type Estimate national WASH expenditure FINANCING TYPE APPROACH Funding from financing units allocated by financing types COST-BASED APPROACH Expenditure of service providers for providing the service FINANCIAL FLOWS When estimating financial flows, it is important to use the same accounting approach and common terminology for the financing types and costs. This will ensure data comparability not only across activities, years and countries, but also against other economic aggregates such as gross domestic product.1 The Guidance Document recommends that data should be collected on actual financial flows, using a cash flow accounting method for both costs and revenue. The rationale for doing so is discussed in more detail in Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies. When using the Financing Type Approach, it is also essential to clarify whether budgeted flows or actual flows are to be collected. The Guidance Document recommends that, where possible, actual flows should be collected; this will build up the most accurate picture of what is actually spent, and allow comparison with costs incurred. Some methodological challenges can potentially be encountered, as outlined below. Whichever methodology is used, the types of financial flows being tracked must be clearly recorded if comparisons are to be made. 1 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a financial flow indicator: GDP estimates the total value of goods and services produced in a country based on production and consumption expenditure. It indicates the total monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country’s borders in a specific time period (usually a year). It includes all private and public consumption, government outlays, investments and exports less imports that occur within a defined territory. It is derived from expenditure figures reported in the National Accounts. Service areas 25Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Potential challenge: Tracking actual vs. budgeted expenditure • When using the Financing Type Approach, different financial flows can be recorded, ranging from committed or budgeted expenditure to actual expenditure on the ground. Although budgetary information may be easier to collect (particularly for transfers from public institutions), it is preferable to obtain actual expenditure amounts for all types of financial flows tracked using the Financing Type Approach. This allows comparison between different funding sources (including with funding provided by households, for which only actual figures are likely to be available) and provides a more accurate representation of expenditure in the sector. It also facilitates the reconciliation of total financial flow information, using both the Financing Type Approach and the Cost-based Approach. • If obtaining actual expenditure information is proving challenging, it may be possible to estimate it based on budgeted amounts and estimated percentages for actual budget spending based on past experience. This could be complemented with qualitative and quantitative assessment of specific programmes or investments to evaluate the difference between budgeted amounts and actual spending. In the longer term, tracking multiple types of financial flows in parallel may be useful to measure efficacy in spending. This is not an immediate objective of the TrackFin exercise, however, and the need to maintain multiple data sets could lead to complexities. Financing allocated to the sector may not always translate into actual services consumed, due to losses along the way. Ideally, these losses need to be quantified. The TrackFin initiative could potentially help quantify amounts that are budgeted or allocated but that do not result in service delivery. The following methodological notes provide additional guidance on applying these approaches and the associated data needs: • Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies • Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach • Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach • Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks 2.3.3 Tasks to be undertaken 2.3.3.1 Identify data sources and define data collection methods The first task is to identify what data should be collected, and in what detail, to achieve the allocation of expenditure to specific categories. Before starting, it is important to understand Methodological Notes 3 to 6, which provide detailed guidance on methods and data sources to estimate different financing types, costs and fixed asset stocks. When collecting data, the WASH accounts team should adopt a combined approach, looking for aggregated and comprehensive sources but combining this with collection of more detailed data from the source. Based on an initial review of available data, the WASH accounts team will need to prepare questionnaires and pro-forma documents for data collection. The TrackFin Secretariat can make some examples available on request. For the purpose of pilot testing the Guidance Document, a simple data collection tool in Excel format was developed, based on the software used to prepare Health Accounts. During the piloting, it was found that standard spreadsheets could be used as guides to develop country-specific data collection tools. In Brazil and Morocco, the WASH accounts team developed their own tailor-made Excel spreadsheet to reflect data availability at the country level. This was done to minimize the need for retreatment of the data. However, the data gathering exercise entailed the collection of a large number of financial data items (up to 13,000 data items in the case of Morocco) and their compilation in multiple dimensions, which was challenging to handle in Excel. The TrackFin tool was used in Ghana—the country that had the least detailed data. Based on the pilot exercise and health sector experience, there are medium-term plans to develop an automated “data collection tool” to facilitate the compilation of WASH accounts over the course of several years. This will facilitate ongoing monitoring, as explained in more detail below. 26 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Developing a data collection tool for WASH accounts on the model of the Heath Accounts tools • Building on experience in the health sector, a data collection and analysis tool, similar to the Heath Accounts tools, will be developed in the coming years. This could be used to prepare WASH accounts on a regular basis with a minimum of external support. The health sector has developed two separate tools: a Health Accounts production and a Health Accounts analysis tool. These tools are now used by over 40 countries, and are valued for the systematic support they provide. The production and analysis tools can potentially be combined into a single tool. • Software similar to the Heath Accounts tools will be created to simplify the exercise, standardizing the data treatment and cutting down the costs of replicating the exercise annually. This tool will process information in different formats in different countries, but operators will need to assign codes to each type of data so that it can be processed for the production of the WASH accounts. If the same data formats are used in subsequent years, the need for data coding will be greatly reduced in successive iterations. • The tool will also help with coding different types of flows, avoiding double counting, visualizing how financial flows are distributed between different financing types or financing units, and producing summary tables and pivot tables of WASH accounts. It will also support proper traceability and accountability of the work underlying the figures, and can be used as a repository for the questionnaires and pro-forma documents for data collection that have been tailor-made for the country. One important data source is likely to be the National Statistics Office (NSO). It is important to verify whether the NSO already collects data on financing to WASH and if so, to understand the methodology it uses. Information gathered by NSOs can provide useful background information, and indicate whether or not the NSO has established systems for data-gathering from the WASH sector. Information gathered by the NSO has limitations, however. Firstly, the SNA focuses on one main aspect of national expenditure, namely the creation of value in production processes. Therefore, this information can principally be used to estimate service providers’ costs and revenue. Secondly, the information gathered through the National Accounts system is likely to be difficult to understand and interpret. It uses terminology and concepts that WASH sector actors may not be familiar with, and the information is unlikely to provide the level of detail required to support policy-making at sector level. Nonetheless, engaging the NSO is important in order to better understand their methodologies for gathering data, and influence how they conduct regular surveys (for example, on household expenditure on WASH). This should facilitate the collection of accurate data and ensure NSO involvement in the recurrent preparation of WASH accounts. Other important sources of information are the main service providers and financing units in the country. The team should be able to collect primary information on expenditure patterns from these sources. It may also be possible to obtain data from an existing sector monitoring and information system, as was the case in Brazil through the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). This has been in existence for 20 years and compiles data on a very large number of service providers throughout the country (see Box 10 for more detail). Data for the Financing Type and Cost-based Approaches should be identified in parallel. To help create the database, the WASH accounts team should identify the main data sources from which information on expenditure can be extracted. Building an inventory of data sources can help keep track of the core data sets available, and identify whether information is missing or additional investigation, such as household surveys, is required. For each type of data, it is useful to collect the type of information indicated in Box 9 below. Box 9. Building a repository of data sources For each data source, it is important to gather the following metadata (i.e. data that describe and provide information about other data). This will assist in keeping track of where the data came from, how they were collected, and clarify what they include, so as to provide a basis for replicating the exercise in successive years. • Name of data source • Administration/institution/origin of the source • Type of data source (registers, business surveys) • Method of collection (administrative source, statistical full-scope or sample survey; national source versus standardized international survey) • Availability of data (years of data available) • Concept of the measuring units (costs, expenditures, turnover) • Variation in the methodology used to estimate data over time • Data reliability bands, i.e. how reliable is the data? Is the methodology to compile the data traceable? This can be assessed with a scoring system. 27Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Where it is obvious that no reliable “hard” data is available, the WASH accounts team will need to make estimates to fill the gaps. It will also need to specify how these estimates can be refined in later iterations of the exercise. To that end, the data repository should clearly signal where estimates have been made for each type of data collected. Box 10 below presents the main type of data sources used in the countries where the methodology was piloted, and the methods proposed to estimate missing data. Data sources used by each country depended on the state of the monitoring and information system for the sector, and the availability of financial data. In all three countries, no information was readily available from the National Statistics Offices, but the TrackFin exercise provided a useful platform for WASH sector stakeholders to engage in dialogue with the NSO on ways of increasing WASH data availability. Box 10. Examples of data collection methods from the pilot exercise In Brazil, the WASH accounts team was able to rely on the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS), an online database that gathers economic and financial data on the WASH service provision from municipalities. The SNIS covers the whole country, but as the provision of data is voluntary, it currently contains data for approximately 89% of the municipalities for water services and 35% for sewage services. However, most municipalities that do not provide data are small and rural. This means that existing data accounts for 97.3% and 80.4% of the urban population for water and sanitation respectively. The SNIS has no systematic data on services in rural areas, particularly for smaller villages. For larger rural agglomerations, the data is usually aggregated with the urban sector. To allocate service providers’ expenditure in more detail, financial reports for the biggest WASH service providers were also collected. The annual report on public expenditure for “saneamento basico” (which includes water, sanitation and solid waste) prepared by the Ministry of Cities was also an important source of data, as was the Transparency Portal of the federal government. It contains systematic and detailed information on federal government expenditure on the WASH sector, at all levels of government, including on domestic transfers to sub-national governments, and regional and local public institutions and NGOs operating in the sector. Finally, the national household survey and household budget surveys of IBGE (the national statistics bureau) were used to estimate household self-expenditure. The TrackFin exercise helped identify potential improvements to those surveys, which IBGE was prepared to take on board at the end of the exercise. Data disaggregated between regions is available, which indicates that regional analysis is possible where resources are available. In Ghana, data availability was a key constraint for the exercise, as data are not readily available in any information system. Data had to be collected from each institution’s own system or reports, where these existed. The data obtained were usually available at the level of disaggregation required for analysis. The TrackFin exercise was therefore key to identifying data gaps and proposing measures to improve data collection in the sector. The exercise coincided with the rolling out of a central financial management system for the public sector—the Ghana Integrated Financial Management Information Systems (GIFMIS)—to improve tracking of government expenditure. One key issue identified during the exercise is that there is no specific code for water or sanitation in the system at present. The national consultant made a presentation to the GIFMIS Steering Committee on the development of the WASH Sector Information Systems, underlining the necessity of tracking government expenditure to WASH, and creating new GIFMIS codes to increase the potential for disaggregated tracking of WASH expenditure. In Morocco, the sector information system does not collect financial information from utilities. A questionnaire was therefore designed to collect primary data directly from the main utilities, public agencies and the ministries. Financial reports were also collected from these institutions. It was not possible to collect data from smaller municipalities not served by ONEE (the main national utility) or a private concessionaire. These small municipalities provide the service directly, or through a CBO. As a result, data on rural WASH was largely missing. For the next exercise, it was proposed to conduct a survey from a sample of municipalities to fill the gap. There is also no consolidated information on international donor funding, so in the next exercise, a questionnaire for donors could be developed to acquire further detail on financing types. Box 9. Building a repository of data sources, continued Regarding expenditure data, it will be important to record the level of disaggregation possible for the different data sources, in order to answer the following questions: • Can expenditure be assigned to categories of providers or financing types and units? • Can expenditure be assigned to categories of WASH services? • Can expenditure be allocated by type (for example to differentiate between investment costs, operating and maintenance, or large capital maintenance costs)? 28 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Once data sources and categories are identified, and before starting data collection, the WASH accounts team should prepare an interim report, summarizing key findings from Steps 1, 2.1 and 2.2, for submission to the TrackFin champion and the national stakeholder group. This report should ideally be presented at a meeting of the national stakeholder group where in-depth discussions on data availability, constraints, and methods to fill data gaps can take place prior to engaging in any data collection exercises. A proposed outline for the interim report can be found on the TrackFin website. This report should contain the following information: • Definition of the scope of WASH accounts (the duration, geographic boundaries, and the WASH services for which financial flows will be tracked); • Identification of key actors and financial flows in the WASH sector, and the associated map of financial flows; • The classifications of WASH uses, actors and financial flows; • An overview of potentially available data sources; • Definition of specific estimation methods to value financial flows and fixed asset stocks, with the identification of potential methodological issues; • A preliminary list of the WASH accounts tables and indicators to be prepared; and • Possible implementation considerations that may affect the preparation of the WASH accounts. 2.3.3.2 Collect data, create database, and categorize financial flows The third task entails creating a database of WASH financial data based on the initial investigation. Once the list of data sources is complete and the methodologies to be applied are clearer, the WASH accounts team should create a database to house all available data. Its structure should facilitate ongoing maintenance. The team should then collect financial flow data and enter it into the database, starting with the approach likely to generate the most comprehensive data set – i.e. the approach for which data availability is greatest and access the easiest. Other approaches can then be introduced at a later stage to fill gaps and gather complementary information where greater detail is needed for policy analysis. To estimate financial flows, both the Financing Type and the Cost-based Approaches will need to be applied in parallel, as some data may only be available based on cost, whereas other data may be more readily available through examination of funding sources, expressed as expenditure. Ideally, the WASH accounts team should try to collect cost information from each service provider. If this is not possible, for example in circumstances where countries have large numbers of service providers, it may be feasible to collect data from a sample of service providers and extrapolate from the results. To refine initial estimates, the data collection process needs to be iterative. The database will be completed progressively through successive cycles, during which remaining data gaps can be filled and estimates reconciled as more data becomes available. Data collection must be carefully planned to avoid burdening data providers with overwhelming requests for data and related tasks. When data entry is complete, WASH accounts classification codes should be assigned to all entries to enable identification of the following: • The financing unit from which the flow originated; • The service provider receiving the funds; • The WASH services it funded, the intended use, and in which geographic area; and • The costs that were covered by this financial flow. More guidance can be found in Methodological Notes 3 to 6 on how to allocate spending to the different categories—for example to estimate spending on a particular use, or a category of spending such as household expenditure on self-supply. 29Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 2.3.3.3 Triangulate and reconcile the data collected The final activity consists of reconciling the different data sets by combining them to refine the allocation of spending to different categories. If significant gaps are found between the results of the two different approaches to capturing financial flow information, further investigation is required to identify estimation errors or missing flows. Potential reasons for this gap are identified in Box 11 below. This may require supplementary information gathering from primary data sources, applying estimates, or using cost allocation keys to estimate data. Box 11. Reconciling differences between the Cost-based Approach and the Financing Type Approach As different data sources are used in the two approaches, the total expenditure calculated is bound to be somewhat different. If this gap seems significant after initial data computation, it is essential to identify potential reasons for the gap in order to reduce sources of error and arrive at the best estimate of total sector expenditure. Factors that could explain differences at the provider level between financial flows received (cash inflows) and costs / expenditures (cash outflows) are as follows: • Variations in the net cash balance between the beginning and end of the period. This is a normal difference for which correction is not possible. The difference might come, for example, from the expenditure or repayment of a loan. More guidance on the treatment of loans is available in Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies. • Missing data, or inadequacy in the estimation methods used. The methods for estimating costs and financing types have been designed for consistency. The data sources may not, however, provide the figures in the way envisaged by the method, which may create false variations between the two approaches: – In the Financing Type Approach, the value considered for FT1 Tariffs for Service Provided, should be the amount of funds actually collected, rather than the gross revenue billed—which is what appears in the profit and loss account of the service provider. If only the gross revenue as billed is available, these figures should be adjusted by increasing or decreasing the balance of accounts receivable. – In the Cost-based Approach: ° Data for current capital expenditure on works in progress may be missing from the Investment Costs category (C1). Indeed, available data might only include expenditure on completed works, especially if estimates are based on the value of the completed asset in the balance sheet; ° Depreciation and amortization of fixed assets should not be included in the Investment Costs category (C1); and ° Data on Financial Costs (C4), which include capital repayments, interest payments and dividends, may not be available. • Double counting of some flows. As indicated in the Challenge Box in Section 2.2.2 above on financing units, a potential difficulty is avoiding the double counting of financial flows, particularly when resources are channelled through several financing units. More guidance can be found in Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach Finally, as already indicated, some degree of estimation will be necessary (see Box 12 below) or additional data gathering required. In the event of the latter, the WASH accounts team should make a request to the national stakeholder group, as additional budget may be required. Assumptions should be tested, possibly by enquiring further into the cost structure of the service provider. All estimation methods and assumptions should be clearly presented in metadata attached to the final results; they should be justified and well documented. Transparency is a key part of WASH accounts development, and provides clearer understanding of how the data was compiled. It also facilitates subsequent compilation rounds. 30 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 12. Filling data gaps: Making assumptions and using allocation keys In some cases, data will not be available to comprehensively estimate a category of WASH accounts. In these cases, estimation methodologies should be proposed, together with recommendations on obtaining more accurate information in the next iteration of the exercise. It may be necessary to use other kinds of information, such as physical information, to derive “allocation keys” for estimating the breakdown of financial flows. If, for example, there is no information on the distribution of expenditure across WASH services for a particular actor, the distribution of its activities can be used as the “key” for allocating expenditure. Making assumptions may also be necessary where insufficient information is available. Estimating the allocation of software costs (i.e. costs associated with infrastructure development such as project preparation, capacity building, training, or community mobilization and behavioural change activities) through the activities of a service provider can be difficult when only its total expenditure is known. It may be necessary to make an assumption about the amounts that should be attributed to each kind of support activity. Support costs may not, however, be directly linked to overall expenditure on a service. Typically, for a public provider of rural WASH services, support costs as a percentage of total costs tend to be higher for sanitation than for water supply. This is because households are increasingly expected to invest in sanitation themselves rather than receiving a subsidy, which means that the support costs borne by the public party may represent a higher share of their total investment than for water. Public investment in water, particularly for capital expenditure, is still very much the norm. Using small-scale studies and extrapolating from these to the rest of the population: In some cases, the results of a small-scale study can be used to estimate the data for a particular component. For example, a survey on the allocation of NGO expenditure can be used more broadly to cover this component in WASH accounts, as NGO expenditure and allocation is usually not known in any detail. This approach does carry risks, however, as the selected sample may not be representative of all NGOs in the country. It is therefore important to document the methods employed and any potential biases from such methods. This approach can be used for households, NGOs or CBOs in a variety of areas where a separate accounting mechanism for WASH expenditure does not exist. 31Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level 3 Step 3 – Analyse data and report findings This section sets out how the WASH accounts and associated indicators should be compiled, and provides guidance on how the data can be interpreted and used for policy-making. 3.1 Compile WASH accounts and indicators The WASH accounts and indicators can be compiled only after the data has been collected. Step 3.1 – Tasks to be undertaken • Identify, from the comprehensive list of potential WASH accounts tables and indicators, those most relevant to the country’s policy questions; • Compile WASH accounts tables and verify their coherence; • Calculate WASH accounts indicators; and • Prepare an Annex to the WASH accounts report. 3.1.1 Create the WASH accounts tables and indicators The WASH accounts team should now construct a number of tables, presenting the information obtained in a format that can be easily understood and used by policy-makers. Taken together, these tables form the WASH accounts. Comparable indicators can be derived from these tables. The TrackFin methodology proposes a number of standard tables that can address most policy needs. Their chief purpose is to provide responses to the fundamental policy questions defined at the start of the exercise. These are: • What is the total expenditure in the WASH sector? • How are funds distributed to the different WASH services and expenditure types? • Who pays for WASH services and how much do they pay? • What entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector? All countries taking part in the TrackFin initiative should preferably use a basic set of common WASH accounts tables and indicators, created in a similar format to facilitate international comparison. Depending on their policy needs and the information available, countries may choose to prepare fewer tables or to present more detailed information on aspects relevant to their own priorities. Table 3 below presents the set of tables required to obtain a comprehensive national picture of WASH financing. The tables required as a minimum are highlighted in bold text. Table WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and use Table WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and provider Table WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH provider and financing type Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and financing type Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by WASH service and financing unit Table WA 7 (PxFU) – WASH expenditure by WASH provider and financing unit Table WA 8 (FTxFU) – WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit Table WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider Table WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and main WASH service Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider Table 3. Recommended WASH accounts tables 32 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative WASH accounts indicators are a set of key headline figures derived from the tables. They provide the core information in a quicker and more digestible way, useful for easy assimilation and widespread dissemination of the results. Box 13 below presents key WASH accounts indicators that can be calculated from the tables. They should be systematically estimated using the same parameters to ensure international comparability.1 Box 13. Key WASH accounts indicators 1. Total WASH sector expenditure at the national level 2. Total WASH expenditure per capita at the national level 3. Total WASH expenditure in the country as a percentage of GDP (This can be compared to the total health expenditure as a percentage of GDP) 4. Expenditure on sanitation as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 5. WASH expenditure in the urban sector as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 6. Public expenditure on WASH as a percentage of total public expenditure (Public expenditure includes funding from national, regional and local authorities, bilateral and multilateral donors for all domestic public transfers, and international public transfers and public loans) 7. User expenditure as a percentage of total WASH expenditure (the sum of FT1 Tariffs, and FT2 User self-expenditure) 8. Domestic public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 9. International public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure 10. Total maintenance and operating costs as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Further indicators can be derived based on country needs, which are presented in Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators. Countries may select those most representative of their needs. Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators. This contains the actual tables, explaining in detail how they are created and for what purposes they can be used. 3.1.2 Select appropriate tables and verify data consistency The WASH accounts team should firstly determine which tables from the proposed full list it plans to produce (see Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators). This will depend on their relevance to national policy requirements, and on the available data. International benchmarking should also be a key consideration when selecting appropriate tables. Data then needs to be extracted from the database (Step 2.3) to complete the tables. It may be helpful to begin with the most disaggregated tables, then move on to more aggregated levels. One major advantage of developing data collection and analysis software, as described in Section 2.3.3.1, is that it facilitates the creation of tables automatically from the database, hence saving a considerable amount of time. Finally, the WASH accounts team should verify that the data presented in the tables is robust and internally consistent. It is important to check points such as the following: • Totals should be consistent across all tables. The total expenditure on consumption should also hold for provision and financing; • Totals reported should be equal to the sum of the constituent parts; • Values for similar items of expense from the same classification should be consistent across tables; and • The indicators are plausible in relation to a) the total expenditure figures, b) the population (per capita value), c) GDP, and d) historical values, if there are several time series of WASH accounts. Throughout this procedure, the compilation process and methods used to estimate the figures shown in the tables should be reported to enable assessment of data quality. An annex to the final report should clearly address how estimations were made and how the tables were constructed (see Step 4.2.1). Documenting the metadata and data sources in an annex to the tables is essential if they are to be appropriately interpreted and used. At a minimum, background information should include the data sources, how they were validated (especially where there are multiple sources), the hypothesis used when evaluating data (method of accounting 1 Regarding exchange rates, the team should convert the results into dollars and use the World Bank official exchange rate (average for the period) available on the World DataBank. 33Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level chosen), the reasoning behind the selection of data used in the estimation, and the procedures applied to render the data usable. 3.2 Prepare WASH accounts reports Step 3.2 – Tasks to be undertaken • Prepare the WASH accounts final report: – Gather information on the sector context (access data, institutional and policy background) – Summarize the methodology used – Summarize key findings from WASH accounts using graphs and tables to answer the four main questions and any additional policy questions – Interpret WASH accounts data to answer policy questions • Present the WASH accounts findings to the national stakeholder group for validation 3.2.1 Rationale Data are not information. In addition to producing tables and indicators, it is important to analyse the data in relation to background information on the WASH sector. This will ensure that the figures derived are correctly interpreted. If it is to be used effectively by policy-makers, the information from WASH accounts must be concise, meaningful, and directly relevant to policy purposes. Table 4 below summarizes how elements of WASH accounts tables and indicators can address policy questions and support policy development. A discussion follows on how these data can be used and interpreted to answer the key policy questions of the exercise. WASH accounts Tables (T) WASH accounts Indicators (I) Policy questions answered by these data 1. What is the total expenditure in the sector? Total from Table WA 10 (CxS) and Table WA 5 (SxFT) Comparison of total WASH expenditure estimated from the Financing Type and Cost-based Approaches • Total WASH sector expenditure (at the national level) • Total WASH expenditure per capita (at the national level) • Total WASH expenditure in the country as a percentage of GDP (this can be compared to the total health expenditure as a percentage of GDP) • What is total funding to WASH? Is current funding sufficient? • What is the trend in funding? Is it increasing or decreasing? • How does the level of funding compare to countries with a similar level of income, or with neighbouring countries? • How does the level of funding compare with other social sectors such as health or education? 2. How are funds distributed to the different WASH services and expenditure types? Table WA 1 (SxA) - WASH expenditure by WASH service area (urban/rural/central) • Expenditure on (rural/urban) sanitation as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Expenditure on (rural/urban) water as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • WASH expenditure in the urban sector as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • WASH expenditure in the rural sector as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • What is the urban/ rural, water/sanitation split in spending? • Is spending allocated to the WASH sub-sectors that need it most? • Is funding going to areas that need it most? Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and use • Total expenditure per type of service use • Which types of use are benefiting most from the financial resources allocated to the WASH sector? Table WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and main WASH service • Maintenance and operating costs as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Investment costs as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Is sufficient spending allocated to operations and maintenance as opposed to investment? Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider • Total WASH asset stocks per capita • What is the stock of fixed assets for WASH services and for each sub-sector? • Is the fixed asset stock being increased or run down? Table 4. Link between WASH accounts information and policy questions 34 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative WASH accounts Tables (T) WASH accounts Indicators (I) Policy questions answered by these data 3. Who pays for WASH services and how much? Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and financing type • Public expenditure on WASH as a percentage of total public expenditure • User expenditure as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • Domestic public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • International public transfers as a percentage of total WASH expenditure • By whom is each type of service financed? • What is the financial burden on households? Are policies and utilization of public funds effective at leveraging private investment, including from households? • What is the share of public vs. private expenditure? • What is the share of donor contribution? How much is donor spending in relation to the total government budget? • Are government and donor commitments on WASH financing respected? 4. Which entities are the main funding channels for the WASH sector? Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH service and financing unit • Focus on WASH expenditure by financing units that channel funds • How is funding in the WASH sector channelled? • What percentage of WASH public expenditure is channelled via local governments and how can they be supported? Table 4. Link between WASH accounts information and policy questions, continued 3.2.2 The WASH accounts final report To conclude the exercise, the WASH accounts team should produce the final report, presenting the results systematically in response to key policy questions and reform needs. A draft Executive Summary should be included. The report should also provide careful documentation of data sources, classifications, and the methodology used to estimate the results, so that differences observed between countries or in one country over time can be understood and put in the appropriate context. The final report should cover the context of the exercise, national motivation for undertaking it, and its specific sectoral challenges, but crucially must remain concise and to the point. It should not exceed 40 pages, excluding annexes. The findings should be summarized principally in tables and graphs. To the extent possible, final reports should use a similar format across countries to facilitate comparison and use of the data at both the national and international level. The WASH accounts final report should contain the following elements: • An introduction setting out the objectives of the WASH accounts and the policy questions the exercise aims to answer. • Country background information. This should present the general socioeconomic characteristics of the country, as well as key data on access to WASH services. It provides the context for interpreting and understanding the WASH accounts findings. • An overview of the water and sanitation sector in the country, setting out the institutional and financing arrangements and mapping the main actors and financial flows. To place the findings in context, it should also present major policy issues such as recent reforms and those still required, current policies, and the institutional framework. • The methodology used to compute the WASH accounts tables, including information on the scope of the exercise, the geographic range, sub-sectors involved, and number of years covered by the study. It should address the classifications used to generate the WASH accounts and the approaches used, highlighting the main methodological choices made for data collection and analysis. • The findings, which are the heart of the report. These should cover the main indicators calculated from the WASH accounts data, translating the core quantitative findings from the tables into qualitative information in order to provide answers to the main policy questions. • Policy recommendations, extracting the main policy implications from the findings and formulating recommendations for future exercises in the country. Guidance on future applications of the methodology should also be provided. The annexes to the report should contain the following: • The full WASH accounts tables; • Detailed information on the data collection and estimation methods used; 35Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level • Documentation of the WASH accounts data sources and any methodological information essential for correctly interpreting the results; and • Lessons learned from the exercise: Feedback from the WASH accounts team on the implementation of TrackFin, focusing on the methodology used but also on organizational and procedural aspects, for example the cost and resource requirements of the exercise. In addition, an executive summary should be produced, summarizing the main findings. This should be a stand- alone document of maximum ten pages that can be shared with high level decision-makers. The WASH accounts draft final report and draft executive summary should be presented at a national stakeholder group meeting. The meeting should validate the results and help clarify the main policy findings. This will provide the basis for engaging in broader dissemination of the results, as detailed in Section 3.3 below. Outlines for the final WASH accounts report and the Executive Summary are available on the TrackFin website. These include the summary findings from the three countries where the exercise was piloted. 3.3 Disseminate the policy analysis Step 3.3 – Tasks to be undertaken • Prepare policy briefs for decision-makers focusing on their specific policy questions; and • Communicate the findings to the wider sector and a broad general audience. Once the results have been validated and the key policy messages emerging from the analysis have been extracted, the WASH accounts team should finalize the Executive Summary. Short policy briefs (maximum of four pages) that extract key information in response to the main policy issues expressed in Step 1 should be prepared. This is a critical measure for conveying the results of the exercise to policy-makers and other sector actors in a clear and easily understandable way. Each policy brief could focus on a specific question, such as, “Does the geographical balance of WASH sector expenditure needs rebalancing?” “Does the country need to spend more on sanitation?” or, “How can additional funding from users be leveraged?” Writing these policy briefs will require a solid understanding of the sector context and the key policy decisions being debated. This information and analysis can be used at the following stages of the policy process, as discussed in more detail in the Policy Note available on the TrackFin website: • Advocacy and attracting funds • Defining financing strategies • Budgeting and planning • Monitoring • Regular tracking of funding, commitments, and targets • Benchmarking against other sectors or other countries • Coordinating donor aid. These policy briefs should be circulated as widely as possible across the WASH sector, to decision-makers, high level members of government, WASH advocates, NGOs, and international organizations in the country. This wide dissemination is crucial to ensuring that the findings of the WASH accounts are understood, and also to raise awareness, gain support, and create future demand for such financial information. In addition, countries should aim to make the collected data available online (downloadable in Excel format, for example) so that it can be used for further analysis by sector actors such as NGOs, think tanks, or policy research institutions. This can enhance transparency in the sector and provide insights to inform policy. 36 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 4 Step 4 – Prepare for the next WASH accounts Step 4. – Tasks to be undertaken • Make recommendations for the next exercise in terms of: scope and years to be covered; timing for the next data collection phase; testing other estimation methods; additional data collection; and possible improvements to existing information systems; • Plan for the next stage: seek funding for the exercise and ways of building the capacity of the WASH accounts team; and • Contribute to improving the methodology by responding to the feedback questionnaire: – Assess and comment on the suitability of the proposed classifications that define the WASH sector and its financing; – Assess and comment on the feasibility of collecting the kind of data required; – Assess the methodology proposed to value the financial flows and fixed asset stocks; and – Suggest improvements in respect of the classifications and the methodology. 4.1 Rationale for further rounds Maximum value can be gained from the WASH accounts exercise when many countries apply the methodology and repeat it on a regular basis. The end goal of WASH accounts is not to produce data, which in itself has limited value, but to ensure that the data generated are transformed into policy insights and used to strengthen policy-making. Using the data is crucial, especially in the first exercise, to “make the case” for WASH accounts, demonstrate its pertinence to sector decision-making, and to encourage national decision-makers to keep producing WASH data over successive years. Monitoring expenditure over time can also help to promulgate WASH accounts in other countries. Involving more countries in the production of WASH accounts on a regular basis will benefit all, as it provides the basis for benchmarking results and increasing understanding of differences in data analysis and outcomes. Using WASH accounts to strengthen policy will also pave the way for institutionalizing the process. This will only take place if there is routine, government-mandated and country-owned production and utilization of a set of WASH expenditure indicators. Fig. 8 below is based on lessons from the health sector, and illustrates how producing and using WASH accounts on a regular basis can generate a virtuous cycle. In order for this to happen, three key structural factors need to be in place: • A clear governance structure for the WASH accounts exercise (including formal and informal arrangements), setting out who is responsible for what in respect of each WASH accounts activity. If the exercise is conducted by consultants, there has to be continuity between the exercises. One institution should be responsible for leading, planning, supervising, and providing quality insurance for the WASH accounts. This institution should also hold the database where data from all previous exercises is recorded and WASH accounts tables computed. The national stakeholder group and WASH Account team should be established as permanent bodies and meet on a regular basis. • Staff capacity: Members of the WASH accounts team should be trained to implement the methodology, either by former members of the team (if there is staff turnover), international consultants, or nationals of other countries that have already implemented the methodology. This should include a “learning-by-doing” component on how to use the data collection tool. • Financing for WASH accounts production, and the dissemination and translation of findings: Financing for WASH accounts activities should be secured by the lead institution. Countries may seek funding from development partners, or ask the TrackFin Secretariat for support in this endeavour. 37Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Source: Authors. Adapted from World Bank (2011), Harnessing National Health Accounts to Strengthen Policymaking – A Compendium of Case Studies. Demand and use of data • As country leaders make tough trade-offs to ensure an equitable and efficient allocation of scarce WASH resources, there is a critical need for an evidence base. • Regular use of WASH accounts findings in policy-making contributes to more sophisticated policy analysis. Production, data management, and quality assurance of WASH accounts • The adaptation and integration of sector monitoring and information systems to collect financial data will enable the production of WASH accounts in a more sustainable manner, in comparison to one-off “manual” data collection. Translation of data and dissemination of specific policy analysis • WASH accounts data have the most value when used to inform evidence-based financing decisions. • When an institution owns the translation process and champions key policy insights, it increases the likelihood that the answers WASH accounts data provide will be used to influence policy. Dissemination of findings • Making the collected data and findings available for analysis enhances transparency and, with experience, analysis and insights that inform policy. • Dissemination takes place at two stages: (1) when the WASH accounts tables are produced and (2) after the data has been translated into policy relevant briefs. STRUCTURAL FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PRODUCTION AND USE OF WASH ACCOUNTS • Governance structure and organization of WASH accounts production (who is responsible for what). • Capacity of institutions to plan and implement the WASH accounts activities. • Financing of WASH accounts activities. 34 1 2 Figure 8. Framework for institutionalizing the production and use of WASH accounts 4.2 Formulate recommendations for the next WASH accounts in the country To facilitate the regular production of WASH accounts, the team should initiate the subsequent iteration as soon as an ongoing exercise is completed. It is crucial to maintain momentum if capacity and experience are not to be lost. Based on their experience, the WASH accounts team should formulate recommendations to the TrackFin champion and the national stakeholder group on how to improve the process for the next exercise. It should advise on scope (by sub-sector) and duration, and whether new data from additional actors or financing types should be gathered, potentially through ad hoc surveys. This could include household surveys, or surveys at the local government level, to collect more detailed estimates on funding allocation and spending. Additional data might be obtainable from existing sector data collection tools, surveys or information systems. This requires working with the partner institutions responsible for these tools or data collection methods. Data could also be collected at a more disaggregated level. Expenditure on repayable financing from international donors, for example, can be divided into concessionary and non-concessionary repayable financing if extra data on the nature of each loan can be collected from primary sources. 38 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative 4.2.1 Plan for the next stage At the end of the exercise, the TrackFin champion and TrackFin Focal Point should come together to plan the next iteration, based on guidance from the national stakeholder group. It is essential to take advantage of the momentum created by the final report and policy briefs, and to maximize the attention of policy-makers and development partners to the results they show. Fundraising is a critical aspect of planning the next stage. The planning should happen at the same time as the dissemination of findings, so that the national Focal Point can follow up rapidly with interested funders, including the national government, and present them with a proposal for a future exercise. The WASH accounts team, under the supervision of the Focal Point, should draft a budget and work plan for the next stage. This should include capacity building for the team. The WASH accounts team should advise on the timing for the next data collection phase. New data collection may take place every one or two years depending on what is most appropriate for the policy and budgeting cycles, and taking account of habitual timing for the release of key data, such as national household surveys or census data. 4.2.2 Provide feedback on the methodology proposed The WASH accounts team should also complete the feedback questionnaire, reporting on their experience with preparing WASH accounts and using this Guidance Document. This allows them to evaluate any methodological issues they have faced, and to suggest potential modifications to the methodology and classifications. Feedback is essential for the improvement of future exercises at the national level, but also to inform ongoing revisions to the methodology and Guidance Document at the international level. A feedback questionnaire is provided for countries to report on their experiences with the implementation of TrackFin and application of the methodology. 39Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 1: WASH services classification systems Objectives: This note presents existing international systems of classification of WASH-related products, services and activities. These have been used to develop the TrackFin classification system. The purpose of this Note is to increase the WASH accounts team’s understanding of data from National Statistics Offices, which often use these classifications. It also highlights areas requiring longer-term methodological refinement to better capture WASH activities at the level of detail needed to inform policy-making. In particular, it proposes a separate category for hygiene services for immediate use and subsequent further development in TrackFin exercises. MN 1.1. Existing WASH services classification systems This section presents a list of existing international classification systems, showing how they capture water, sanitation, and hygiene activities. There are three main international systems of classification used to categorize industries, activities, goods and services. These are described in Table 5 below. Classification Purpose CPC VERSION 2 (Central Product Classification) Classifies goods and services to help answer the question, “What is being consumed?” ISIC REV. 4 (International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities) Classifies service providers to help answer the question, “Who provides these goods and services?” COFOG (Classification of the Functions of Government) Classifies functions performed to ensure that these products are provided. There are also other functional classifications such as CEPA (Classification of Environment Protection Activities), which are less frequently used. Table 5. Summary of main international systems of classification of goods and services Table 6 – Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain below summarizes where the CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications correspond along the water and sanitation value chain. The nature of these classifications is clarified below the table, with an explanation of the codes most relevant to the WASH sector. The Central Product Classification (CPC) is a system used in national accounts to classify all goods and services based on their physical properties and intrinsic nature, and on their industrial origin. It is comprehensive, internationally recognized, and includes all economic activities. Its breakdown of activities into categories is not, however, a close match with WASH accounts’ needs. There is no clearly identified CPC category for sanitation and hygiene promotion services, although these may be aggregated into other “public service” categories, for example non-WASH education activities. In addition, services provided by government (i.e. public administrative functions) are classified on a highly aggregated basis. This prevents the identification of specific government functions. Learning from SEEA-Water: Simplified standard SEEA-Water tables use only two of the products related to water: CPC 18000 (natural water) and CPC 94100 (sewerage, sewage treatment and septic tank cleaning services). This could be because they track products produced by water and sanitation industries (ISIC 36 and 37) and consider that other products are produced by the construction industry. However, to track expenditure related to capital investments, it is essential to track water and sanitation-related construction services. The International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) is a United Nations system. It classifies economic data according to the type of activity carried out by an economic unit. An “industry” is defined as a set of production units engaged primarily in the same or similar productive economic activities. This classification examines only the activities undertaken and does not distinguish between them according to their legal status (i.e. whether the producers are governmental, non-governmental, or private). 40 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Va lu e c ha in CP C ( Ce nt ra l P ro du ct s C la ss ifi ca tio n) IS IC (I nt er na tio na l S ta nd ar d In du st ria l C la ss ifi ca tio n) CO FO G Co de De sc rip tio n Co de De sc rip tio n W ha t i t i nc lu de s Co de De sc rip tio n W at er su pp ly se rv ice s ( S1 ) 53 23 3 Da m s 42 90 Co ns tru cti on of ot he r c ivi l en gin ee rin g p ro jec ts 53 23 1 Aq ue du cts an d o th er w at er su pp ly co nd uit s, ex ce pt pip eli ne s 42 20 Co ns tru cti on of ut ilit y p ro jec ts 54 34 1 W at er w ell dr illi ng se rv ice s W at er w ell dr illi ng an d s ep tic sy ste m in sta lla tio n s er vic es 18 00 0 Na tu ra l w at er 36 00 W at er co lle cti on , t re at m en t an d s up ply Co lle cti on of ra in wa te r a nd w at er fr om va rio us so ur ce s s uc h a s riv er s, lak es , w ell s Pu rifi ca tio n o f w at er fo r w at er su pp ly pu rp os es De sa lin at ion of se a o r g ro un dw at er to pr od uc e w at er as th e pr inc ipa l p ro du ct 69 21 0 W at er di str ibu tio n t hr ou gh m ain s, ex ce pt st ea m an d ho t w at er (o n o wn ac co un t) Di str ibu tio n o f w at er th ro ug h m ain s 86 33 0 W at er di str ibu tio n s er vic es th ro ug h m ain s ( on a fee or co nt ra ct ba sis ) 69 23 0 W at er di str ibu tio n, ex ce pt th ro ug h m ain s ( on ow n ac co un t) Di str ibu tio n o f w at er by tr uc ks or ot he r m ea ns 86 35 0 W at er di str ibu tio n s er vic es , e xc ep t t hr ou gh m ain s ( on a fee or co nt ra ct ba sis ) Sa nit at ion se rv ice s (S 2) 54 34 2 Se pt ic sy ste m in sta lla tio n s er vic es 42 20 Co ns tru cti on of ut ilit y p ro jec ts W at er w ell dr illi ng an d s ep tic sy ste m in sta lla tio n s er vic es 94 12 0 Se pt ic ta nk em pt yin g a nd cl ea nin g s er vic es 37 00 Se we ra ge Co lle cti on of se wa ge by se we r s ys te m s o r s ew ag e t re at m en t fac ilit ies 94 11 0 Se we ra ge an d s ew ag e t re at m en t s er vic es Tre at m en t a nd di sp os al of se wa ge by se we r s ys te m s o r s ew ag e tre at m en t f ac ilit ies Ta bl e 6 . S im ila rit ie s b et we en CP C, IS IC an d CO FO G cla ss ifi ca tio ns al on g th e w at er an d sa ni ta tio n va lu e c ha in 41Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Va lu e c ha in CP C ( Ce nt ra l P ro du ct s C la ss ifi ca tio n) IS IC (I nt er na tio na l S ta nd ar d In du st ria l C la ss ifi ca tio n) CO FO G Co de De sc rip tio n Co de De sc rip tio n W ha t i t i nc lu de s Co de De sc rip tio n Un all oc at ed co ns tru cti on ac tiv iti es (f or bo th w at er an d sa nit at ion se rv ice s) (S 1 a nd S2 ) 53 25 1 Lo ca l p ipe lin es (w at er an d s ew er ag e) 42 20 Co ns tru cti on of ut ilit y p ro jec ts Co ns tru cti on of pi pe lin es an d l on g- dis ta nc e t ra ns po rt of w at er an d s ew ag e 53 25 3 Se wa ge an d w at er tr ea tm en t p lan ts Co ns tru cti on of se wa ge di sp os al pla nt s 54 24 1 Ge ne ra l c on str uc tio n o f lo ng -d ist an ce pi pe lin es Co ns tru cti on of pi pe lin es an d l on g- dis ta nc e t ra ns po rt of w at er an d s ew ag e 54 25 1 Ge ne ra l c on str uc tio n o f lo ca l p ipe lin es Co ns tru cti on of pi pe lin es an d l on g- dis ta nc e t ra ns po rt of w at er an d s ew ag e 54 25 3 Ge ne ra l c on str uc tio n o f s ew ag e s er vic es an d w at er tre at m en t p lan ts Su pp or t s er vic es (S 3) 91 12 3 Pu bli c a dm ini str at ive se rv ice s r ela te d t o h ou sin g a nd co m m un ity am en iti es 84 12 Re gu lat ion of ac tiv iti es th at pr ov ide he alt h c ar e, ed uc at ion , c ult ur al se rv ice s an d o th er so cia l s er vic es , ex clu din g s oc ial se cu rit y Pu bli c a dm ini str at ion of pr og ra m m es to in cre as e p er so na l we llb ein g: he alt h, ed uc at ion , c ult ur e, sp or t, re cre at ion , en vir on m en t, ho us ing , o r s oc ial se rv ice s Th is cla ss inc lud es : • A dm ini str at ion of po ta ble w at er su pp ly pr og ra m m es • A dm ini str at ion of w as te co lle cti on an d d isp os al op er at ion s 5.2 W as te wa te r m an ag em en t 6.3 W at er su pp ly Ta bl e 6 . S im ila rit ie s b et we en CP C, IS IC an d CO FO G cla ss ifi ca tio ns al on g th e w at er an d sa ni ta tio n va lu e c ha in (c on tin ue d) 42 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative There are two main categories relating to WASH activities, namely ISIC class 36 covering the collection, treatment and supply of water, and ISIC class 37 covering sewerage. These two categories are utilized by SEEA-Water in their Economic Accounts. While they are service-oriented, they do not capture the full range of activities involved in providing access to and delivery of water and sanitation services, such as construction of WASH infrastructure, or water resource management. Moreover, ISIC 36 does not separate water provided for domestic use from that provided for industrial use, or for irrigation canals, while ISIC 37 does not explicitly include faecal sludge management or hygiene promotion. Finally, activities under ISIC 84 (activities linked to collective government activities) are aggregated, so those specifically relating to the water and sanitation sector cannot be singled out in this system. Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is a classification of government expenditure according to purpose. It classifies transactions such as outlays on final consumption expenditure, intermediate consumption, gross capital formation, and capital and current transfers according to the function that the transaction serves. These COFOG categories allow further breakdown of the broad ISIC category in which water supply and sewage administration are included, i.e. ISIC 8412 (Public Administration). Four COFOG categories relate to water management in general: wastewater management, soil and ground water protection, environmental protection not elsewhere classified, and water supply. These COFOG categories refer to collective services of government (formulation and administration of government policy, the setting and enforcement of public standards, and the regulation, licensing or supervision of producers, as in the case of education and health). Other systems of classification of government environmental protection activities have been developed and could potentially be used. For example, Classification of Environmental Protection Activities (CEPA) was developed by Eurostat in cooperation with the United Nations to classify environmental protection activities, environmental protection products, and expenditures for environmental protection. These environmental protection activities are production activities in the sense of the SNA as they combine resources, such as equipment, labour, manufacturing techniques and information networks or products in order to create an output of goods or services. In the case of water, CEPA includes wastewater management and protection and remediation of soil, ground water and surface water. Learning from SEEA-Water: SEEA-Water uses the CEPA definition of wastewater management to classify expenditure for activities and measures aimed at preventing the pollution and protection of water through reductions in the release of wastewater into inland surface water and seawater. As a CEPA category does not exist for water management and exploitation, SEEA-Water has created this classification, which corresponds to ISIC 36 and part of ISIC 84. However, according to the UN Statistics Division, this classification is not greatly used in developing countries. MN 1.2. Approach to defining the TrackFin classification of services Existing international classification systems do not fully capture the reality of the WASH sector and hence have limited capacity to answer policy questions. CPC categories are too infrastructure-based, while ISIC categories do not explicitly include some services essential to developing countries, such as faecal sludge management. The TrackFin classification of water and sanitation services presented in Table 1 of the Guidance Document builds to the extent possible on existing classifications and definitions. It also seeks to better reflect the realities of providing water and sanitation services, particularly in developing countries. This classification covers the main activities alongside the WASH value chain, including hygiene. Table 1 also shows whether and to what extent the categories proposed for WASH accounts and those of international classification systems correspond. Water Resource Management activities directly relevant to water and sanitation services provision (S4 in the TrackFin classification) are not explicitly mentioned as a separate category in CPC, ISIC, and COFOG, which is why they are not shown as corresponding. 43Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level In the longer term, the WASH international community should examine whether a revised and more disaggregated classification of WASH services is needed to create even closer matches with the sector’s analytical and policy needs. If this long-term objective were pursued, the following limitations of the current TrackFin classification system would need to be addressed: • There is no internationally agreed definition and classification of hygiene services. Section MN 1.3 below presents the rationale for the proposed TrackFin classification but also identifies how it would need to be further developed in subsequent exercises; and • The list of support services (usually provided by government) is rather limited and needs to be further developed in the context of country needs. MN 1.3. Proposals for further developing the classification for hygiene services As indicated above, there is no internationally agreed definition for hygiene at present. Furthermore, none of the existing international classification systems identifies hygiene activities relating to water and sanitation as a specific product or service category. If hygiene financing is to be adequately tracked, this requires the development, adoption, and mainstreaming of specific classifications for hygiene products, service providers, and functions. During the TrackFin pilot phase, countries identified the need for a separate category of hygiene activities. In the earlier version of the Guidance Document, hygiene promotion had been designated under either sanitation or support services to WASH. The creation of a definition for hygiene and a list of hygiene related activities is therefore now proposed. Existing definitions of hygiene: WHO defines hygiene as “the conditions and practices that help to maintain health and prevent the spread of diseases”. In its Hygiene Framework, WaterAid defines hygiene as “personal and household practices such as handwashing, bathing, and management of stored water in the home, all aimed at preserving cleanliness and health” (WaterAid, 2012). This last definition is focused on household hygiene, however, whereas it should also encompass practices in the community and in public places, such as in schools and health facilities. Water Aid’s hygiene framework identifies various areas of hygiene behaviour that have a significant impact on the transmission of water and sanitation-related diseases. These are: • Safe disposal of human excreta (including that of children and infants); • Water source protection and use (from water source to transportation, storage, and point of use); • Personal hygiene (handwashing with soap at critical times, as well as body, face and clothes); • Food hygiene (cooking, washing, storing, preventing cross contamination); and • Domestic and environmental hygiene (disposal of solid waste and animal excreta, control of wastewater and rainwater, cleanliness of the house and its surroundings). In addition, other frameworks also include menstrual hygiene management as part of personal hygiene. Some of these areas fall outside the WASH sector, for example food hygiene, animal hygiene, and solid waste management. Some of these areas are already included in water or sanitation service classification systems, such as safe disposal of human excreta, and water source protection and use. The TrackFin methodology therefore proposes to clearly identify the scope of hygiene activities and their allocation between sub-sectors. The proposed list of activities falling within the “hygiene” category is as follows: • Hygiene promotion programmes by government or service providers, for households, communities and in public places such as schools and clinics: This includes hardware and software interventions, including handwashing campaigns, sanitation promotion and hygiene education, menstrual hygiene management, distribution of hygiene products, and chlorine distribution; and 44 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative • Personal and household-level hygiene activities related to water and sanitation: This includes handwashing, bathing, washing clothes and washing material/equipment (soap, tippy taps, bathroom); chlorine for point of use water treatment. This item was removed from the “water” category. Food hygiene, animal hygiene, and solid waste management are excluded from this category. Improving the definition of hygiene services will require further research and consultation, preferably conducted collaboratively by institutions involved in the provision of these services, with the aim of adopting and mainstreaming an international definition and classifications. 45Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 2: Classification of WASH uses, actors and financing types Objectives: This note presents existing internationally-accepted classification systems for WASH uses, actors and financing types that have been used as reference points for developing the TrackFin system. Classifications of WASH service use, service providers and financing units were adapted from SEEA-Water, while the classification of financing types is an adaptation from the OECD 3Ts (Tariffs, Taxes and Transfers). MN 2.1. Classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units This section covers the classifications used by SEEA-Water. These are based on internationally accepted statistical conventions, and were used as the basis for developing the TrackFin classification of WASH service uses, service providers and financing units. Classification of WASH service users: Existing international classification systems do not refer to water uses but rather to water users. This is the case of SEEA-Water, which classifies water users based on the ISIC classification system (see Table 6 – Similarities between CPC, ISIC and COFOG classifications along the water and sanitation value chain for more detail). Table 7 below summarizes how WASH service users are classified in the SEEA-Water methodology. Categories of water service users in SEEA-Water Explanation and matching categories Specialized producers – intermediate consumption • ISIC 36 water producers • ISIC 37 sewerage services producers ISIC 36 and ISIC 37 producers are identified as users only if they themselves consume the water and sanitation services they produce Other producers (ISIC 1–3, 5–33, 41–43, 35, 38, 39, 45–99) – intermediate consumption Includes producers involved in other types of activity that consume water and sanitation for industrial or commercial purposes Households Domestic use General government • Can be disaggregated into central and local government Institutional use Rest of the world International users; for water supply and sanitation, this is not directly relevant Table 7. Classification of water services users in the SEEA-Water system Classification of WASH service providers: SEEA-Water classifies producers into “relevant ISIC categories, regardless of the kind of ownership, type of legal organization and mode of operation. Even when activities for water collection treatment and supply (ISIC 36) and sewerage (ISIC 37) are carried out by the government, they are therefore classified as far as possible in the specific division (ISIC 36 and 37).” It also shows in separate tables water and sewerage services self-provided by households, and water-related collective consumption services provided by government. Table 8 below sets out the different categories of water service providers used in SEEA-Water. Categories of water service providers Specialized producers: • ISIC 36 water producers • ISIC 37 sewerage service producers Other Producers (ISIC 1–3, 5–33, 41–43, 35, 38, 39, 45–99) Households (as producers for their own use) General government (as a producer of water-related collective consumption services) • Can be disaggregated into central and local government Table 8. Classification of water services providers in the SEEA-Water system 46 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Classification of WASH financing units: To identify the sources of financing, SEEA-Water refers to “financing sectors”. These are the entities actually bearing the cost, and are characterized by type of ownership, which includes: General Government, potentially disaggregated into central and local government; Not-for-profit institutions serving households; Corporations; Households; Rest of the world. These financing sectors are shown in Table 9 – Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system below. Categories of financing sectors General government • Can be disaggregated into central and local government Not-for-profit institutions serving households Corporations • Specialized producers: (ISIC 36 water producers; ISIC 37 sewerage service producers) • Other Producers (ISIC 1–3, 5–33, 41–43, 35, 38, 39, 45–99) Households Rest of the world Table 9. Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system In the same way, financing units in WASH accounts are classified by type of institutional sectors, as this provides the best response to policy questions on the origins and channelling of funds received by service providers. MN 2.2. Classification of WASH financing types This section presents two existing classification systems that identify financing types: the OECD 3Ts classification, which refers to financing types as “financing sources”, and SEEA-Water. The OECD 3Ts system was used as the principal basis for the TrackFin classification of financing types. WASH sector financing sources according to the OECD: the 3Ts Since the Camdessus report on water financing (Winpenny, 2003), the water sector has referred to three main sources of finance for the water sector as the “3Ts”, i.e. tariffs, taxes and transfers, to which must be added repayable financing sources. These sources of finance can be combined to cover the costs of water service provision, as summarized by the OECD in Fig. 9 below (OECD, 2010). Figure 9. Sources of finance for the WASH sector Source: (OECD, 2010), Innovative financing mechanisms for the water sector. Private funds Public funds WATER SERVICE PROVIDERS’ FINANCES COSTS Operating costs Maintenance costs Investment costs (rehabilitation and new) Financing gap REVENUE Tariffs Taxes Transfers REPAYABLE FINANCE Equity Bonds Commercial loans Concessionary (incl. grant element) Repayments Bridge the financing gap MARKET BASED REPAYABLE FINANCE 47Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level The OECD defines these sources of finance as follows: • Tariffs are funds contributed by WASH service users to obtain the services. Users generally make payments to service providers for access to and use of the service. Where a service is self-provided, for example, if a household builds and operates its own household latrine, the equity invested by the household in the form of cash, material or time – “sweat equity” – would also fall under tariffs. • Taxes refer to funds originating from domestic taxes that are channelled to the sector via transfers from any level of government – national, regional or local. Such funds would typically be provided as subsidies for capital investment or operations. “Hidden” subsidies may include tax rebates, soft loans (i.e. at a subsidised interest rate) or subsidised services such as electricity. • Transfers refer to funds from international donors and charitable foundations (including NGOs, decentralized cooperation or local civil society organizations) typically originating from other countries. These may take the form of grants, guarantees, or concessionary loans (i.e. through the grant element included in a concessionary loan, in the form of a subsidised interest rate or a grace period). WASH sector investments tend to be capital-intensive and ‘lumpy’ by nature, characterized by relatively large investments with a long asset life. It is therefore seldom possible to finance all necessary investments up-front. If additional financing cannot be raised, either by reducing costs or by increasing the 3Ts, it is standard practice for the financing gap to be “bridged” with a mix of repayable financing types. These may include the following:1 • Bank loans, including commercial finance, microfinance and concessionary loans. The latter are loans from donors that would include a grant or transfer element in the form of an interest rate below market rate, or a grace period; • Equity provided by investors with the expectation that it would be repaid and would earn a rate of return on the capital invested. In going concerns, equity may be provided over very long periods of time and may therefore not be repaid. A hidden form of public subsidy (or transfer) may consist of making an equity investment with no expectation of repayment or return; and • Other financial instruments, such as bonds, whereby a debt title is sold in the market to a large group of bond investors. Bond issuers may include municipalities –“municipal bonds” – or public and private companies – “corporate bonds.” Evaluation of the relevance of the OECD 3T typology for WASH accounts The OECD 3T typology is relevant to WASH accounts in the sense that it categorizes the flows of funding according to their origin and nature (for example, distinguishing between revenue from services, and external subsidies). This terminology has become well known and accepted in the sector. Its value is in conveying in simple terms a number of key concepts about WASH sector financing, such as the understanding that full cost- recovery from tariffs should not be the only objective and that sustainable cost recovery from a mix of the 3Ts is an acceptable alternative. Concerns regarding this typology were, however, raised in previous consultations: • Some sector stakeholders expressed concern that this typology is principally recognized by international organizations and external support agencies such as donors or NGOs. Its ownership by developing country actors is still in progress. • The terminology can be confusing in the context of some developing countries. As WASH accounts are intended for use by policy-makers, the classifications adopted need to be straightforward and easily understood, without allowing for any misinterpretation. 1 For large, capital intensive service providers individual loans may be repaid, but the total debt level may not reduce as loans are ‘rolled-over’ or renewed to maintain the same balance between debt and equity finance. 48 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Additional concerns have been raised about the 3T terminology, including the following points: • The term tariff is understood in common language as the tariff paid by users to utilities. However the OECD typology includes in this category payments made by households for self-provision. These two types of financing are substantially different, with different data sources. Thus the two types of financing should be clearly separated if possible. • Under the item transfer, the OECD typology includes “funds from international donors and charitable foundations (including NGOs, decentralized cooperation or local civil society organizations) that typically come from other countries”. In several countries, however, such as India or many Latin American countries, the term transfer often refers to central government budget allocated to local government in decentralized settings. This is part of what the OECD terminology refers to as taxes, although this term is relatively vague and can be misunderstood in developing countries. Given the interpretation differences that could arise around the OECD terminology, it was adjusted to provide the basis for the TrackFin classification of financing types. These are the equivalent of what the OECD would refer to as “financing sources.” WASH sector financing types according to SEEA-Water: Financing units and sectors SEEA-Water does not consider financing types as such. But the financing sectors identified by SEEA-Water (as defined in Table 9 – Classification of water financing sectors in the SEEA-Water system above) comprise categories of financing types not explicitly considered by the OECD 3T terminology. These include transfers from not-for-profit institutions serving households (which might be in kind or in cash, and may originate from domestic voluntary sources as opposed only to international transfers). International transfers from the rest of the world, which might not be described as Official Development Assistance (such as transfers from non-OECD donors, including from BRICS), might also be included. TrackFin classification of financial types The TrackFin classification of financing types broadly aligns with the 3T terminology, but provides additional disaggregation and reconciles with the SEEA-Water terminology. It is presented in Table 10 – TrackFin classification of WASH financing types below, showing where it matches the OECD 3T and SEEA-Water classifications. 49Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level TrackFin financing types Definition Alignment with OECD typology of financing sources Alignment with SEEA- Water categories of financing sectors FT1 Tariffs for services provided Payment by users to service providers for access to and use of a service. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT1.1 Domestic tariffs for services provided, FT1.2 Non-domestic tariffs for services provided. TARIFFS Part of funding via “Corporations” FT2 User expenditure on self-supply Funding from users to invest in or provide the service themselves. Self- providing users have to pay an initial investment up-front (in a well, a private water production system, or a private latrine) for access to the service, and must then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves; this can be in form of cash, material or time. This category can be further disaggregated into two sub-categories: FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply, FT2.2 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply. Households and “Corporations” FT3 Domestic public transfers Public transfers from government agencies (central or local government) to WASH actors. These are often subsidies from taxes or other sources of government revenue. This category includes only grants and excludes concessionary loans that are included in FT6 Repayable financing. TAXES Governments FT4 International public transfers Voluntary donations (or grants) from public donors and multilateral agencies that come from other countries. Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and entirely included in FT6 Repayable financing. TRANSFERS Rest of the world FT5 Voluntary contributions Voluntary donations (or grants) from international and national non- governmental donors including from charitable foundations, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and entirely included in FT6 Repayable financing. Not-for-profit institutions serving households FT6 Repayable financing Sources of finance from private or public sources that ultimately need to be repaid, such as loans (including concessionary loans and guarantees), equity investments, or other financial instruments such as bonds. This category can be divided into two sub-categories: FT6.1 Concessionary repayable financing, and FT6.2 Non-concessionary repayable financing. REPAYABLE FINANCING Part of funding via “Corporations” Table 10. TrackFin classification of WASH financing types 50 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies Objectives: This note provides guidance on the methodologies required to track financing types (i.e. sector revenue) and costs on a comparable basis. It argues that a cash flow approach should be used wherever possible. It also outlines a possible longer-term development, which would entail using an economic approach to estimate financial flows. MN 3.1. Rationale for estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis The underlying philosophy of the Financial Flow Approach is to achieve the recording of financial flows on a yearly basis, i.e. the actual cash flows to cover costs that come in and out of the sector. In theory, financial flows computed using the Financing Type Approach (to estimate sector revenue) and the Cost-based Approach (to estimate the costs incurred by the sector) should balance, as represented in Fig. 10 below. REVENUECOSTS C4 – Repayment of repayable finance C4 – Financial costs (interest, dividends) C6 – Taxes C5 – Support costs C1 and C3 – Investment expenditure (new and rehabilitation ) C2 – Operating and small maintenance expenditure FT6 – Repayable financing (loans, equity) FT5 – Voluntary contributions FT4 – International Public Transfers FT3 – Domestic Public Transfers FT1 and FT2 – Tariffs and user expenditure on self-supply Figure 10. Costs and revenue to be computed for the Financial Flow Approach In practice, however, differences in accounting treatment of financial flows are likely to introduce slight differences between financial flows using these two methods of computation. Financial flows on the cost and revenue sides do not necessarily happen simultaneously, and the point in time at which they are recorded is significant. How financial flows are computed depends on the accounting methods used by the different actors from which data is collected, i.e. on whether the cash flow or the accrual accounting method is used, as described in more detail in Box 14 below. Box 14. Accounting methodologies and financial statements Financial transactions can be recorded through two accounting methods: • Cash flow accounting records cash flows received and disbursed when payment is made (or received); • Accrual accounting records a transaction when economic value is created, transferred or extinguished. This means that an economic event is recorded at the time the transaction occurs rather than when payment is made (or received). In the case of tariffs for network water supply services, the cash flow method records these based on bills collected, i.e. the amount of cash paid by users to service providers in the accounting period. By contrast, the accrual accounting method records tariffs based on revenue calculated when bills are sent to users, i.e. the tariffs that are due rather than tariffs actually paid. The three main financial statements prepared by most companies above a certain size compute financial transactions in different ways: • The Cash Flow statement records the flows of cash in and out of a company’s bank account for a certain time period. It is based on the cash flow accounting method. • The Income and Expenditure statement (or the Profit and Loss account) records the wealth-creating revenue and the wealth-destroying charges of a company for a certain time period. It is based on the accrual accounting method. • The Balance Sheet is a picture of the value of assets and liabilities of a company at a fixed point in time. 51Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level The data obtained from different types of stakeholder with different accounting systems can either be computed on a cash basis or on an accrual basis. For example, governments or donors disbursing funds to the sector are likely to use a cash flow approach and to record such funds when payment is made, whereas service providers above a certain size are more likely to use accrual accounting methods. They may also be less likely to publish cash flow statements, or compilations of cash flow statements at sector level are less likely to exist. Using the accrual method, as recommended by the System of Health Accounts and in line with the System of National Accounts, would construct a more accurate picture of sector financing, as transactions would be recorded when they result in wealth creation. However, the challenges of compiling WASH accounts at the national level based on accrual accounting are likely to be the same as those encountered in the health sector, namely that it is not possible to get into the detail of each financial statement collected from service providers. More detail is given in the box below. Accounting methods used in the System of Heath Accounts and challenges The SHA Manual points to the methodological difficulties associated with seeking to use an accrual method. “This [System of Health Accounts] Manual recommends the accrual method, in which expenditures are attributed to the time period during which the activity took place, rather than the cash method, in which expenditures are registered when the transaction that paid for the activity took place. However, it is recognized that cash accounting may still be applied in some countries or in some parts of the health system. Health accountants may find a variety of accounting practices in their data sources. Good practice should involve converting everything to an accrual basis to the extent possible”. Source: A System of Health Accounts (OECD, 2011:111). As the objectives of TrackFin are to track funding flows, and given the importance of government and donor funding in the sector, the cash flow approach is recommended wherever possible. Tariffs should therefore be recorded based on the actual cash received (not billed) from users for services provided. Where cash flow statements from utilities are available, cash flows should be used. If these are not easily available, however, information from Income & Expenditure statements can also be used. Repayable financing should be accounted for at the time and value that the cash flow is received by the service providers, assuming it is used in the same year. Repayments and costs of capital should also be recorded as expenditure. More guidance on the treatment of loans is given in Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach. The box below presents a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of using a cash flow approach to estimate financial flows. Box 15. Advantages and disadvantages of using the cash flow approach to estimate financial flows Advantages • Easier to compile as many data sources record expenditure based on cash flows • Less risk of mixing different accounting methods • Shows the actual expenditure and revenue in that year, taking into account expenditure that was not paid and the revenue not collected • Shows flows of capital expenditure (which would not appear using an accrual method) Disadvantages • Shows repayable financing received and thus does not show whether “actual” revenue to the sector is sufficient to cover expenditure MN 3.2. Using an economic approach as a possible alternative Because it is based on cash flow accounting, the proposed cash flow approach to estimating financial flows does not provide information about whether the sector is solvent, i.e. whether non-repayable revenue (real revenue) is sufficient to recover the full costs, including capital maintenance costs, required to keep fixed assets functioning. This approach therefore does not reveal whether or not the sector is financially sustainable in the long-run. To address these concerns, economic regulation usually relies on an economic approach, based on accrual accounting, to estimate the financing requirements of service providers. Applying this approach at sector level would be an interesting way to assess the financial sustainability of the sector as a whole. Box 16 below indicates how this economic approach might work. 52 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 16. A possible economic approach to estimating financial flows in the WASH sector An economic approach could be used to estimate the revenue required to recover the full costs of the life-cycle of service provision. This economic approach would capture operating and maintenance costs, large capital maintenance expenditure and financial costs and taxes, but would exclude net capital expenditure and include only the depreciation of assets. It would show if, in the long-term, the sector is generating sufficient revenue to cover the full life-cycle costs and the repayable finance. An economic approach would estimate the financing requirements of the sector based on projected costs, including the following: • Operation and maintenance recurrent costs. • Capital maintenance costs (for capital maintenance expenditure). A very crude measure of these capital maintenance costs can arguably be depreciation, as depreciation can be seen as “what needs to be set aside to replace past investments.” However, whether depreciation amounts can adequately reflect what needs to be spent on capital maintenance would largely depend on asset valuation methods. In most cases, when depreciation is set based on historical asset values, corresponding depreciation amounts are likely to be insufficient to cover real capital maintenance requirements. A regulator such as Ofwat has sought to address this by introducing specific capital maintenance costs when estimating utilities’ revenue requirements (to be covered through tariffs). Attributing such values can, however, be difficult and controversial, and are usually not estimated in most water sectors. • An expected return on the asset base (estimated by applying a Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) to the projected asset base, which includes projected new investments). This provides a sound basis for budgeting and tariff setting as it allows the smoothing out of future revenue requirements. Estimation of the revenue requirement in this way could be compared to the actual revenue for the sector (from tariffs, users’ non-tariff contributions or non-repayable transfers) to assess whether or not the sector is sustainably financed. REVENUEREVENUE REQUIREMENT Net financial costs (interest, dividends) Taxes Depreciation and amortization of fixed assets Large capital maintenance expenditure Operating and small maintenance expenditure Voluntary contributions International Public Transfers Domestic Public Transfers Tariffs and user expenditure on self-supply Figure 11. Costs and financing types recorded by the economic approach Using the economic approach is not recommended at this stage. It would add further complexity and elements to the requirements for estimating revenue that are likely to be very difficult to compile. Moreover, as this approach has to be applied at service provider level, it is not certain whether expenditure can simply be added together across service providers to create a sector picture. As service providers can be public, private, corporate, or government organizations, and even communities, it may not be possible to estimate all expenditure based on accrual accounting. An additional methodological challenge lies in the estimation of large capital maintenance expenditure and depreciation of fixed assets, which would need to be done based on an ideal lifetime of assets and estimation of their current value using IFRS standards. A simplified model for estimating large capital maintenance expenditure could be developed based on the current UK Ofwat approach. 53Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 4: Estimating financial flows with the Financing Type Approach Objectives: This note provides guidance on tracking financial flows in the WASH sector using the Financing Type Approach. It draws on the experience of the System of Health Accounts in estimating financing types. The note indicates what the potential sources of information and data might be for each type of financing, identifying challenges and possible solutions in each case. MN 4.1. Collecting data by financing types As explained in the main Guidance Document, there are numerous types of financing that can be drawn upon to finance the sector. Identifying information on each type can be done in various ways, as outlined in Table 11 below. The most appropriate method for gathering data on financing types has to be decided on a country- by-country basis, depending on data availability. Additional guidance on information gathering for each type of financing is provided below the table. Categories of financing types Data sources and collection methods Tariffs for services provided (FT1) • Use existing sources where available, such as IBNET, national regulators or service providers’ associations, and strategic financial planning exercises at national level • For main service providers, obtain turnover data per WASH service; in decentralized countries, organize a survey of formal service providers • Organize an inventory and survey of other service providers (including small-scale informal providers) to assess their overall tariff revenue User expenditure on self-supply (FT2) • For households: – Rely on existing household survey data on coverage – Organize ad hoc household surveys to assess their investments in self-provided water or sanitation • For other user types, it can be difficult to obtain data. Water basin authorities or environmental protection agencies might collect data on self-supply from industries and should be consulted Domestic public transfers (FT3) • Rely on national and local government financial accounts. These may be consolidated in the main public financial information system recording public expenditure, or could be held by the Ministry of Finance. • Rely on national and local government actual expenditure data collected by National Statistics Offices (NSOs) • Collect expenditure reports from main governmental WASH programmes • For central ministries and public agencies: Create specific questionnaires to collect primary data on transfers received and provided • For decentralized public bodies (such as local governments): Create a specific questionnaire to collect primary data, at least from a sample • For main service providers: Create a specific questionnaire to collect primary data from a sample on transfers received International public transfers (FT4) • Obtain data from the OECD DAC database • Collect data on transfers received from national and local government financial accounts and main service providers • Collect data on transfers sent by creating specific questionnaires to collect primary data from multilateral and bilateral donors Voluntary transfers (FT5) • Collect data on transfers received from national and local government financial accounts • Collect data on transfers received by creating specific questionnaires to acquire primary data from a sample of NGOs and other charitable organizations Repayable financing (FT6) • Rely on surveys of the commercial banking sector • Collect data on repayable financing provided by creating specific questionnaires to acquire primary data from main lenders (government agencies and development banks, multilateral and bilateral donors) • Collect data on repayable financing received by creating specific questionnaires to acquire primary data from main borrowers (main service providers) Table 11. Gathering data on financing types 54 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative FT1: Tariffs for services provided Information on tariffs paid to formal WASH service providers exists at a disaggregated level (i.e. at the level of each service provider) but obtaining this information usually requires careful examination of the service providers’ financial accounts and tariff schedules. Following the Cash Flow Approach (see Methodological Note No 3: Estimating financial flows on a cash flow basis and alternative methodologies) actual tariffs paid by users and collected by service providers should be tracked, including subsidies and taxes on products. This approach differs from that used in the SNA, which recommends calculating the “output” or total amount of sales, shipments or turnover following the accrual accounting methods (referred to as the economic approach in the Guidance Document). It can be expressed either in terms of producers’ prices or basic prices. The differences are due to subsidies and taxes on products. Basic prices include subsidies on products and exclude taxes on products. Producers’ prices exclude subsidies on products and include taxes on products. Some countries or organizations have gathered data on average tariffs in a given country or in different cities,1 while other organizations gather and present data on tariff structures at country level. However, few if any countries consistently and regularly collect data on the total amount of revenue generated through tariffs paid by users for services provided. The TrackFin methodology requires gathering data of this kind at both aggregated and disaggregated levels: • Aggregate information on revenue from tariffs: This is the aggregate of all revenue generated from all types of service at the level of service providers, based on what is usually referred to as “turnover from sales of water/ sanitation services.” It is extracted from the profit and loss accounts of service providers, preferably relying on existing databases in the case of multiple providers. • Disaggregated information on revenue from tariffs: In most cases, disaggregated information on the distribution of revenue from tariffs between various services (water, sanitation and other services), between various types of users (households, businesses or industries, institutions) or various regions can be obtained from commercial data. This requires a specific visit, or sending a questionnaire, to each service provider, unless this has already been computed in a database. Where the provision of WASH services is highly decentralized, there may be a large number of service providers. Informal providers may account for a large share of the market. To overcome these potential difficulties, the WASH accounts team can seek to obtain data from: • National water sector economic regulators (for example, NWASCO, the National Water Supply and Sanitation Council in Zambia, PURC in Ghana, and WASREB in Kenya); • National utility associations such as ABCON2 in Brazil; • Global surveys and databases that collect information on tariffs, such as the International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities (IBNET) benchmarking platform managed by the World Bank, which includes a water tariff database developed in 2011; and • Strategic Financial Planning exercises for the sector, sometimes carried out under the auspices of international organizations such as the OECD or the World Bank.3 1 An example is the OECD data for a set of cities and countries around the world (OECD, 2009. Managing Water for All – An OECD perspective on pricing and financing. Paris: OECD Publications.) 2 “ABCON: Associação Brasileira das Concessionárias Privadas de Serviços Públicos de Água e Esgoto”: The association of private and public concessionaries for water and sewerage. 3 The following OECD publication gives an overview of tools that can be used to improve financial management in the sector, including strategic financial planning tools. http://www.oecd.org/env/resources/ meetingthechallengeoffinancingwaterandsanitationtoolsandapproaches2011.htm 55Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 17. Regulatory data on tariffs of service provision from national regulators Data on tariff structures may be available from the national regulator of water and sewerage. For example, the Office of Water Services (Ofwat) is the economic regulator of the water industry in England and Wales. Every year, Ofwat monitors and approves each company’s water and sewerage charges to check that they respect the price limits set. Results were published yearly, and are now available online. These price limits are set by the regulator every five years by assessing in detail the operators’ business and financial models. To conduct price reviews, they rely on financial models that capture all financial flows, including revenue from tariffs and other sources, and sources of repayable financing. The regulator builds into the price limits, and therefore the tariffs charged to customers, the cost of servicing the debt and equity by estimating the value of the regulatory fixed assets base. All this information is made publically available online, except for any information deemed commercially sensitive. To create WASH accounts, financing types must be tracked by use. For served use, the revenue from tariffs should be tracked by user types, differentiating at a minimum between domestic and non-domestic users. If the total revenue only is available in the service providers’ financial statements, the WASH accounts team should collect additional data on the average tariff charged to each user category, and the volume consumed by each user type, in order to allocate revenue to their financing units. When recording the data, this category can be further disaggregated into additional sub-categories such as: FT1.1 Domestic tariffs for services provided and FT1.2 Non-domestic tariffs for services provided. As stated above, tariff surveys are unlikely to estimate total revenue from tariffs but are more likely to include data on average tariffs or tariff structures. The WASH accounts team should therefore process this data, using complementary datasets on the number of customers and their respective consumption. This could, however, become a somewhat complex exercise when tariffs are structured around consumption blocks, in which case some approximations may be necessary. In the case of informal service providers, it is unlikely that information on their revenue from tariffs is readily available. Where informal providers serve a substantial share of the market, surveys based on a representative number (and their customers) should be conducted in order to obtain data on the revenue from tariffs that they receive. The tariffs they charge are likely to be higher than those of formal operators, but the volumes consumed will inevitably be lower, so information on tariffs as well as volumes consumed should be collected for a representative sample. Extrapolation from the resulting data should be based on the average number (and size) of informal service providers, but should exclude households, which are covered under FT2 User expenditure on self-supply. The additional effort of collecting information on tariffs paid to informal providers would only be justified in countries where this expenditure is significant. FT2: User expenditure on self-supply The second financing type emanating directly from users is referred to as user expenditure on self-supply.1 This financing type principally captures investment in water self-supply solutions (private or community wells, small private water production systems, water tanks) and household level sanitation. If possible, the category User expenditure on self-supply should be disaggregated into at least two sub- categories: FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply and FT2.1 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply, to clearly distinguish whether expenditure by households or non-domestic use is being tracked. Potential challenge: Distinguishing between household expenditure on self-supply and non-domestic expenditure on self-supply • For completeness, this category includes all user expenditure on self-supply, including investments and operation and maintenance made by non-domestic users, such as industries or institutions with their own water supply. This can include building small systems for water required in industrial processes or for distributing drinking-water on their production sites. Some industries, such as mining, can be major investors. If these users do not distribute their water as a service to customers, the expenditure should be recorded as self-supply. • It may be difficult to track non-domestic expenditure on self-supply as there is very little information publicly available. Some information may be found in surveys administered to industries by water basin agencies, or an environmental protection agency that issues water abstraction licences. 1 Note that in the OECD 3T terminology, these are included in “tariffs.” They are separated in the WASH accounts classification because they represent very different financial flows that have to be recognized in their own right, and because the methodology for their estimation is different. 56 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative It is important to track this financing type as it can represent a substantial proportion of investment in water and sanitation, not only by users (particularly households), but by the country as a whole. Yet it is not normally tracked, in large part because doing so is difficult. This is discussed below. Estimation of user expenditure on self-supply lies at the intersection of the Financing Type and the Cost-based Approaches, as it captures both financing from users as financing units and expenditure from users as service providers. Two categories of cost are relevant to user self-expenditure: (C1) investment costs, and (C2) operating and maintenance costs (see the cost classification in Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing service with the Cost-based Approach). Data collection methods for each are likely to be different. In seeking to assess expenditure specifically from households, the WASH accounts team should identify which methodology can yield the best results on the basis of data availability. In most countries, it is unlikely that estimates of household expenditure on self-supply will exist or be readily available. Some household surveys may include questions on household WASH expenditure, but these will typically focus on monthly operating expenditure. They will not always distinguish between served and self-provided supply, so would therefore include both tariffs and household expenditure on self-supply. To address this issue, the average expenditure of rural households can be used as a proxy. Rural households are less likely to be connected to a piped water supply, although this varies greatly from one country to another. They are not a sufficiently reliable data source to allow estimation of household expenditure on self-supply as described in the Box 18 below. This view was expressed by the WASH accounts team in discussions with the NSOs in Brazil and Morocco. These NSOs agreed to consider revising the WASH-related questions in their future household surveys. To derive estimates on expenditure in the absence of reliable data, it is therefore necessary to rely on existing survey data or to conduct ad hoc surveys. The data collection methods for C1 and C2 will be different, as discussed below. Average expenditure can be estimated for main activity types, for example on a latrine (by type of latrine), a water point (borehole), or a water tank. The methodology and assumptions used should be properly documented in an annex to the WASH accounts final report. While households may allocate resources for self-supply both in cash and in kind, only monetary expenditure should be included in the WASH accounts. This is to ensure international comparability of estimates. It holds for both investments and operations and maintenance expenditure, and is in line with current guidance from the System of National Accounts. The latter also contribute to the System of Health Accounts, as detailed in the box below. Learning from the health sector: Estimating the costs of self-provision Whereas the actual costs of self-supply to households are estimated (such as investment or operating costs), free labour provided by households to build latrines should not be included. This is in line with the System of National Accounts, which does not include non-monetary contributions. It is also in line with System of Health Accounts practice. The value of these in-kind activities for self-supply can still be estimated and provided as a reference point, but it cannot be shown as part of the total expenditure used for comparison of WASH expenditure with other economic aggregates or for international comparisons. Estimating household investment in self-supply: In the absence of reliable survey data, household investment can be estimated by combining estimated changes in domestic water and sanitation coverage rates, and estimates of average investment costs in self-provision (for example, the average cost of investing in a household latrine). At a minimum, surveys should provide the number of households with access to unimproved and improved WASH services. The annual increase in this number permits the calculation of household investments in WASH, although some challenges are likely to remain. When coverage data is updated on a regular basis, it is possible to track investment by households over time. For example, the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Drinking Water and Sanitation (JMP) currently publishes coverage figures every other year, based on data from national household surveys such as DHS, MICS, WHS, LSMS, and population and housing censuses. These take place every two to five years, and in some cases could possibly be conducted more frequently. In many countries, however, reliable coverage information 57Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level is not gathered on an annual basis, so it would not be possible to track household annual expenditure on self- supply. This gives rise to the methodological challenges highlighted in the box below. Potential challenge: Using coverage data to estimate household expenditure on self-supply • If coverage data is not updated on an annual basis, household expenditure on self-supply can be estimated from coverage estimates for two available dates, and estimating the trend in coverage increase between those two dates to derive annual trends. If the most reliable information is the census, the dates may be five, 10 or 15 years apart. • If there is no increase in national coverage data (as was the case in Ghana) or if the overall trend in coverage via self-supply solutions is negative (as was the case in Brazil), a more disaggregated level of coverage data should be identified. This is because the overall negative trend may mask an increase (and therefore investment) in specific areas or regions. Where the overall trend in coverage is constant in percentage terms, some investment may also be taking place due to population growth as the number of people with access to improved services will be increasing, or because households are improving their existing facilities. Using the coverage trend does not allow estimation of investment in improvements between service levels and replacements. Coverage estimates should then be combined with information on average household investment and operation and maintenance expenditure by type of service, based on existing household surveys or project-related information. To enhance accuracy, and if coverage estimates are sufficiently detailed, these expenditure estimates should reflect the type of investment made by households and for what service (for example, the type of latrine). The box below provides additional examples of methodological challenges that arose in relation to this issue in Ghana and Brazil, and how they were (or could be) addressed. Box 18. Estimating household investment for self-supply (C1 costs for P5): Examples from the pilot exercise In Ghana, household investment in new rural sanitation facilities could not be estimated. Indeed, the percentage of people with access to improved sanitation in rural areas has remained at 8% according to the JMP figures for 2010 and 2012. It was therefore not possible to estimate the number of new households gaining access to sanitation, although there was a nominal increase. There also was an increase in shared sanitation from 42% to 44% in the same period, and it is very likely that a large proportion of this was paid for by households. In that event, one solution is to estimate an average investment per rural household gaining access to a new improved latrine, and an average investment per rural household gaining access to a shared improved latrine. This can be done through a bottom-up estimation that requires costing the latrine components, material and work needed (monetary and non-monetary costs), and the average number of people using the latrine. The actual number of new people gaining access to sanitation should then be estimated based on the total population number and its increase. For example, the number of rural households gaining access to improved sanitation each year between 2010 and 2012 was equal to (8% × number of rural households in 2012 - 8% × number of rural households in 2010)/(2012–2010). This equals 8,000 households a year. The same method can be applied to households gaining access to shared sanitation. In Brazil, even though data on the number of existing sanitation facilities was available, the investment trend could not be estimated because the overall variation of the percentage of people using self-provided WASH services is negative. This is because there are more households closing down latrines to switch to network suppliers than households building new latrines. An increase in the number of facilities occurred only in a few municipalities, where the network did not grow as quickly as population growth, or in rural areas. However, it is negligible compared to overall investment in the sector. Source: Final report on WASH accounts, Brazil, 2014. Final report on WASH accounts, Ghana, 2014. Given the methodological challenges highlighted above, estimating these expenditures lends itself better to the Fixed Asset Stock Approach rather than the Financial Flow Approach as discussed in Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks. Based on existing coverage figures, this approach allows estimation of the value of the total asset stocks in which households have invested. For simplicity, it may be preferable to value this asset stock at replacement value, as estimating an historical value would require information on the date of construction. This is not likely to be available unless specific surveys are conducted for this purpose. Operation and maintenance expenditure must also be estimated. The boxes below show examples of how operation and maintenance costs for household expenditure on self-supply were estimated, providing a useful indication of how this can be done for the first round of the exercise. These estimates can be improved using the methods described above. 58 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 19. Estimating households’ operation and maintenance costs (C2 costs for P5) for self-supply: Examples from Brazil and Morocco In Brazil, household operation and maintenance (O&M) expenditure on self-supply for water and sanitation was estimated using the number of self-provided households reported by the National Statistics Bureau (IBGE) census,1 and the average expenditure per household for water and sanitation obtained from their Household Budget Survey – POF of IBGE2 (2009). It was assumed that the expenditure recorded by households was recurrent rather than investment. Given that O&M expenditure by urban households includes tariffs paid to formal providers, the average O&M expenditure of rural households was considered as the reference and applied to all self- provided households, including urban. In order to improve this estimate in the next exercise, it was recommended that more detailed questions on household expenditure on self-supply be included in the IBGE household budget survey questionnaire, including separating recurrent expenditure from investment, as well as expenditure by served and self-supplied households. In Morocco, it was only possible to estimate household self-supply expenditure on O&M. For sanitation, estimated expenditure per household was provided by the 2007 ENNVM HCP census for both rural and urban areas. The total expenditure was not estimated in relation to the number of self-provided households (i.e. those with no access to the sewerage network), but based on the number of self-provided households that reported making cash payments for operating their WASH services. This group represented 20.6% of the self-supplied urban population and 8.6% of the self-supplied rural population. The expenditure per household was estimated at 1336 DH per year for rural households, and 921 DH per year for urban households. Household expenditure on self-supply of water was estimated only for rural households not served by the network, given that 100% of the urban population is served by the network or by water standpipes. The average expenditure per household was estimated at 600 DHR per year. It was estimated that 100% of self-supplied households were making cash payments. Source: Final report on WASH accounts, Brazil, 2014:32,35. Final report on WASH accounts, Morocco, 2014:35. If average expenditure figures on both investment and operation and maintenance for different types of service are not available, ad hoc household surveys to assess their investment level should be conducted. Using mobile phone technologies can greatly facilitate surveys of this kind, and can reduce the cost of data gathering and the risk of error. They have already been used extensively to gather information on water points (referred to as “water point mapping”) including information on the geographic location, related investment costs, and functionality of rural hand-pumps. This kind of information, particularly in relation to investment cost, is critical to filling data gaps in household investment in self-supply. The SHARE research consortium in the UK has developed a prototype Sanitation Investment Tracker — a mobile phone application designed specifically for conducting this kind of survey.3 FT3: Domestic public transfers Domestic public transfers are public funds transferred by government agencies (either at central or decentralized level) to WASH sector actors. Such funds would typically be provided as subsidies for capital investment or operations. This category includes only “pure” grants and excludes repayable financing and concessionary loans, which are included in FT6 Repayable financing. Explicit subsidies (grants) are a priority area for the tracking exercise. It is also important to recognize that there may be “hidden” kinds of subsidies. These could include tax rebates or subsidised services such as electricity. As these hidden subsidies may be very difficult to identify and measure in financial terms, it would be sufficient to mention the existence of hidden subsidies rather than to seek to quantify them for the first round of WASH accounts. Attempting to quantify hidden subsidies could be done at later stages of methodological development. Data on public transfers channelled to the WASH sector should be collected from a wide range of stakeholders and sources, including national and local governments or other public financing units. The latter may include common funding baskets, if a sector-wide approach to pool funding is adopted. This should be based on the mapping of sector financial flows conducted in Step 2.2. 1 2010 Census and PNAD 2011 and 2012. 2 2009 Household Budget Survey – POF. 3 Information on the Sanitation Investment Tracker (SIT) is available on the SHARE website (www.shareresearch.org) here: http://www.shareresearch.org/Resource/Details/sit_note_1. 59Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level In some cases, aggregated data at the national level can be found in established tools for tracking and planning financial resources. They can also be found in programme budget reporting systems. For example, the Total Sanitation Campaign in India had a solid system of reporting, both for public financial flows and for achievements. These tools can be used to some extent, although independent spot-check verifications might be needed. See also the Brazilian example in Box 10, Section 2.3.3. FT4: International public transfers This category includes only voluntary donations from external public donors and multilateral agencies. These funds can be contributed in the form of grants or guarantees. Other forms of repayable financing from international donors, such as concessionary loans, are excluded from this category and are shown in FT6 Repayable financing. Data on international public transfers can be sought from the following sources: • The OECD International Development Statistics databases: These databases track most transfers in the form of official development assistance (ODA) from donor countries and international organizations (bilateral and multilateral cooperation). This is the best source of international public transfer data and offers the possibility of tracking grants and (concessionary) loans separately. However, there are a number of caveats. Firstly, data does not always match more detailed data obtained at the national level. Some degree of triangulation is therefore likely to be needed. Secondly, only since 2010 has the OECD/DAC database started differentiating spending on water from spending on sanitation, and no further disaggregation between services is currently available. Finally, the database covers only international public transfers from members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC). This comprises 29 developed countries and tracks funding from emerging donors such as the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Turkey, separately. It does not currently include important non-OECD aid flows such as those from China, Arab states, or India. • National and local government financial accounts: These can be used to complement and refine data from OECD databases at the national level. In the event of conflicting information, however, it is essential to state which source has been given priority (which will depend on reliability). The Ministry of Finance should have aggregated reports on transfers from donors, but it may not differentiate between grants and concessionary loans. • Public donor and multilateral agency financial accounts: It may be necessary to send a questionnaire to all major donors to collect more detailed information on international public transfers. This may be information on their use (for which sector, service, service providers) and on their nature (grants or concessionary loans). Potential challenge: Collecting data on ODA and the issue of concessions The OECD database tracks ODA from donor countries and international organizations according to the following definition: “Financial flows to countries and territories on the DAC which are: • provided by official agencies, including state and local governments, or by their executive agencies; and • each transaction of which: a) is administered with the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries as its main objective; and b) is concessional in character and conveys a grant element of at least 25%, calculated at a rate of discount of 10% (except for capitalized interest included in rescheduling of ODA loans which is recorded as ODA, regardless of the grant element of the rescheduling.)” To allocate the expenditure between FT4 International public transfers, and FT6 Repayable financing, it is therefore necessary to distinguish repayable loans from pure concessional finance (100% of grant element). Details on the conditionality of the financial flows can be found on the OECD databases and corroborated with national level information. Source: http://www.oecd.org/dac/38429349.pdf. FT5: Voluntary transfers Voluntary donations may come from international and national non-governmental donors, including from charitable foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Only donations that are 100% pure grants are included in this category. All forms of repayable financing (including concessionary loans and guarantees) are included in category FT6 Repayable financing. In many developing countries, voluntary organizations frequently contribute to funding the water and sanitation sector both in cash and in kind (for example, by digging a well or providing equipment). Such transfers are often not reliably recorded, 60 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative so there is little clarity over their actual contribution to sector financing. To obtain data on voluntary transfers, the WASH accounts team could consult the following: • National and local government financial accounts: Some governments have started collecting information on voluntary transfers to the water and sanitation sector, with the objective of ensuring better coordination of such financial flows. This now occurs in Bangladesh, for example, where NGO financing is recorded in the public sector budget, thereby greatly simplifying the task of collecting financial information on their contribution. This type of initiative, if deemed successful, could be replicated in other countries to improve coordination and facilitate the task of obtaining and recording information on such flows. • Surveys of NGOs and other charitable organizations concerning their investments: Given the current lack of transparency on WASH spending by the voluntary sector, some international NGOs have taken the initiative of recording their donations in a more reliable manner. Washfunders is an example. Other initiatives, such as that developed by Interaction, the largest coalition of US-based NGOs, seek to map NGO-funded projects at country level (see example for Haiti). However, this information is not specifically gathered for water and sanitation and is only currently available for a very small number of countries. FT6: Repayable financing This category includes all types of repayable financing, including concessionary loans or guarantees. Information on repayable financing to the sector is very limited, but some can be found in existing databases: • The OECD-CRS database contains information on concessionary lending; • The International Financing Review compiles data on commercial loans or bonds; and • The World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database reports the amount of capital investment committed by private operators at the start of a public private partnership contract. It is commonly used to track private investment in infrastructure. Although private operators would not typically bring “new” financing to the sector as they are not financing types as such, they can temporarily bridge the financing gap. If possible, this category should be sub-divided into two sub-categories, FT6.1 Concessionary repayable financing and FT6.2 Non-concessionary repayable financing, as the two types are very different in nature. Approaches to this are set out below. Potential challenge: Separating concessional from non-concessional repayable financing The allocation of repayable financing flows between these two sub-categories can be made in two ways: • Flows can be roughly characterized as concessional or non-concessional according to the ownership status of the lender. A repayable flow coming from a public sector agency could be characterized as concessional, while a repayable flow from a private sector agency could be termed non-concessional. However, some public sector agencies can themselves be involved in providing loans at market rates so this method of classification is very imperfect. • To obtain a more refined estimation of these flows, data can be obtained on the lending conditions for specific loans where there are doubts about the category in which they fall. Concessional loans include a grant element in the form of a subsidised interest rate or a grace period. The OECD definition of concessional can be used to allocate the flows to the FT6.1 and FT6.2 sub-categories. Concessionary repayable financing would include repayable flows that convey a grant element of a least 25%, calculated at a rate of discount of 10% (except for capitalized interest included in rescheduling of ODA loans which is recorded as concessional, regardless of the grant element of the rescheduling). Source: http://www.oecd.org/dac/38429349.pdf. The WASH accounts team may, however, need to complement this information with ad hoc surveys, to better understand the extent to which development banks and commercial banks currently finance the water and sanitation sector and through what kind of instrument (for example commercial loans, bonds, equity issuance, or guarantees). The box below presents examples of the kind of data available in the pilot countries to estimate loans. All three countries were able to include loans to some extent, depending on data availability. Allocating the financing according to type of service and use was more challenging, even impossible, in some cases. 61Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 20. Estimating loans: Examples from country studies In Brazil, data on repayable financing disbursed by the government to service providers was collected from databases of the public banks and funding schemes that are the main sources of repayable loans – namely the Caixa Economica Federal (CAIXA), and the BNDES (Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social) – two state-owned banks. Data on repayable financing received from multilateral and bilateral agencies were obtained from the financial statements of state and municipal enterprises, and from private companies operating in the sector. This data could be partially allocated to types of service, providers, regions and by type of cost, but not by type of use. The allocation by service was made according to the relative share of investment by service available in the Sector National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). Only cash flows disbursed to final borrowers of funds were considered. Going forward, data gaps on repayable financing could be resolved by collecting better data from service providers through SNIS. In Morocco, data on loans was collected from service providers’ financial statements. It was not possible to cross-check this data with information from lenders (national commercial banks or international, multilateral or bilateral financial institutions) as there is no consolidated database. As a result, it was not possible to separate concessional loans from commercial loans. Only disbursements to borrowers (service providers) had been included (excluding financial charges as it was not possible to identify them separately in the financial statements). Going forward, this could be done by collecting detailed data from main lenders. In Ghana, information on loans from donors to the government was obtained from the Ministry of Finance. Information on loans to the main utility, GWCL, appears in their financial statements. It was considered unlikely that other service providers would have taken loans for water supply or sanitation, but this information is difficult to verify. It would require surveying all the private providers through the Private Utilities Association (PUSPA). Source: Final report on WASH accounts, Brazil, 2014:34. Final report on WASH accounts, Ghana, 2014:46. Final report on WASH accounts, Morocco, 2014. Reflecting financial flows that are by definition repayable in WASH accounts is not straightforward. Repayable financing differs in nature from other financial flows because it does not constitute revenue as such for the sector; it is only a means of bridging the cash flow gap with the requirement for subsequent repayment. Users usually have to absorb the cost of repayable financing through tariffs, unless a subsidy is provided to write off part of the debt. If a large proportion of sector revenue is derived from repayable finance, it shows that the sector is “borrowing” on future revenue. The cost of this borrowing will ultimately need to be covered by tariff increases or increases in transfers. However, WASH accounts’ aim is to show how and to what extent repayable financing is used as an instrument to finance the sector. Hence they are tracked as a distinct financing type. As explained in Section 2.3.3 of the Guidance Document, the objective of the Cash Flow Approach is to track flows of funding to the sector. Loans are therefore reflected in accounts as financing types at the moment they are received or spent by borrowers, although the actual revenue to pay them back is only received later. The repayment of loans and costs of capital should then be recorded as expenditure in the year when the expense occurs. Due to time differences between the receipt of a loan in the accounts, the timing of the expenditure for which loan funds are disbursed, and the repayment of the loan, it is more than likely that the expenditure and revenue will not balance. The receipt of loans should ideally be recorded in the year when the expenditure is made; since most loans are spent as soon as they are disbursed, in most cases this should not pose too many problems. This approach varies slightly from the System of Health Accounts, which follows the economic approach of the National Accounts (See Section 2.3.3). The box below indicates how the System of Health Accounts handles the treatment of loans. 62 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Learning from the health sector: Handling of loans in the System of Health Accounts Loans increase the funds available to a provider or financing agent (equivalent to financing units in the WASH accounts). In the Health Accounts, financing agents are defined as the units that channel finance to the sector by pooling funds from different sources and redistributing them to service providers. Loans are not included directly in the Health Accounts, because they affect the balance sheet (assets and liabilities) of the financing agent. What does appear in the SHA is the money that the financing agent releases into the health care system. Since most loans are spent as soon as they are disbursed, the distinction matters more for the purposes of attributing the funds to a financing type than for the level of health expenditure. Loan repayments do not appear in the Health Accounts because they represent a change in assets rather than a current expenditure for health. In effect, they are funds that were already registered in the Health Accounts when the disbursement was spent. On the other hand, it is appropriate to include interest payments made on outstanding debt as part of health spending, provided that the debt was directly related to the financing agent’s health activity. Most accounting systems separate loans and loan repayment from other transactions, so this treatment is not difficult to implement in practice. In systems where such separation is not made, health accountants should be vigilant for budget line items that indicate the infusion of new capital or the repayment of loans or retirement of other debt, and eliminate those entries from the total for the financing agent. From a policy perspective, it is important to show the effect of new loans or of loan repayments on a given financing agent or class of financing agents. This can be done in an exhibit table. This kind of exhibit can inform policy-makers without detracting from the presentation of the current state of the health care system’s ability to deliver care. Exhibit X. Changes in the financial position of financing agents Total Government Private Total national health expenditure Less: Net increase in health-related debt New loans for health From external organizations/entities Governments Development agencies NPISHs* Other From domestic lenders NPISHs* Other Less repayment of loans To external organizations/entities Governments Development agencies NPISHs* Other To domestic lenders NPISHs* Other Equals: Spending from own resources Less: Draws on own assets Equals: Spending from own resources *Non-profit institutions serving households Example of an exhibit table showing changes in debt related to the health system 63Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level MN 4.2. Potential challenges and how to address them MN 4.2.1 Data availability In general, availability of data on financing types (and certain financing types in particular) can be an issue. Where this is the case, it is important to be transparent about the issues faced and to represent them graphically. This can serve as a prompt for data providers to produce additional data if possible. The box below summarizes the data availability challenges that arose in Ghana, and the methods used to overcome them. Box 21. Data availability in Ghana The table below summarizes the financing types included in and excluded from the Ghana study and the reliability of the data (actual or estimated). Data available Data partly available plus estimates Estimates No data collected Financing types Availability of data Data availability challenges Methods used to overcome these challenges Tariffs for services provided Data for urban water available only from the national WASH service provider Ghana Water Company Limited (GWCL), and only in aggregates. Household expenditure on self-supply Data from 2013/2014 Ghana Living Standards Survey (GLSS) were not available at time of study. Estimations were made from the 2005/2006 GLSS survey based on average household expenditure. Domestic public transfers (central government) Data from the Ministry of Finance transfers to sector agencies were not obtained, but data on receipts from agencies were available. Domestic public transfers (local government) Total transfer from the Ministry of Finance to DACF for distribution to MMDAs. It was estimated that 15% of transfers were for water, sanitation and support services. International public transfers (grants from public donors or multilaterals) Data from development partners available from the Ministry of Finance, but only in aggregates. Voluntary contributions transfers Data not available. Repayable financing (loans) Data from development partners available from the Ministry of Finance, but only in aggregates. MN 4.2.2 Allocation of financing types per financing units, WASH uses and services Allocating financing types to different financing units and services is likely to be problematic. For example, domestic public transfers are not systematically allocated to different types of service, particularly where funding for water and sanitation forms part of overall transfers from central to municipal governments. Records on public transfers do not usually specify the amounts spent on WASH activities, let alone disaggregate them between sub-sectors. To overcome this challenge, it may be necessary to define financing allocation keys in order to reconstruct the portion of funding flows allocated to WASH services. These allocation keys can differ in precision, depending on the level of information available. One potential method is to estimate the costs relative to different use or different services based on the Cost-based Approach described in Section 2.3 of the Guidance Document and Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing the service with a Cost-based Approach, and to use these to derive allocation keys. Allocating the expenditure figures to classifications is an iterative process. A back and forth approach between the results from the two approaches is required to complete the allocations. The box below presents an illustrative example of how to use allocation keys. 64 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 22. Example: How to use allocation keys to allocate spending across categories Where amounts are not clearly specified, it may be easier to allocate financing types to services and uses through the use of allocation keys, using expenditure data obtained from service providers. The following is a hypothetical example: The Ministry of Water (MoW) gave a grant to a utility that provides both water and sanitation services. It is not possible to ascertain from MoW records what the grant was used for. The cost-based data collected from the service provider has to be reconciled with this financing flow and used to allocate the MoW funds to sub-sectors. This allocation can be based on real data or on estimates: • If the utility holds records on the use of grants received (this is quite unlikely but is assumed for the purpose of this example), the grant can be allocated to sub-sectors based on its actual use. • If it is not possible to allocate the expenditure of this specific grant to a sub-sector, an estimate can be made. In this case, the same ratio can be applied to the funding received through this grant as that of the total funding allocation of this service provider. The arrows in the figure below shows what ultimately needs to be done with each financing flow. In this case, a national authority (FU1) provided funding of USD 100 to the sector through two types of service providers (P1 Government providers, and P2 Network corporate providers). It provided USD 40 to P1 and USD 60 to P2. P1 then disbursed USD 25 to water services (S1) and USD 15 to sanitation services (S2). P2 disbursed the entire USD 60 funding on sanitation services. The WASH accounts team would collect two kinds of data: • From the Financing Type Approach: The allocation of funding from FU1 to P1 and P2 (recorded in WASH accounts Table 7 (PXFU); and • From the Cost-based Approach: The allocation of funding from P1 and P2 to S1 and S2 (recorded in WASH accounts Table 3 (SxP). The two sets of information then need to be reconciled to allocate the funding from FU1 to S1and S2 (and recorded in WASH accounts Table 6 (SxFU). Overall, from FU1 funding, USD 25 goes to water services (S1) and USD 75 to sanitation (S2). Figure 12. Example of a financing flow allocation to categories of providers and services Financial information per use can be estimated both from the Financing Type and Cost-based Approaches: • At the level of financing types to know how much of the funding comes from different types of use and users; and • At the level of expenditure to know how much is spent by service providers for each type of use. The box below provides detailed guidance on how to estimate both flows according to type of use. FU1 $60 P1 P2 S1 S2 FT1 $100 $60$40 $25 $15 65Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 23. Estimating flows per use: Financing types (revenue) and expenditure per type of use In the Financing Type Approach, when data is not directly available, allocation of financing per type of use can be made through estimates, using the percentage of revenue collected from each type of user, for example according to tariff. This can be calculated from the average revenue by type of use and the number of connections for this category. This approach does require the existence of detailed operational information per type of user and use. Data on self-supply of non-domestic users is unlikely to be available. In the Cost-based Approach, expenditure for each type of use can be estimated from the percentage of water volume consumed by each category of user. In Brazil, it was only possible to estimate expenditure per type of use for served domestic use (U1). Data on other types of served use (i.e. non-domestic: industrial, commercial and institutional) was aggregated, and it did not prove possible to obtain the parameters that would enable disaggregation. In the Financing Type Approach, revenue from served domestic users was estimated using the average revenue per domestic connection and the number of domestic connections. For the Cost-based Approach, expenditure on served domestic use was estimated using the volume of water consumed by households. It showed that 88% of resources were spent on services in this category. Self-supply represents 2.2% of expenditure. The remaining non-domestic served uses (institutional, industrial, commercial) represents 9.8% of expenditure. Further disaggregation proved impossible. Based on a sample of accounts from service providers, it was estimated that commercial served use represented most of the remaining expenditure. In Brazil, water resource legislation and management tools do not include the category of self-supply for commercial and industrial uses. These categories are usually monitored by service managers and are not included in public policies. They are monitored only in the context of integrated management of water resources, or in the case of sewage, the environmental policy and environmental management system. MN 4.2.3 Avoiding double counting and tracking how financial flows are channelled across the sector It is essential to avoid double counting when using the Financing Type Approach, particularly if resources are channelled through several different financing units. As explained in the Challenge Box in Section 2.2.2, financing can be allocated by an international donor to a national government and then channelled from the national government to local governments before finally being disbursed to a service provider. In that case, it is important not to count the financial flow twice, i.e. at source (at the level of the donor or the national government as the financing unit), and at the point where funds are disbursed to service providers (at the level of the financing unit through which funds are channelled, which in this case would be the local government). For the purpose of computing overall expenditure in the WASH sector, financial flows should be computed at the level of the financing unit through which they enter the sector. A key principle is that one flow only should be recorded as one “financing type.” Donor funding channelled to a local government through the national government, for example, should always be recorded as FT4 International public transfers. This is also why FT1 Tariffs for services provided, is deemed to originate from FU1 Users (i.e. the financing unit that has injected revenue into the sector) rather than from FU5 Network service providers. Applying this rule consistently should ensure that there is no double counting in overall expenditure. This being the case, the only financing injected by FU5 Network service providers, would be reinvested profits or equity investments, and would generally be recorded as FT6 Repayable financing. However, financial flows also need to be recorded in other ways to enable various key policy questions to be investigated. These would include investigation of what the funds are used for and how they are channelled through the sector. Each financial flow should therefore be “coded” in more detail, to track whether it has been: • Directly disbursed to service providers • Channelled through another financing unit • Received from another financing unit and disbursed to service providers. This is an area where the availability of data collection and analysis software would make a significant difference. 66 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Ascertaining what the total expenditure has been spent on would generally be achievable by relying on the Cost- based Approach, rather than the Financing Type Approach. Information on how funds are channelled, on the other hand, will need to be computed from financing type data, and the careful coding of how the financial flow has gone from the financing unit where it entered the system, to the financing unit that made the disbursement decision, and finally to a service provider. Box 24. Example: How to avoid double counting of financial flows The situation: A donor provides general budget support to the Ministry of Finance (MoF). These funds are then channelled via the MoF through local governments, which disburse them to service providers. For the purpose of this example, they are disbursed to an NGO to finance hygiene promotion and a non-network corporate service provider for sanitation. The figure below illustrates this situation. Figure 13. Illustrative example Service providers (P2) NGO (P4) Non-domestic users“Served” households Central government (FU2) Bilateral and multi- lateral donors (FU8) Sanitation tax International public transfers (FT4) Domestic public transfers (FT3) Domestic public transfers (FT3) Tariffs (FT1) Self-financing (internally generated funding from property tax, business rates etc.) Local government (FU4) How can this situation be reflected in the WASH accounts framework? • The donor, the MoF and the local government are financing units. More specifically, the MoF and the agency are financing units acting as financing channels. The NGO (P4) and the non-network corporate service provider (P2) are the service providers. • Funds between the donor and MoF would be marked as “channelled”. Funds between MoF and the local governments would be marked as “channelled”. Funds between the local governments and the service providers would be marked as “received and disbursed”. • The flow is an international public transfer (FT4) because it ultimately originates from an international donor. What should be presented? Two elements are important: • The overall picture: Funding is received from international donors as international public transfers. • The detailed picture: This funding is channelled via the MoF to a local government, which makes the spending decision. How can results be presented? • To produce WASH accounts compiled at sector level and show the overall picture: – The principle recommended above is applied. Flows are tracked at the level of the financing unit where funds enter the sector. In this case, the funding should be recorded at the level of the donor. The funds would therefore be recorded as FT4 (international public transfers) originating from a FU8 (bilateral and multilateral donor). Yet more information from the level of the local government and service providers is needed to allocate the funds to different types of service provider, services, cost, and use. – The tables FTxP and FTxS show that the international transfer from the donor is disbursed to NGOs and corporate service providers for sanitation and hygiene services. – The table FUxP shows that bilateral and multilateral donors provide funding to P2s and P4s. • At a deeper level of analysis, to show the details of financing units channelling the financing, and making the funding decision: – It would be useful to provide more detail on the financing and expenditure of the local government. For this financing unit specifically, WASH accounts can show that the international public transfers received from donors are channelled via the MoF. Local governments also have self-funding sources from internally generated resources – for example local taxes. 67Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Answering questions of this kind requires tracking many simultaneous transactions, and cannot realistically be done for all transactions and financing units in the sector. Instead, it is recommended that the WASH accounts team select those financing units for which it is critical to know where funding has originated and through what channels it has been assigned. This policy question is probably most critical for local governments, as it is essential to understand what funding they receive and by what means. A more detailed examination of local government funding might show that it receives international public transfers (FT4) through the national government (FU1) and not directly from the donor (FU8). Box 24 offers solutions for examining specific financing units. 68 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Methodological Note No 5: Estimating the costs of providing services using the Cost-based Approach Objectives: This note addresses existing cost classifications in the WASH sector that were called on in drawing up the TrackFin classification note. It also provides methodological guidance for estimating the cost of WASH services using the Cost-based Approach. It recommends that at the very least, distinction should be made between capital expenditure and operations and maintenance expenditure, and potentially large capital maintenance expenditure. Support costs for policy and programme development should also be tracked separately if possible, although this may prove difficult at an aggregate level. MN 5.1. Classifying costs For the purpose of data comparability across countries, the same cost categories and commonly agreed methodologies should be used to estimate and classify costs. MN 5.1.1. Existing cost classifications in the WASH sector At the international level, there are no standard cost classifications used in both urban and rural WASH sectors. In the urban sub-sector, country-level regulators define cost items in a specific way. An example is Ofwat in England and Wales, which has defined cost categories in order to set consistent prices for all water and sewerage companies. International utility benchmarking exercises, such as IBNET hosted by the World Bank, seek to benchmark operating costs (defined as the unit operational cost per cubic metre of water produced or sold), but do not attempt to benchmark investment costs. As IBNET puts it, “they tend to differ widely from one year to another due to the lumpiness of the investments.” As a result, the IBNET toolkit suggests measuring the capital intensity of a utility based on the gross fixed asset value (a fixed asset stocks indicator) per capita served.1 However, they also state that, “Unfortunately there is often limited information available about asset values and until more emphasis is placed on this item, the values derived must be treated with caution” (see Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks for more information about how asset values can be derived). The WASHCost project led by IRC of the Netherlands has defined a cost typology for the rural and peri-urban sector that seeks to capture the entire life cycle cost of investing in WASH services.2 The cost definitions developed by WASHCost were inspired by the cost categories typically used for urban water and sewerage services, and were extended to the rural water and sanitation sectors. This classification identifies typically neglected cost items that are not adequately budgeted for, such as capital maintenance expenditure or expenditure on direct (or indirect) support. For example, the methodology explicitly identifies “software” costs—that is, expenditure on a range of activities required to ensure that such services are delivered effectively.3 These support activities are extremely broad and varied in scope; they range from the costs of managing the sector at the level of the ministry (staff costs for planning, budgeting, interaction with international donors, monitoring and evaluation, and technical assistance) to the costs of capacity-building or hygiene education activities at the local level. The distinction between “hardware” costs (investments and associated studies) and “software” costs (associated “soft” support activities) has now become standard in the WASH sector and has been used, for example, in recent analysis of the value for money of DFID WASH investments in rural water (see www.vfm-wash.org for more information). However, cost classifications of this kind in the rural water sub-sector tend to be used more for project planning and budgeting than for tracking costs at a national level. Indeed, some of the cost categories in the WASHCost classification (such as capital maintenance expenditure, cost of capital or expenditure on direct and indirect 1 http://www.ib-net.org/en/texts.php?folder_id=117&mat_id=97&L=1&S=3&ss=4 2 http://www.ircwash.org/washcost 3 Trémolet, Kolsky & Perez (2010) also explicitly accounted for software costs when deriving the costs of providing on-site sanitation at the household level. 69Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level support) are not consistently tracked in most countries at present. Most government or NGO-led programmes do not typically account for support costs associated with capital expenditure separately, or for expenditure on direct or indirect support. This review of existing cost classifications in the WASH sector clarified the need for a TrackFin classification that could be applied across both urban and rural water sectors, but would remain in alignment with currently available information on costs at national level in most countries. This classification is set out below. MN 5.1.2. TrackFin classification of costs The TrackFin classification of costs is presented in Table 12 below. The terms cost and expenditure are used interchangeably in the Guidance Document. Cost is generally used in relation to utilities, while expenditure refers to governments or households. Type of costs Definition C1 Investment costs including hardware and associated support Initial capital costs of putting new services in place, including “hardware” such as pipes, toilets, and pumps, and one-off associated “software” costs, such as for detailed design/engineering studies or associated training and consultation. C2 Operating and maintenance costs Routine maintenance and operation costs to keep services running (wages, fuel, or any other regular purchases). Operating costs are the recurrent expenditure involved in providing WASH goods and services: labour, fuel, chemicals, materials, and purchases of bulk water. Maintenance costs are the routine expenditure needed to keep systems running at design performance, but does not include major repairs or renewals which are not recognized as recurrent. C3 Large capital maintenance costs Occasional large maintenance costs for the renewal, replacement and rehabilitation of a system beyond routine repair and replacement costs. These essential expenditures are required before system failure occurs and need to be planned and budgeted for. If this cost cannot be separated from capital expenditure (C1), it should be included with this category and explicitly identified as such. C4 Financial costs This includes capital repayments and the cost of capital, including borrowing costs (interest on the loan) and the cost of equity (dividends if a return is paid to shareholders). C5 Support costs Includes expenditure on direct and indirect support: • Direct support includes expenditure on both pre-and post-construction support activities directed to local-level stakeholders, such as training for community or private sector operators, users or user groups. • Indirect support includes the cost of planning and policy-making at government level, including strengthening the skills and capacities of professionals and technicians. These costs have a direct impact on the long-term sustainability of projects. C6 Taxes Includes taxes and fiscal contributions levied from service providers, such as: • Taxes on production (corporate tax on profits, property tax, leasing tax for renting fixed assets, taxes for occupation of public grounds or in relation to employees). • Usage charges related to (or earmarked for) the sector such as royalties, levies or duties for the use of water or the discharge of wastewater into water bodies. • Other charges on production levied for earmarked uses, such as social contribution. Table 12. TrackFin classification of costs This classification distinguishes between capital expenditure (including large maintenance costs) and operating and minor maintenance costs. This information should ideally be collected from each service provider. 70 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative MN 5.2. Potential sources of cost data Potential sources of cost data vary depending on which agencies incur the costs. Table 13 Gathering data on costs of service provision below lists potential sources of cost by type of service provider. Categories of service providers Data sources and collection methods P1 Government agencies • Public expenditure accounts presented to national parliaments • National budget • Annual budget for each relevant financing unit • Supplementary information if needed to determine cost allocation (such as number of staff per department, or percentage of their time dedicated to a sub-sector) P2 Network corporate providers • Service providers’ annual financial statements (balance sheet and profit and loss accounts) • Supplementary information to determine cost allocation if needed: – Number of staff per department, percentage of their time dedicated to a given service – Number of customers per service, unit cost of production, average investment cost per type of investment – Investment programme (by category of investment spending) – Activity-based costing reports – Any recent tariff study undertaken to estimate costs of production, historically and going forward P3 Non-network corporate providers • Survey of a sample of small independent providers to determine their total production costs P4 NGOs and community-based organizations • Annual financial statements • Detailed costing/cost benchmarks for a number of representative projects P5 Self-provided users • Household survey • Detailed costing/cost benchmarks for typical household investments Table 13. Gathering data on costs of service provision A number of methodological issues relative to the estimation of these costs can be anticipated. Further guidance is provided below. C1: Investment costs Annual flows of capital expenditure (and large capital maintenance) can usually be estimated from both the service providers’ cash flow statement and balance sheet. The asset base included in the balance sheet evolves from one year to the next on the basis of new investments (also referred to as “gross capital formation” in the System of National Accounts), which would be reflected as an increase in assets and depreciation of existing assets (also referred to as “consumption of fixed capital” in the SNA). Any change in the asset base value would then need to be distributed between C1 and C3 Large capital maintenance, by triangulating this finding with the information obtained from the cash flow statement on C1. Based on the balance sheet, it is therefore possible to estimate how much the service provider has invested every year. Where different types of service are offered (such as water and sanitation), allocating the costs by service will require data on their recent and planned investment programme. Allocation could be made based on actual investment (particularly if the utility itself has made any such allocations) or by using estimated ratios — for example 40% investment for water, 60% for sanitation — if this is not the case. The aim, over time, is to reflect as much actual allocation as possible. Related support expenditure, if it is a one-off expenditure incurred specifically to support this hardware investment (such as supporting design studies or planning) should be included in the total costs of the investment. A note of caution: There are a number of reasons why capital investment flows may not be a robust indicator of an actual trend in investment, as discussed in more detail in Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks. Estimating capital investment flows may therefore need to be complemented by estimation of fixed asset stocks. 71Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level C2: Operating and maintenance costs Operating and minor maintenance costs can be derived from the cash flow statement of service providers. In the event of joint service provision for water and sanitation, the costs need to be allocated to the different services. If the utility does not already do this based on actual costs, allocation keys should be used. This calls for additional information, including on individual cost factors such as energy, chemicals, and spare parts, and on the number of staff per service. Using the share of revenue by service as an allocation key is unlikely to be helpful and could introduce distortions. As cross-subsidies between water and sanitation are common, tariff revenues from sanitation may in reality be much lower than the actual costs generated by the services. When applying a Cost-based Approach, it will be necessary to analyse costs to arrive at the true cost of each service. This involves reliance on recent tariff studies or pre-existing information to gain a clear understanding of the relative share of operating costs that can be allocated to different services. Doing this can be time consuming, and may be only possible for a small sample of utilities. C3: Large capital maintenance cost Large capital maintenance expenditure is the cost of renewing, replacing, rehabilitating, refurbishing or restoring assets to ensure that services continue at the level of performance that was first delivered. Capital maintenance typically occurs more infrequently than minor maintenance classified under C2, but is considerably more costly. Examples include replacing components; cleaning/re-excavating wells and storage tanks; and rehabilitating network pipes. Annual expenditure on large capital maintenance can usually be estimated in the same manner as for C1 Investment costs — that is from both the service providers’ cash flow statements and balance sheets. In some cash flow statements, service providers may not separately record C3 Large capital maintenance, and C2 Operating and maintenance costs. It will then be necessary to compare annual balance sheets to estimate how the asset base has evolved over time. Any change in value would then need to be distributed between C1 and C3 by triangulating this finding with the information obtained from the cash flow statement in C1. C4: Financial costs Financial costs, estimated from financial accounts, typically comprise three main elements: • Capital repayments, or the principal of the debt associated with capital investment; • The cost of capital, or the cost of repaying the interest of the debt associated with capital investment. This is the cost of renting the capital and can usually be identified separately in financial accounts; and • The return on equity capital, paid as dividends to shareholders (or other benefits) in the case of for-profit companies. Given the potential difficulties in estimating the return on equity capital, and the profit element for not-for-profit companies, the System of Health Accounts uses different approaches as discussed in the box below. Learning from the health sector: Distinguishing between for-profit and not-for-profit/government service providers The System of National Accounts (and the System of Health Accounts) make a distinction in evaluating the costs of market and non-market providers. In the case of market (for-profit) providers, the value of the goods and services they produce is estimated in relation to the revenue they receive from the sale of their goods. This is done by compiling information on the total amount paid for the goods and services at the point of consumption. Data that values their output in the country’s national accounts may therefore be viewed by these providers as very beneficial. In the case of non-market (non-profit or government) providers, the value is estimated in relation to the cost of production, as these goods and services are not necessarily sold at a price that reflects the true cost of production. Costs are typically calculated as actual expenditure on inputs such as staff remuneration (including all benefits) and supplies. This includes budgetary expenditures on salaries, supplies, and other inputs. It may also include goods and services — such as free electricity — provided to those facilities by other government agencies 72 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative C5: Support or software costs Support, or software costs can be collected at the aggregate level, for example the expenditure of the Ministry of Water or other sector institutions. Specific service providers may also incur these costs as part of a specific programme. Expenditure on indirect support, such as for policy development, sector planning, budgeting, and related issues, can be estimated at the national level. Information on these costs may be obtainable directly from the National Accounts, which contain categories on support services to the water and sanitation sector (see Table 1, which contains the recommended classification of WASH services). In the case of support costs directly related to the provision of a particular service, it may be difficult to disaggregate them from other types of investment and operating costs classified under C1, C2 and C3. If recurrent in nature, they are likely to be included in either C2 Operating and maintenance costs, or if they are one-off costs incurred through a specific capital investment project, in C1 Investment costs. In the longer term, further development of expenditure reporting systems may facilitate the separation of support costs for specific investments and programmes, and enable them to be tracked as a separate cost category, or at least a subset of C5. Support costs might also be elicited from NGOs and other entities (including government) that support service delivery, or at the level of providers that use NGOs for this purpose. These costs are typically hard to track, however. In the case of NGOs, gaining access to their consolidated costs can be difficult, and they seldom separate hardware and support or ‘software’ costs. The best approach would therefore be to make estimations on the basis of a representative sample of NGOs, and for a representative number of programmes. C6: Taxes As defined by the SNA (SNA, 2008:143), taxes are compulsory, unrequited payments, in cash or in kind, made by economic agents to government units.1 There are two types of taxes: 1. Taxes on products (D21): These are taxes on goods and services resulting from their production, sale, transfer, leasing or delivery, and payable per unit of the product. These taxes can include: • Value added tax (VAT) • Taxes and duties on imports excluding VAT • Export taxes • Taxes on products, excluding VAT. 2. Other taxes on production (D29): These are taxes paid for the ownership or use of land, buildings or other assets, as well as on labour employed in the production process. See box below for more details. 1 They are described as unrequited because the government provides nothing in return to the economic agent making the payment, although governments may use the funds raised in taxes to provide goods or services to other units, either to the community as a whole or individually. 73Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 25. Other taxes on production in SNA Other taxes on production exclude those incurred as a result of engaging in production. They exclude tax on the profit or other income received by the enterprise, and are payable regardless of its profitability. They may be payable on land, fixed assets, or labour employed in the production process, or on certain activities or transactions. Other taxes on production can include the following: a. Taxes on payroll or workforce; b. Recurrent taxes on land, buildings or other structures: These are payable regularly, usually each year, for the use or ownership of land, buildings or other structures utilized by enterprises in production, whether owned or rented (GFSM2001, 1131; OECD, 4100); c. Business and professional licences: Taxes paid by enterprises for a licence to carry out a particular business or profession, such as taxi and casino licences. In certain circumstances, licences to use a natural resource are treated not as a tax, but as the sale of an asset. If, as a condition for granting a licence, the government carries out checks on the suitability or safety of the business premises, on the reliability, or safety, of the equipment employed, on the professional competence of the staff employed, or on the quality or standard of goods or services produced, the payments are not unrequited and should be treated as payments for services rendered, unless the amounts charged for the licences are out of all proportion to the costs of the checks carried out by governments (GFSM2001, 11452; OECD, 5210); d. Taxes on the use of fixed assets or other activities: Taxes levied periodically on the use of vehicles, ships, aircraft or other machinery or equipment used by enterprises for purposes of production, whether such assets are owned or rented. These taxes are often described as licences, and are usually fixed amounts that do not depend on the actual rate of usage (GFSM2001, 11451-11452 and 5.5.3; OECD, 5200); e. Stamp taxes; f. Taxes on pollution: Taxes levied on the emission or discharge into the environment of noxious gases, liquids or other harmful substances. They do not include payments made for the collection and disposal of waste or noxious substances by public authorities, which constitute intermediate consumption of enterprises (GFSM2001, 11452; OECD, 5200); and g. Taxes on international transactions. Source: SNA 2088:148 Section 7.97. The System of Health Accounts tracks taxes in a similar manner, as discussed in the box below. A second category, “Other items of spending” has been added to include charges that fall outside taxes on production and products. Learning from the health sector: Tracking taxes The System of Health Accounts Manual focuses on the final consumption of health care goods and services, with valuation at purchasers’ prices (i.e. including taxes on products). The aggregate current health expenditure combines in a single figure the monetary value of the final consumption of all health care goods and services by residents of a given country during a given period. In SHA 2011, taxes paid by service providers are included in the factors of provision classification. Taxes are included in FP.5 Other items of spending on inputs. This item includes all financial costs, such as interest payments on loans, taxes and so on. It includes: • FP.5.1 Taxes: Following the SNA definition, taxes are compulsory, unrequited payments, in cash or in kind, made by economic agents to government units. They are described as unrequited because the government provides nothing in return to the economic agent making the payment, although governments may use the funds raised in taxes to provide goods or services to other units, either collectively to the community as a whole or individually. • Item FP.5.1: Taxes comprise taxes on production and taxes on products. As the name implies, taxes on products are payable per unit of product. The tax may be a flat amount, depending on the physical quantity of the product, or it may be a percentage of the value at which the product is sold. • FP.5.2 Other items of spending: Other spending items include all transactions related to items not classified elsewhere. Transactions recorded here include property expenses, fines and penalties imposed by government, interest rates and costs for the use of loans, and non-life insurance premiums and claims. A major difference with the WASH sector is that charges (or royalties) must also be included. Numerous taxes are paid on WASH goods and services, varying between countries. The main kinds of tax collected are: a) from end-users on the sale of WASH goods and services, and b) from service providers. The first is classed as a financing type in WASH accounts and included in the tariff paid. Only the second should be included in the cost classification; these are recorded as a cost for WASH service providers in the Cost-based Approach. 74 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative It is assumed that taxes on intermediary consumption (taxes on products) would already be included in other expenditure categories. Pilot testing of the methodology demonstrated that it is impossible to disentangle taxes on products from the main expenditure (see box on Brazil below). Taxes tracked should therefore include: • Taxes paid by service providers on production: – Corporate taxes (corporate tax on profits, property tax, leasing tax for renting fixed assets, taxes for occupation of public grounds, taxes on compensation of employees) – Earmarked taxes paid by service providers. An example would be a tax for collecting water or a pollution tax for discharging wastewater into the environment. These are paid to the state or public institutions and used for specific purposes, including social contributions. • Other usage charges paid by service providers: – Charges for abstraction of water or discharge of wastewater paid to the state or public authority for the management of water resources. The licence fee depends on the volume of water collected. It is passed on to users on the basis of the volume of water consumed. Earmarked taxes and fees are often passed onto end-users as a separate item on their bills. The box below gives an example from Brazil, showing the importance of tracking different types of tax as they can represent a significant cost for the sector. Box 26. Example from Brazil: The importance of tracking taxes In Brazil, the current tax policy greatly affects the cost of WASH services, so it is crucial to include taxes when calculating the total cost of services. Services are taxed according to the legal nature of the provider rather than the nature of the service. The cost of services are therefore not affected in the same way for all providers, which in turn affects user tariffs. This approach does not take into account that WASH is a public service and should be accessible to all. Taxes levied should therefore be included in the analysis to observe their effect on prices and equity, and to compare them to domestic public transfers. This will increase understanding of the net inflow of public subsidies to the sector. WASH services are taxed when provided under concession by private companies, directly by public corporations, or by joint ventures between states and municipalities. These companies serve about 80% of users in the country and taxes can account for up to 15% of the cost of WASH services. Taxes include charges levied directly from end-users on the cost of services and paid to the government, as well as taxes on profit. This revenue is largely channelled to the federal government. The federal government then redistributes it to public services (including WASH) in the form of domestic public transfers (grants). The main finding was that in the period 2010–2012, taxes paid to the government by WASH service providers represented on average 4.8% of the total expenditure on WASH services, compared to domestic public transfers, which represented 7% of the total financing revenue to the sector. This shows that the net inflow of public subsidies is actually lower than it seems. It did, however, increase between 2010 and 2012 as domestic public transfers to the sector rose with Brazilian National Plan for Basic Sanitation (Plansab). 75Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 6: Estimating fixed asset stocks Objectives: This note indicates why it is important to estimate fixed asset stocks for the sector in parallel with estimating financial flows. It shows how this facilitates linkages with existing accounting conventions such the System of National Accounts. It highlights potential methodological challenges and suggests ways of addressing them. MN 6.1. Why is it important to estimate fixed asset stocks? There are several limitations to tracking financial flows, as set out below: • Tracking investment flows can potentially generate misleading results, as they typically vary from year to year. For example, if a country is building a large asset at national scale, such as a dam or a pipeline, capturing the nominal value of that investment for each year the asset is under construction would show up as an investment peak followed by much lower investment levels. At global level, this may be interpreted as the country having “deprioritized” investment once this large asset has been built. In reality, the asset would be producing benefits so investment needs are subsequently lower. • Capturing the entire value of an investment in a given year does not allow for differences in the lifespan of investments to be reflected. Following the example given above, reflecting the entire value of a new asset with an anticipated lifespan of approximately 50 years only in the year of initial investment fails to capture the benefits that this asset delivers over a long period. • Some significant investments, such as FT2: User expenditure on self-supply, may be difficult to track where no data is available on annual investment flows for this type of expenditure. Information may, however, be available on service coverage at different points in time. This information is likely to come from periodic household surveys rather than annual investment flows. To complement the tracking of investment flows, it can be useful to estimate the value of existing fixed asset stocks and track how it evolves over time. This has numerous advantages: • It permits all sources of investment to be tracked on a comparable basis, thereby overcoming the problem of insufficient data on annual capital investment flows for significant investors, such as household investment in on-site sanitation. This approach was taken by the World Bank-led Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic report (AICD) for estimating current investment in the sector (Banerjee & Morella, 2011). Using this approach, it was found that households are the most significant investors in the WASH sector in sub-Saharan Africa. • It allows the consideration of asset performance. It would be possible, for example, at a subsequent stage of methodological development, to exclude the value of non-functional assets, which can be significant. Estimates indicate that up to 40% of manual hand-pumps in sub-Saharan Africa are non-functional at any given time (Sutton, 2005). • It can provide a sounder basis for estimating future costs, in particular the costs of attaining the SDGs. For example, the WHO global costing exercise first produced in 2004 and updated in 2012 is currently based on a relatively crude estimate of the total asset stocks (Hutton, 2012). This combines JMP coverage figures with the best available estimates of unit costs, based on the service ladder. Taking the value of this asset stock, a ratio is applied to derive projected operation and maintenance costs. Good unit cost values are not, however, always available at the national level so these estimates would be strengthened through more reliable estimates for asset stocks. • It is in line with the United Nations System of National Accounts, the standard methodology used by governments to compile and track information on economic activity. According to the UN Statistics Division, National Statistics Offices (NSOs) in each country should already be compiling information on asset stocks for all economic activities, including for water and sanitation. The total value of fixed assets is defined as “stocks of fixed assets” in SNA 2008, and evolves over time in line with gross fixed capital formation. 76 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table 14 below summarizes the SNA definitions that can be used or referred to in WASH accounts. Definition Consumption of fixed capital Cost of the decline in value of the producer’s stock of fixed assets as a result of physical deterioration, foreseen obsolescence or normal or accidental damage in the accounting period. It corresponds to “depreciation” in business management terminology. It should reflect the use of capital as a factor of production. It includes the use of buildings, equipment and other capital goods such as vehicles. It excludes rentals paid on the use of equipment or buildings, and fees, commissions, royalties, etc. payable under licensing arrangements, which are included as the purchase of services. Gross fixed capital formation Total value of the fixed assets that service providers have acquired during the accounting period (less the value of the disposal of these assets) and that are used repeatedly or continuously for more than one year in the production of services and goods. This corresponds to investments made in that year. Opening stocks of fixed assets Value of fixed assets at the start of the period (usually an accounting year). Closing stocks of fixed assets Closing stocks = opening stocks + gross fixed capital formation – consumption of fixed capital + other changes in volume of asset + holding gains/losses on assets Where: • Other changes in the volume of the asset are those not due to transactions, such as changes in classification, discoveries, and natural disasters; and • Holding gains/losses on assets are the changes in the price of assets. Source: System of National Accounts (2008). Table 14. Terminology used in SNAs to evaluate changes in fixed asset stocks MN 6.2. Potential methodological challenges with this approach and ways to overcome them This methodology has not been explicitly adopted in previous exercises seeking to track financial flows to the WASH sector. This is doubtless because there are a number of methodological difficulties in adopting the Fixed Asset Stock Approach, which require further consideration. These include the following: • For a number of reasons, existing information on fixed assets is often very poor in the WASH sector. Few entities have developed a comprehensive and reliable asset register. Ownership of assets is frequently unclear, and there is frequent confusion over who has paid for them and who effectively owns them. If this methodology were widely adopted, however, it could provide added incentives to WASH service providers to improve asset registries and create a useful tool for improved asset management. • Existing information may not always distinguish between water and wastewater. Some utilities currently split the valuation of their assets between water and wastewater, but this is by no means universal. Again, the adoption of a more systematic approach to valuing fixed asset stocks could provide incentives for utilities to split the values of water and wastewater in their balance sheets. • Most importantly, to obtain comparable fixed asset stock values, it would be necessary to agree on a common methodology for valuing assets across the sector. There are a number of existing methodologies for valuing assets, but these can produce very different values, especially if the asset base combines assets that have been built at different times. Alternative methodologies for valuing fixed asset stocks are presented in the box below. Different service providers may use different rules, even within the same country. 77Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Box 27. Alternative methodologies for valuing fixed asset stocks Valuing assets at their current book value (or as they are recorded in the service providers’ balance sheet): This is likely to be the simplest method for asset valuation, at least initially, as the values can be taken directly from companies’ balance sheets. The book value is based on the original expenditure less any depreciation incurred since the asset was purchased, plus any capital maintenance expenditure incurred. Applying this method can lead to distortions, however, as different service providers may use different conventions for valuing assets in their balance sheets. Some may value assets at their historical cost (adjusted for depreciation and in some cases for inflation), while others may adjust the value based on their replacement value. Valuing assets at their historical cost: This methodology estimates the cost at the time the asset was built, adjusted for depreciation and inflation. In the case of many utilities, water and sewerage assets were acquired a long time ago, although they are still delivering benefits. Their historical value would therefore be very low, although they continue to provide services. Other utilities might opt to update the value of assets in their books. Valuing assets at their replacement value, also referred to as the Modern Equivalent Asset (MEA) value: This approach identifies the cost of replacing the given asset by its modern equivalent at today’s cost, i.e. investing in an asset equipped with the latest technology but providing the same level of service. This provides figures closer to actual values, but conducting this kind of “revaluation” exercise can be complicated, costly and time-consuming. It is therefore seldom undertaken unless there is a clear motivation for doing so, such as the introduction of private sector participation which would call for valuing the asset base before contracting it out. Asset valuation methods vary from one country to another. Ofwat (2005) compared methods for valuing capital bases in six different countries while comparing their regulatory systems as a whole. In England and Wales, values for capital employed are based on a value estimated at the time of privatization in 1989, adjusted for subsequent depreciation and new investment. Companies also report MEA values: The estimated cost of assets of equivalent productive capability to satisfy their remaining service potential, less accumulated current cost depreciation. Australian companies report current replacement costs in a similar way to companies in England and Wales. Source: (Ofwat, 2005), “International comparison of water and sewerage service” The System of National Accounts (2008) also formulates recommendations for valuing assets and reflecting them in balance sheets. These can serve as a useful reference, while bearing in mind the following points of caution: • Information on the initial investment in a particular asset should be obtained: To successfully track financing types to the sector, it is important to identify the actor(s) that financed the initial construction. In the case of water utilities, for example, investment funds may come from internally generated revenue, government subsidies or international transfers. • For investment by households, a number of assumptions should be formulated: Deriving the value of the fixed asset stock in which households have invested over time can be done based on the number of existing facilities multiplied by the unit cost of these facilities, minus government subsidies.1 Given the typical lack of information about when the investments were made, this is equivalent to valuing household assets based on the MEA approach. For consistency, it might be preferable to use the MEA approach for all other asset types as well, although this could be difficult to achieve if the method has not previously been applied. The box below shows how this method was applied in Brazil. 1 An additional complication is that in national accounts, households are not considered to be “investors”; instead, they purchase consumer durables (which would be classified as investments if purchased by an establishment). For households, the consumer durable is recorded as consumed the moment it is purchased. It is therefore important to record the purchase of consumer durables by households and estimate the lifetime of the equipment. The treatment of these household investments will need to be discussed and agreed with statistics experts and with the System of National Accounts. 78 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Box 28. Example from Brazil: Estimating fixed asset stocks of service provides and households Estimating fixed asset stocks in Brazil was possible thanks to the aggregation of financial information on asset investments from service providers in the National Sanitation Information System (SNIS). Significant work was still required on the data, which were drawn from a range of different service providers and presented in different formats. Nor were asset stocks valued in the same way. Due to differences in methods, it was only possible to estimate the stock of fixed assets for formal service providers. This information is recorded in their balance sheets, which are available in SNIS for corporate private service providers only, and not for public service providers, local authorities or public organizations. SNIS records the asset value at depreciated historical prices. These values were used to estimate the asset stock of all formal providers at their historical value, which was then adjusted with the sectoral price index to adjust for annual inflation. This was done by calculating an average unit fixed asset stock per connection and per household. The total stock was calculated as Total Assets (-) Current Assets (-) Long-Term Assets. An additional challenge was that in 1995, asset valuation changed from a method based on the historical value of assets to one based on the acquisition value of assets. The current average book value of assets acquired after 1995 therefore had to be estimated using their acquisition value. Only one state-owned company (SABESP) in São Paulo that turned public very recently re-evaluated its assets using their replacement values. This methodology could be applied to other service providers in the future, as it gives a more accurate value of asset stocks. The stock of fixed assets for self-provided households was calculated based on estimated unit costs of equipment per household (septic tanks, water tanks and wells) and the reported number of self-supplied households from the population census. However, it was not possible to estimate asset stocks of water resource management infrastructure for municipalities whose information is not held in the SNIS. These omissions may represent around 5% of existing total asset stocks. In conclusion, given the methodological difficulties entailed in estimating fixed asset stocks, the WASH accounts team will need to test the feasibility of alternative methods and the potential errors or biases in doing so. Countries that undertake the exercise of valuing asset stocks should state clearly which method has been used, and whether it has been consistently applied across service providers or asset types. It may be possible to do so only on a sample basis. Valuing fixed asset stocks may be more complex when first attempted, as the initial value of the asset base needs to be determined, but will become comparatively easier for subsequent iterations. It will require the identification of existing assets, and their value, for each service provider. This will also help to define reference values for other types of cost such as operating costs and capital maintenance costs. These can be estimated as a percentage of asset values if no other reliable estimate can be gathered at a reasonable cost. A further step in the refinement of the methodology could be to adopt a full Fixed Asset Stock Approach for the sector, tracking not only assets but also liabilities (i.e. the loans that have been provided to finance such assets) in order to derive a value for the net fixed asset stock. This is recommended by the International Monetary Fund (2001) in its Government Finance Statistics Manual.1 1 (International Monetary Fund Statistics Department, 2001) available at: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/gfs/manual/pdf/all.pdf 79Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Methodological Note No 7: WASH accounts tables and indicators Objectives: This note sets out the tables used to prepare WASH accounts. A summary list of all tables is presented in Step 3 of the Guidance Document. Preparing these tables enables a full picture of WASH sector financing to be created for policy use. This Methodological Note contains the structure of the tables together with an explanation of each, and the list of indicators that can be derived from them. MN 7.1 How are the WASH accounts tables constructed? WASH accounts tables display information on the consumption, production and financing activities of a country’s WASH sector. Reporting the data and estimates in a uniform way, using standard tables, facilitates comparison across countries. The rows and columns of WASH accounts are based on the classifications presented elsewhere in this methodology, including: • Table 1 – TrackFin classification of WASH goods and services; • Table 2 – Definitions: Uses of WASH services, WASH sector actors and financing types; and • Table 12 – TrackFin classification of costs. In addition, some of the proposed tables include a breakdown by region or service areas, some are included in the table below. This summarizes all classification types (and labels) used in WASH accounts. Classifications Definition WASH services (S) WASH services and products provided by WASH service providers and consumed by users. See Table 1 for more on classification. Uses of WASH services (U) Type of use of WASH goods and services. See Table 2. WASH service providers (P) Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH goods and services. See Table 2. Financing units (FU) Institutional entities that provide or mobilize funding to the sector to pay for WASH services. They may allocate funds directly to service providers or channel them through intermediary institutions. See Table 2. Financing types (FT) The sources of funding prior to distribution through financing entities. See Table 2. Costs (C) Type of cost (or expenditure type) borne by service providers for the provision of WASH services. See Table 12. Service areas (A) Areas where WASH services are provided and consumed (urban, rural or central). Geographic regions (R) Regions where WASH services are provided and consumed. Geographic nominations will vary from one country to another. Table 15. Classifications used in WASH accounts WASH accounts tables are constructed to track the financial flows between these dimensions. The classifications can be applied to individual costs, producing expenditure tables for a single dimension (such as by type of WASH use, service providers, or financing type). Additional information can be gained from cross-classification involving two or more dimensions. Many combinations of two or three-dimensional tables can be created. The choice of tables depends on their relevance to the country, and the feasibility of creating them. A selection of two-dimensional tables is presented here. Recommended common WASH accounts tables Additional explanation of each proposed WASH accounts table, and the information they generate, is provided below. For ease of reference and to facilitate comparison, each table is assigned a number and a code indicating the type of information it contains. The convention used is that the headings refer first to the row classification, and then to the column classification. For example, Table WA 1 (SxA) presenting the allocation of expenditure by main WASH service (S) and service area (A) is referred to as the SxA table, with WASH services (S) appearing in rows and service area (A) in columns. 80 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area: This table shows total expenditure on each main type of WASH service by service area as defined by the country. According to country-specific policy needs, countries can decide to develop also an SxR table for WASH expenditure by main WASH service and country-defined geographic region. Areas A1 Urban A2 Rural A3 Central Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total Table 16. WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by main WASH service and service area Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of service and use: This table shows financing units’ expenditure on the various types of WASH service and use. This table provides a summary presentation of the demand for WASH services in the country, identifying who is consuming what type of service. This is done by type of use rather than by type of users. Table 17. WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH use and service WASH uses (U) U1 U2 U3 U4 Main WASH services (millions of currency units) Served domestic use Self-provided domestic use Served non-domestic use Self-provided non-domestic use Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total 81Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Table WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of service and provider: This table shows service providers’ expenditure on different types of WASH service. It clarifies “Who provides what?” It also provides a summary presentation of the WASH supply market in the country, identifying who the providers are, and how spending to the sector is channelled through different providers. It displays the relative importance of each type of provider on the market. Table 18. WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of WASH provider and service WASH providers P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Main WASH services (millions of currency units) Government agencies Network corporate providers Non-network corporate providers NGOs and community-based organizations Self-provided users Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total Table WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of provider and financing type: It addresses the question, “Where does the money come from?” presenting the different sources of revenue by financing type for each service provider. It allows resource flows within the WASH sector to be followed, via the columns displaying the funding origin to the rows displaying its recipients and users. The table also shows the relative importance of each type of revenue stream in financing each type of provider’s activities, and in the sector overall Table 19. WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by financing type and WASH provider Financing types FT1 FT2 FT3 FT4 FT5 FT6 WASH providers (millions of currency units) Tariffs for services provided User expenditure on self-supply Domestic public transfers International public transfers Voluntary contributions Repayable financing Total P1 Government agencies P2 Network corporate providers P3 Non-network corporate providers P4 NGOs and community- based organizations P5 Self-provided users Total 82 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by service type and financing type: This table shows the financing path to the provision of WASH services. It addresses the question, “Who finances what?” presenting the different sources of revenue (financing types) for each service. Resource flows to the WASH sector can be followed from the columns displaying the origin of the funds to the rows displaying the activities on which they are spent. Table 20. WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of financing and type of WASH service Financing types FT1 FT2 FT3 FT4 FT5 FT6 Main WASH services (millions of currency units) Tariffs for services provided User expenditure on self-supply Domestic public transfers International public transfers Voluntary contributions Repayable financing Total S1 Water supply services S2 Sanitation services S3 Support services to the WASH sector S4 Water resource management related to water and sanitation services S5 Hygiene services Total 83Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Ta bl e 2 1. W A 6 ( Sx FU ) – W AS H ex pe nd itu re by fi na nc in g un it an d W AS H se rv ice Fi na nc in g un its FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 M ai n W AS H se rv ice s (m illi on s o f c ur re nc y u nit s) Us er s Na tio na l au th or iti es Re gio na l au th or iti es Lo ca l a ut ho rit ies Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs Ec on om ic an d q ua lit y re gu lat or s Bi lat er al an d m ult ila te ra l do no rs NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s Ba nk s a nd fin an cia l ins tit ut ion s To ta l S1 W at er su pp ly se rv ice s S2 Sa nit at ion se rv ice s S3 Su pp or t se rv ice s t o t he W AS H se cto r S4 W at er re so ur ce m an ag em en t re lat ed to wa te r a nd sa nit at ion se rv ice s S5 Hy gie ne se rv ice s To ta l Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by service and financing unit: This table shows how much is spent by each financing unit on which service. It describes how overall financing units allocate their resources. It addresses the question, “Who funds what?” 84 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Ta bl e 2 2. W A 7 ( Px FU ) – W AS H ex pe nd itu re by W AS H pr ov id er an d fin an cin g un it Fi na nc in g un its FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 W AS H pr ov id er s ( m illi on s of cu rre nc y u nit s) Us er s Na tio na l au th or iti es Re gio na l au th or iti es Lo ca l a ut ho rit ies Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs Ec on om ic an d q ua lit y re gu lat or s Bi lat er al an d m ult ila te ra l do no rs NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s Ba nk s a nd fin an cia l ins tit ut ion s To ta l P1 Go ve rn m en t ag en cie s P2 Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs P3 No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs P4 NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s P5 Se lf- pr ov ide d us er s To ta l Table WA 7 (PxFU) – WASH expenditure by provider and financing unit: This table shows how much is spent by each financing unit on which type of service provider. It highlights the financing path to the provision of WASH services. It addresses the question, “Who funds who?” 85Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Ta bl e 2 3. W A 8 ( FT xF U) – W AS H ex pe nd itu re by fi na nc in g ty pe an d fin an cin g un it Fi na nc in g un its FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 Fi na nc in g ty pe s (m illi on s o f c ur re nc y u nit s) Us er s Na tio na l au th or iti es Re gio na l au th or iti es Lo ca l a ut ho rit ies Ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs No n- ne tw or k co rp or at e pr ov ide rs Ec on om ic an d q ua lit y re gu lat or s Bi lat er al an d m ult ila te ra l do no rs NG Os an d co m m un ity - ba se d or ga niz at ion s Ba nk s a nd fin an cia l ins tit ut ion s To ta l FT 1 Ta riff s f or se rv ice s pr ov ide d FT 2 Us er ex pe nd itu re on se lf- su pp ly FT 3 Do m es tic pu bli c tra ns fer s FT 4 In te rn at ion al pu bli c tra ns fer s FT 5 Vo lun ta ry co nt rib ut ion s FT 6 Re pa ya ble fin an cin g T ot al Table WA 8 (FTxFU) – WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit: This table shows the types of financing through which overall financing units allocate resources to the sector. 86 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table 24. WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider WASH providers P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Cost type (millions of currency units) Government agencies Network corporate providers Non-network corporate providers NGOs and community-based organizations Self-provided users Total C1 Investment costs including hardware and associated support C2 Operating and maintenance costs C3 Large capital maintenance costs C4 Financial costs C5 Support costs C6 Taxes Total Table WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH provider: This table shows how different types of provider allocate resources to cover different types of cost. It answers the question, “What types of cost are funded and by whom?” Table 25. WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH service Main WASH services S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Cost type (millions of currency units) Water supply services Sanitation services Support services to the WASH sector Water resource management related to water and sanitation services Hygiene services Total C1 Investment costs including hardware and associated support C2 Operating and maintenance costs C3 Large capital maintenance costs C4 Financial costs C5 Support costs C6 Taxes Total Table WA 10 (CxS) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and WASH service: This table shows the type of cost on which resources are spent to provide each WASH service. 87Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Table 26. WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider WASH providers P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Asset stocks (millions of currency units) Government agencies Network corporate providers Non-network corporate providers NGOs and community-based organizations Self-provided users Total AS1 Closing stocks of fixed assets Total Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Asset stocks by type of WASH provider: This table presents the stock of assets for each type of provider. This permits the evaluation of asset stocks for the sector as a whole, reflecting what has been invested over time by each type of service provider (including household self-service). MN 7.2 What are WASH accounts indicators? WASH accounts indicators are key figures on sector expenditure derived directly from the WASH accounts tables. These indicators are directed principally to national policy-makers, but also serve to facilitate international reporting. Due to difficulties in comparing national currency units, the use of ratios is recommended where possible (such as the ratio of WASH spending to GDP), in order to avoid the distorting impact of currency exchange rates. However, some indicators, such as total expenditure on the WASH sector at the national level, and total expenditure on WASH per capita, can be presented in currency units. The conversion from local currency into international dollars using current exchange rates or a PPP exchange rate needs to be considered and documented. Table 27 below presents the main indicators that can be elaborated in response to a country’s policy questions. Benchmarking and presenting indicators in context Certain indicators would benefit from comparison with actual levels of GDP. For example, a figure showing the percentage of WASH sector expenditure as a percentage of GDP does not provide an indication of the relative size of GDP from one country to the next. It is therefore preferable to chart the percentage of WASH expenditure on the x-axis and show GDP per capita on the y-axis. This shows whether there is any form of GDP impact on WASH sector spending. 88 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Table (T) Indicator (I) that can be derived Table WA 1 (SxA) – WASH expenditure by service and service area Total expenditure on the WASH sector at the national level Total expenditure on WASH in the country as share of GDP Total expenditure on WASH per capita Total expenditure on WASH as a percentage of total public spending Total expenditure on urban and on rural drinking-water as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Total expenditure on urban and on rural sanitation as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Table WA 2 (SxU) – WASH expenditure by type of service and use Total expenditure per type of service use Table WA 3 (SxP) – WASH expenditure by type of service and provider Total expenditure per type of WASH service Total expenditure per type of WASH provider Table WA 4 (PxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of provider and financing type Total expenditure per type of financing type Table WA 5 (SxFT) – WASH expenditure by type of service and financing type Total domestic public transfer expenditure and as a percentage of total WASH financing Total international public transfers expenditure and as a percentage of total WASH financing Total user expenditure as a percentage of total WASH financing Table WA 6 (SxFU) – WASH expenditure by service and financing unit Table WA 7 (PxFU) – WASH expenditure by provider and financing unit Table WA 8 (FTxFU) – WASH expenditure by financing type and financing unit Total expenditure channelled through regional and local authorities as a percentage of WASH public expenditure Table WA 9 (CxP) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and provider Table WA 10 (CxS ) – WASH expenditure by type of cost and main service Total investment cost as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Total operating and maintenance cost as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Total large capital maintenance cost as a percentage of total WASH expenditure Investment cost as a percentage of total water supply expenditure Operating and maintenance cost as a percentage of total water expenditure Large capital maintenance cost as a percentage of total water expenditure Investment cost as a percentage of total sanitation expenditure Operating and maintenance cost as a percentage of total sanitation expenditure Large capital maintenance as a percentage of total sanitation expenditure Table WA 11 (ASxP) – Fixed asset stocks by type of WASH provider Total WASH fixed asset stocks per capita Table 27. WASH accounts indicators 89Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Annex A. Glossary Note that terms in italics are defined elsewhere in the glossary. Bond A method of borrowing used by private companies, governments or municipalities consisting of the issue of fixed interest securities, repayable by a specified date. Certain government bonds have no fixed redemption date, and can be sold at their prevailing market price. Closing stocks of fixed assets Closing stocks = opening stocks + gross fixed capital formation – consumption of fixed capital + other changes in volume of asset + holding gains/losses on assets Where: Other changes in the volume of the asset are those that are not due to transactions, such as changes in classification, discoveries and natural disasters. Holding gains/losses on assets are the changes in the price of assets (SNA 2008). Commercial loan A loan extended by commercial banks or development finance agencies at commercial rates, i.e. interest rates that reflect market conditions. Compensation of human resources (employees and self-employed professional remuneration) Total remuneration paid by an enterprise to an employee in return for work performed during the accounting period. It includes wages and salaries and all forms of social benefits, payments for overtime or night work, bonuses, allowances, as well as the value of in-kind payments such as the provision of uniforms for medical staff. This category also includes the remuneration of non-salaried self-employed professionals (SNA 2008). Concessionary loan (or ‘soft loan’) A loan provided on concessionary lending terms, which may include a lower interest rate than the market rate, a longer repayment period or a grace period. Consumption of fixed capital Cost of the decline in value of the producer’s stock of fixed assets as a result of physical deterioration, foreseen obsolescence or normal or accidental damage in the accounting period. It corresponds to “depreciation” in business management terminology. It should reflect the use of capital as a factor of production. It includes the use of buildings, equipment and other capital goods such as vehicles. It excludes the rentals paid on the use of equipment or buildings, and fees, commissions, royalties, etc., payable under licensing arrangements, which are included as the purchase of services (SNA 2008). Domestic public transfers Public transfers from government agencies (central or local government) to WASH actors. These are often subsidies that come from taxes or other sources of government revenue. This category includes only grants and excludes concessionary loans, which are included in FT6. Equity investments A form of finance in which investors take an ‘equity stake’, meaning that they purchase shares in an entity. This enables them to share the risk of that entity (through fluctuations in the share price) in return for the prospect of sharing its profits (through dividend payments). The higher the investment risk, the higher the expected level of return. 90 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Factors of production Factor inputs used by providers to produce the goods and services consumed or the activities conducted in the system. Included are: the costs of production (intermediary consumption + gross valued added + Compensation of human resources + Other taxes less subsidies on production + Consumption of fixed capital); Gross fixed capital formation; and Changes in the stock of assets. (SNA 2008). Financing Act of providing funding. Financing types Financial flows that circulate between financing units and service providers, characterized by their origin and nature. Financing units Institutional entities that provide funding to the sector. They mobilize funding to pay service providers for WASH services. They may allocate funds directly to service providers or channel them through other financing units. Funding Monetary value of the funds provided to support a given activity. Grant A form of development aid without repayment obligations. Grants might be untied or carry explicit or implied political and commercial obligations. Grants are usually provided by IFIs, governments, foundations and specific funds with different policies, procedures and technical products. A grant can be blended with other kinds of finance to produce a suitable financing package for a particular project. Gross Domestic Product GDP derives from the concept of value added. Gross value added is the difference between output and intermediate consumption. GDP is the sum of gross value added of all resident producer units plus that part (possibly the total) of taxes on products, less subsidies on products, that is not included in the valuation of output. GDP is also equal to the sum of the final use of goods and services (all uses except intermediate consumption) measured at purchasers’ prices, less the value of imports of goods and services. Finally, GDP is also equal to the sum of primary incomes distributed by resident producer units (SNA 2008). Gross fixed capital formation Total value of the fixed assets that service providers have acquired during the accounting period (less the value of the disposal of assets) and that are used repeatedly or continuously for more than one year in the production of services and goods (SNA 2008). Gross valued added Gross value added = output – intermediate consumption. Gross value added is a measure of the contribution to GDP made by an individual producer, industry or sector. It is the value of output less the value of the goods and services, excluding fixed assets, consumed as inputs by a process of production (intermediate consumption). Once the value added has been generated, it can be decomposed in the primary factors for generation of income, according to the following formula: (Gross) value added = (gross) operating surplus + compensation of employees + taxes – subsidies (SNA 2008). 91Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Guarantees A contract by a third party (C) to underwrite a financial commitment entered into by two parties (A and B). Guarantees can be used by national governments to reduce the risks of borrowing and bond issues by their sub-sovereign bodies, and by international agencies to increase the creditworthiness of developing country institutions and support specific projects within them. Intermediate consumption (materials and services used) Total value of goods and services used for the provision of goods and services (not produced in-house) bought in from other providers and other industries of the economy. All the materials and services are to be fully consumed during the production activity period (SNA 2008). International public transfers Voluntary donations (or grants) from public donors and multilateral agencies that come from other countries. Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and entirely included in FT6 – Repayable financing. Microfinance institutions Refers to schemes for extending credit, savings, insurance, money transfers and other financial products to small business, farmers and other low-income borrowers who cannot get access to normal bank loans. Net value added Net value added = Gross valued added – consumption of fixed capital = output – intermediate consumption – consumption of fixed capital Net value added is obtained from Gross value added less the Consumption of fixed capital that occurs when the reduction in the value of the fixed assets used in production during the accounting period results from physical deterioration, normal obsolescence or normal accidental damage (SNA 2008). Official Development Assistance (ODA) Grants or loans to countries and territories on the DAC List of ODA Recipients (developing countries) and to multilateral agencies. They may: (a) be undertaken by the official sector; (b) have promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective; (c) provide concessional financial terms (if a loan), having a grant element of at least 25%. The OECD DAC database at present only tracks ODA flows from OECD member countries but is looking to develop coverage of other non-OECD donors. Operating and maintenance expenditure Routine maintenance and operation costs to keep services running (e.g. wages, fuel or any other regular purchases). Operating expenditures is the recurrent (regular, ongoing) spending to provide WASH goods and services: labour, fuel, chemicals, materials, and purchases of any bulk water. Maintenance expenditure is the routine expenditure needed to keep systems running at design performance, but does not include major repairs or renewals not recognized as recurrent (WASHCost). Repayable financing Sources of finance from private or public sources and that ultimately have to be repaid, such as loans (including concessionary loans and guarantees), equity investments or other financial instruments such as bonds. This includes concessionary repayable financing and non- concessionary repayable financing. Service providers Actors engaged in the production and delivery of WASH services, including government institutions that provide support. 92 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Subsidies A subsidy is a grant given generally by the government to economic actors in various forms, such as a cash transfer, a tax reduction or inputs at lower prices (such as free land). A subsidy can be given to economic actors as an incentive to deliver goods and/or services that benefit society. A subsidy can also be provided to households below the poverty line to enable them to access basic goods and services. Subsidies are sometimes provided to support utility infrastructure projects and may include ‘hardware subsidies’ (to reduce the initial capital investment costs), ‘operating subsidies’ (to cover losses incurred during service operation) or ‘software subsidies’ (to cover the software costs associated with the infrastructure development, such as for project preparation, capacity building and training). A hidden form of public subsidy may consist of making an equity investment with no expectation of repayment or a return. Support or software costs Cost of software activities associated with infrastructure development, such as project preparation, capacity building, training, community mobilization and behavioural change activities. Includes expenditure on direct and indirect support. Expenditure on direct support (ExpDS) includes expenditure on both pre- and post-construction support activities directed to local-level stakeholders (for example, training for community or private sector operators, users or user groups). Expenditure on indirect support (ExpIDS) includes the cost of planning and policy-making at the governmental level, including strengthening the skills and capacities of professionals and technicians. These costs have a direct impact on the long-term sustainability of projects. Tariffs (in the OECD 3T typology) Funds contributed by users of WASH services for obtaining the services. In the OECD 3T typology, tariffs include two types of funding: • Tariffs for services provided; and • Households’ out-of-pocket expenditure on self-supply. The WASH accounts terminology proposes to separate these two types of funds to avoid confusion. Tariffs for services provided (in WASH accounts) Payments made by users (domestic and non-domestic) to service providers for access to and use of the service. Taxes Includes taxes and fiscal contributions levied from service providers: • Taxes on production (corporate tax on profits, property tax, leasing tax (“taxe professionelle”) for renting fixed assets, taxes for occupation of public grounds, or for the remuneration of employees. • Usage charge related to (or earmarked for) the sector such as the payment of royalties, levies or duties for the use of water, or the discharge of wastewater into water bodies. • Other charges on production levied for earmarked uses, such as social contribution. Taxes (in the OECD 3T typology) Funds originating from domestic taxes that are channelled to the sector via transfers from all levels of government – national, regional or local. Such funds would typically be provided as subsidies for capital investment or operations. “Hidden” forms of subsidy may include tax rebates, concessionary loans (i.e. at a subsidised interest rate) or subsidised services (such as subsidised electricity). 93Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Transfers (in the OECD 3T typology Funds from international donors and international charitable foundations (including NGOs, decentralized cooperation or local civil society organizations) that typically come from other countries. These funds can be contributed either in the form of grants, concessionary loans (i.e. through the grant element included in a concessionary loan, in the form of a subsidised interest rate or a grace period) or guarantees. The WASH accounts terminology proposes to separate international public transfers and voluntary transfers to avoid confusion. User expenditure on self- supply Funding provided by users to invest in or provide the service themselves. Self-provided users pay an initial investment up-front (in a well, a private water production system, or a private latrine) for access to the service and then cover operating and maintenance costs themselves. This can be in form of cash, material or time, but only cash payments are included in WASH accounts. This category can be further disaggregated into several sub-categories, such as FT2.1 Domestic user expenditure on self-supply, or FT2.2 Non-domestic user expenditure on self-supply. Voluntary contributions Voluntary donations (or grants) from international and national non- governmental donors including from charitable foundations, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society organizations and individuals (remittances). Concessionary loans are excluded from this category and are entirely included in FT6 Repayable financing. 94 UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Annex B. Bibliography AMCOW, EUWI, UNDP. (2006). Getting Africa on track to meet the MDGs on water and sanitation - A status overview of sixteen African countries. AMCOW. Banerjee, S., & Morella, E. (2011). Africa’s Water and Sanitation Infrastructure – Access, Affordability, and Alternatives. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. Barnett, C., & al. (2001). The Application of National Health Accounts Framework to HIV/AIDS in Rwanda. Special Initiatives Report No. 31. Bethesda, MD: Partnerships for Health Reform Project, Abt Associates Inc. Camdessus, M. and Winpenny, J. (2003). Financing water for all. World Water Council, Secretariat of the 3rd World Water Forum and Global Water Partnership. De, S., & al. (2003). Has Improved Availability of Health Expenditure Data Contributed to Evidence-Based Policymaking? Country Experiences with National Health Accounts. Health Systems 20/20. (2011). Mali NHA policy Impact. Health Systems 20/20. Hernandez, P. (2012). Health Accounts: A review of 20 years of experience, Presentation for the 2012 Stockholm World Water Week. Hutton, G. (2012). Global costs and benefits of drinking-water supply and sanitation interventions to reach the MDG target and universal coverage. Geneva: WHO. International Monetary Fund Statistics Department. (2001). Government Finance Statistics Manual. IMF. Maeda, A., & al. (2012). Creating Evidence for Better Health Financing Decisions: A Strategic Guide for the Institutionalization of National Health Accounts. The World Bank. McIntyre, D., & al. (1995). Health Expenditure and Finance in South Africa. South Africa: Health Systems Trust and the World Bank. OECD, Eurostat, WHO. (2011). A System of Health Accounts. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Benefits of Investing in Water and Sanitation: An OECD perspective. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2010). Innovative financing mechanisms for the water sector. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2009). Managing Water for All – An OECD perspective on pricing and financing. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Meeting the Challenge of Financing Water and Sanitation: Tools and Approaches. Paris: OECD Publishing. Ofwat. (2005). International comparison of water and sewerage service. Ofwat. Partners for Health Reformplus. (2002). Using NHA to Inform the Policy Process- NHA Global Policy Brief. Bethesda, MD: Abt Associates Inc. SNA 2008. (2009). System of National Accounts 2008. New York: United Nations. Snehalatha, M., & al. (2011). Looking Beyond Capital Costs - Life Cycle Costing for Sustainable Service Delivery -A Study from Andhra Pradesh, India. Hyderabad: WASHCost (India) Project, Center for economics and social studies. Sutton, S. (2005). The sub-Saharan potential for household level water supply improvement. Rural Water Supply Network. The World Bank . (2010). Harnessing National Health Accounts to Strengthen Policymaking – Compendium of Case Studies. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Trémolet. (2012). Small-scale finance for water and sanitation. Stockholm: EU Water Initiative and Share. 95Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at the national level Trémolet, S., & Binder, D. (2010). Evaluating the effectiveness of public finance for household sanitation in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Trémolet, S., & Rama, M. (2012). Tracking national financial flows into sanitation, hygiene and drinking water. Geneva: WHO. United Nations Statistics Division. (2012). International recommendations for water statistics. New-York: United Nations Publications. United Nations Statistics Division. (2012). System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water. New-York: United Nations Publication. WaterAid. (2012). Hygiene framework. London, UK: WaterAid. WHO. (2012). UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) 2012 report. Geneva: WHO. WHO. (2014). UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level. Geneva: WHO. Relevant websites IBNET: https://www.ib-net.org/ National Health Accounts: http://www.who.int/nha/en/ SEEA-Water: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeaw/ SNIS (Brazil): http://www.snis.gov.br/ UN Statistics Division – International classifications registry: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regct.asp?Lg=1 VFM-WASH: www.vfm-wash.org WASH Cost: http://www.ircwash.org/washcost Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ inside back cover ] For more information: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/glaas/trackfin/en/ Contact: glaas@who.int ISBN 978 92 4 151356 2
Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Iniciativa TrackFin DOCUMENTO DE ORIENTAÇÃO UN-Water GLAAS Iniciativa TrackFin da ONU-Água GLAAS: Rastrear o financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional [UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative - tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level] ISBN 978-92-4-851356-5 © Organização Mundial da Saúde 2018 Alguns direitos reservados. Este trabalho é disponibilizado sob licença de Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo). Nos termos desta licença, é possível copiar, redistribuir e adaptar o trabalho para fins não comerciais, desde que dele se faça a devida menção, como abaixo se indica. Em nenhuma circunstância, deve este trabalho sugerir que a OMS aprova uma determinada organização, produtos ou serviços. O uso do logótipo da OMS não é autorizado. Para adaptação do trabalho, é preciso obter a mesma licença de Creative Commons ou equivalente. Numa tradução deste trabalho, é necessário acrescentar a seguinte isenção de responsabilidade, juntamente com a citação sugerida: “Esta tradução não foi criada pela Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS). A OMS não é responsável, nem pelo conteúdo, nem pelo rigor desta tradução. A edição original em inglês será a única autêntica e vinculativa”. Qualquer mediação relacionada com litígios resultantes da licença deverá ser conduzida em conformidade com o Regulamento de Mediação da Organização Mundial da Propriedade Intelectual. Citação sugerida. Iniciativa TrackFin da ONU-Água GLAAS: Rastrear o financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional [UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative - tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level]. Ginebra: Organização Mundial da Saúde; 2018. Licença: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Dados da catalogação na fonte (CIP). Os dados da CIP estão disponíveis em http://apps.who.int/iris/. Vendas, direitos e licenças. Para comprar as publicações da OMS, ver http://apps.who.int/bookorders. Para apresentar pedidos para uso comercial e esclarecer dúvidas sobre direitos e licenças, consultar http://www.who.int/about/licensing. Materiais de partes terceiras. Para utilizar materiais desta publicação, tais como quadros, figuras ou imagens, que sejam atribuídos a uma parte terceira, compete ao utilizador determinar se é necessária autorização para esse uso e obter a devida autorização do titular dos direitos de autor. O risco de pedidos de indemnização resultantes de irregularidades pelo uso de componentes da autoria de uma parte terceira é da responsabilidade exclusiva do utilizador. Isenção geral de responsabilidade. As denominações utilizadas nesta publicação e a apresentação do material nela contido não significam, por parte da Organização Mundial da Saúde, nenhum julgamento sobre o estatuto jurídico ou as autoridades de qualquer país, território, cidade ou zona, nem tampouco sobre a demarcação das suas fronteiras ou limites. As linhas ponteadas e tracejadas nos mapas representam de modo aproximativo fronteiras sobre as quais pode não existir ainda acordo total. As linhas ponteadas e tracejadas nos mapas representam de modo aproximativo fronteiras sobre as quais pode não existir ainda acordo total. A menção de determinadas companhias ou do nome comercial de certos produtos não implica que a Organização Mundial da Saúde os aprove ou recomende, dando-lhes preferência a outros análogos não mencionados. Salvo erros ou omissões, uma letra maiúscula inicial indica que se trata dum produto de marca registado. A OMS tomou todas as precauções razoáveis para verificar a informação contida nesta publicação. No entanto, o material publicado é distribuído sem nenhum tipo de garantia, nem expressa nem implícita. A responsabilidade pela interpretação e utilização deste material recai sobre o leitor. Em nenhum caso se poderá responsabilizar a OMS por qualquer prejuízo resultante da sua utilização. Design y layout por L’IV Com Sàrl, Villars-sous-Yens, Suíça. Design do identificador visual da GLAAS por Ledgard Jepson Ltd, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, Inglaterra. Impresso na França. Iniciativa TrackFin: uma breve visão geral Um financiamento eficaz do sector da água potável, saneamento e higiene (WASH) é essencial para uma prestação sustentável de serviços. O relatório de Análise e Avaliação do Saneamento e da Água Potável a Nível Mundial (GLAAS), da entidade UN-Water, revela que existem lacunas consideráveis na nossa compreensão e no rastreamento do financiamento para o sector WASH. Os relatórios financeiros são, muitas vezes, insuficientes para permitir um planificação sólida e baseada em evidências e tomada de decisões sobre orçamentação. Para ajudar a corrigir estas dificuldades, a OMS está a liderar a iniciativa TrackFin no âmbito do projecto UN-Water GLAAS. Os objectivos da iniciativa são definir e testar uma metodologia mundialmente aceite para rastrear o financiamento do sector WASH, a nível nacional. Essa metodologia permitirá aos países rastrear o financiamento do sector, usando classificações padronizadas, e desenvolver um conjunto de Contas WASH e indicadores, apresentados num formato que possa estabelecer comparações entre as regiões e os países. O objectivo é responder a quatro questões básicas: • Qual é a despesa total com o sector? • Como são os fundos distribuídos entre os vários serviços WASH e tipos de despesa, tais como despesas de capital, despesas de operação e custos de capital? • Quem paga os serviços WASH? • Que entidades são os principais canais de financiamento do sector WASH e qual a respectiva quota da despesa total? Os benefícios esperados desta iniciativa incluem o reforço dos sistemas nacionais de colecta e análise da informação financeira, com vista à elaboração e programação de políticas para o sector WASH e a um melhor entendimento do modo como os recursos financeiros para o WASH são alocados, tanto a nível nacional como mundial. A TrackFin está a ser desenvolvida em colaboração com instituições nacionais líderes no sector, institutos nacionais de estatística, departamentos de finanças e entidades internacionais como o Departamento de Estatística das Nações Unidas, a Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Económico (OCDE) e o Banco Mundial e com o apoio de um Grupo Técnico Consultivo constituído por peritos do sector WASH e peritos do sector financeiros. Com base na experiência do sector da saúde, a OMS elaborou este documento de orientação para ser usado pelas instituições envolvidas na monitoria e financiamento do sector WASH, a nível nacional. A abordagem foi aplicada com sucesso durante testes-piloto levados a cabo no Brasil, Gana e Marrocos, tendo as lições aprendidas sido incorporadas numa metodologia revista. A TrackFin será agora implementada noutros países e repetida no conjunto inicial de países, para se construir gradualmente um conjunto de dados comparáveis. A iniciativa TrackFin é gerida por um pequeno secretariado sediado na OMS. A sua finalidade é fornecer orientações metodológicas gerais para o trabalho a nível internacional, assim como formação para os países interessados em aplicar a metodologia. Em resposta às solicitações dos países, a OMS poderá dar apoio às partes interessadas nacionais que pretendam preparar Contas WASH. Para mais informações, contactar glaas@who.int. ii Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Índice Iniciativa TrackFin: uma breve visão geral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Agradecimentos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Lista de terminologia alternativa usada no Brasil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Lista de siglas e acrónimos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Introdução . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Por que é necessária uma metodologia para rastrear o financiamento ao sector WASH? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii O que é a Iniciativa TrackFin? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Objectivos do documento de orientação . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Por que motivo os países devem criar Contas WASH? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Público-alvo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Visão geral da metodologia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Estrutura do documento de orientação . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii 1 Passo 1. Iniciar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Mobilizar apoio político para as Contas WASH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Criar uma equipa forte para as Contas WASH apoiada por instituições . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Definir o âmbito das Contas WASH e principais questões políticas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Identificar requisitos dos dados e planificar o trabalho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4.1 Identificar dados disponíveis e definir um plano de colecta de dados . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4.2 Elaborar um orçamento e plano de trabalho detalhados . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2 Passo 2. Colecta de dados . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1 Definir os limites do sector WASH em termos de serviços . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.1.1 Fundamentos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.1.2 Classificação TrackFin dos serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.1.3 Tarefas a executar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.2 Mapear acordos de fornecimento de serviços e fluxos financeiros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.1 Fundamentos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.2 Classificação TrackFin dos usos, actores e fluxos financeiros do WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.3 Tarefas a executar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.3 Estimar os fluxos financeiros e os stocks de activos fixos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Fundamentos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.2 Metodologias de colecta de dados sobre fluxos financeiros e stocks de activos fixos . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Tarefas a executar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3 Passo 3. Analisar os dados e os resultados dos relatórios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.1 Compilar Contas WASH e indicadores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.1.1 Criar tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.1.2 Seleccionar tabelas apropriadas e verificar a consistência dos dados . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3.2 Preparar relatórios das Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.2.1 Fundamentos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.2.2 Relatório final das Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 3.3 Divulgar a análise de políticas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4 Passo 4. Preparar as próximas Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.1 Justificativa para novas rondas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2 Formular recomendações para as próximas Contas WASH no país . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 4.2.1 Plano para a fase seguinte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 4.2.2 Comunicar feedback sobre a metodologia proposta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Nota Metodológica n.º 1: Sistemas de classificação dos serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 NM 1.1. Sistemas actuais de classificação dos serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 NM 1.2. Abordagem para definir a classificação TrackFin dos serviços . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 NM 1.3. Propostas para uma melhor classificação de serviços de higiene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nota Metodológica n.º 2: Classificação dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH . . 46 NM 2.1. Classificação dos usos, fornecedores/prestadores de serviços e unidades financiadoras dos serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 NM 2.2. Classificação dos tipos de financiamento WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 iiiRastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Nota Metodológica n.º 3: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa e metodologias alternativas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 NM 3.1. Fundamentos para estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 NM 3.2. Usar uma abordagem económica como possível alternativa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 NM 4.1. Colectar dados por tipos de financiamento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 FT1: Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 FT2: Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 FT3: Transferências públicas domésticas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FT4: Transferências públicas internacionais . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 FT5: Transferências voluntárias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 FT6: Financiamento reembolsável . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 NM 4.2. Potenciais desafios e modo de os abordar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 NM 4.2.1 Disponibilidade de dados . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 NM 4.2.2 Alocação de tipos de financiamento por unidades financiadoras, usos e serviços WASH . . . . . 64 NM 4.2.3 Evitar a dupla contagem e verificar como os fluxos financeiros são canalizados em todo o sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Nota Metodológica n.º 5: Estimar os custos do fornecimento de serviços usando a Abordagem Baseada em Custos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 NM 5.1. Classificação dos custos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 NM 5.2. Potenciais fontes de dados sobre custos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 C1: Custos de investimento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C2: Custos de operação e manutenção . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C3: Custos de manutenção de grande capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 C4: Custos financeiros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 C5: Custos do apoio ou de assistência . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 C6: Impostos e taxas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 NM 6.1. Por que motivo é importante estimar os stocks de activos fixos? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 NM 6.2. Potenciais desafios metodológicos desta abordagem e meios de os superar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Nota Metodológica n.º 7: Tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 NM 7.1 Como são construídas as tabelas das Contas WASH? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 NM 7.2 O que são indicadores das Contas WASH? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Anexo A. Glossário . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Anexo B. Bibliografia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Websites relevantes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Lista das Figuras Fig. 1. Visão geral da metodologia proposta para rastrear o financiamento ao sector WASH a nível nacional . x Fig. 2. Disposições organizacionais para preparação das Contas WASH no âmbito da Iniciativa TrackFin . . . 3 Fig. 3. Contas WASH em relação às Contas SEEA-Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fig. 4. Mapeamento dos fluxos financeiros com base no consumo, produção e tipos de financiamento . . . 10 Fig. 5. Cadeia de valor dos serviços WASH ao abrigo does Objectivos do Desenvolvimento Sustentável (ODS) 12 Fig. 6. Mapeamento dos fluxos financeiros para o fornecimento de serviços WASH: exemplo ilustrativo . . . 22 Fig. 7. Metodologias para estimar as despesas no sector WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Fig. 8. Estructura para a institucionalização da produção e uso das Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Fig. 9. Fontes de financiamento do sector WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Fig. 10. Custos e receitas a calcular para Abordagem dos Fluxos Financeiros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Fig. 11. Custos e tipos de financiamento registados pela abordagem económica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Fig. 12. Exemplo de uma alocação de fluxo de financimento ás categorias de prestadores e serviços . . . . 65 Fig. 13. Exemplo ilustrativo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 iv Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Lista das Caixas Caixa 1. Sistema de Contas Nacionais (SCN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Caixa 2. Experiência-piloto da TrackFin em Marrocos: o papel do Comité de Direcção . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Caixa 3. Exemplos de disposições organizacionais dos exercícios-piloto da TrackFin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Caixa 4. Como podem os dados das Contas WASH ser usados para formulação de políticas baseadas em evidências? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Caixa 5. Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental para a Água (SEEA-Water) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Caixa 6. Exemplos de informação existente . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Caixa 7. Pontos-chave a integrar no relatório inicial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Caixa 8. Identificação e classificação dos actores e fluxos financeiros do sector WASH – o exemplo do Brasil 23 Caixa 9. Criar um repositório de fontes de dados . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Caixa 10. Exemplo de métodos de colecta de dados do exercício-piloto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Caixa 11. Ajustar as diferenças entre a Abordagem Baseada em Custos e a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Caixa 12. Preencher lacunas de informação: formular hipóteses e usar chaves de alocação . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Caixa 13. Principais indicadores das Contas Wash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Caixa 14. Metodologias de contabilidade e demonstrações financeiras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Caixa 15. Vantagens e desvantagens de usar a abordagem dos fluxos de caixa para estimar os fluxos financeiros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Caixa 16. Uma abordagem económica possível para estimar os fluxos financeiros no sector WASH . . . . . . 53 Caixa 17. Dados dos reguladores nacionais sobre as tarifas do fornecimento de serviços . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Caixa 18. Estimar o investimento familiar no auto-abastecimento (custos C1 para P5): Exemplos do exercício-piloto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Caixa 19. Estimar os custos das familias com o operação e a manutenção (custos C2 para P5) do auto- abastecimento: Exemplos do Brasil e Marrocos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Caixa 20. Estimar os empréstimos: Exemplos dos estudos dos países . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Caixa 21. Disponibilidade de dados em Gana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Caixa 22. Exemplo: Como usar chaves de repartição para afectar as despesas entre as categorias . . . . . . 65 Caixa 23. Estimar fluxos pelos usos: Tipos de financiamento (receitas) e despesa por tipo de uso . . . . . . . 66 Caixa 24. Exemplo: Como evitar a dupla contagem dos fluxos financeiros? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Caixa 25. Outros impostos do SCN sobre a produção . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Caixa 26. Exemplo do Brasil: A importância de rastrear os impostos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Caixa 27. Metodologias alternativas por valorizar os stocks de activos fixos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Caixa 28. Exemplo do Brasil: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos dos prestadores de serviços e das famílias 79 Lista das Tabelas Tabela 1. Classificação TrackFin dos serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Tabela 2. Classificações TrackFin para uso de serviços WASH, actores e tipos de financiamento do sector WASH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Tabela 3. Tabelas recomendadas para as Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Tabela 4. Ligação entre a informação das Contas WASH e as questões políticas do sector . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Tabela 5. Resumo dos principais sistemas de classificação internacionais de bens e serviços WASH . . . . . 41 Tabela 6. Semelhanças entre as classificações CPC, ISIC e COFOG ao longo da cadeia de valor da água e saneamento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Tabela 7. Classificação dos usuários dos serviços de água no sistema SEEA-Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Tabela 8. Classificação dos prestadores/fornecedores de serviços de água no sistema SEEA-Water . . . . . . 46 Tabela 9. Classificação dos sectores financiadores de água no sistema SEEA-Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Tabela 10. Classificação TrackFin dos tipos de financiamento WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Tabela 11. Colecta de dados sobre os tipos de financiamento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Tabela 12. Classificação TrackFin dos custos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Tabela 13. Colecta de dados sobre os custos do fornecimento de serviços . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Tabela 14. Terminologia usada no SCN para avaliar as alterações nos stocks de activos fixos . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Tabela 15. Classificações usadas nas Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Tabela 16. WA 1 (SxA) Despesa WASH por principais serviços WASH e área de serviços . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Tabela 17. WA 2 (SxU) Despesa WASH por tipo de uso e serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Tabela 18. WA 3 (SxP) Despesa WASH por tipo de prestador e serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Tabela 19. WA 4 (PxFT) Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e prestador WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Tabela 20. WA 5 (SxFT) Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e tipo de serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Tabela 21. WA 6 (SxFU) Despesa WASH por unidade financiadora e serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Tabela 22. WA 7 (PxFU) Despesa WASH por prestador WASH e unidade financiadora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Tabela 23. WA 8 (FTxFU) Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e unidade financiadora . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Tabela 24. WA 9 (CxP) Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e prestador WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Tabela 25. WA 10 (CxS) Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e serviços WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Tabela 26. WA 11 (ASxP) Stocks de activos fixos por tipo de prestador WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Tabela 27. Indicadores das Contas WASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 vRastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Agradecimentos Este relatório foi preparado por Sophie Trémolet e Marie-Alix Prat, da Trémolet Consulting Limited (Londres), sob a liderança e orientação de Bruce Gordon, Didier Allély-Fermé e Fiona Gore, assim como de Jaqueline Sims e Betsy Engebretson, da OMS. Esta é a segunda versão do documento de orientação, que incorpora as observações recebidas do Grupo Técnico Consultivo (TAG) para a Iniciativa TrackFin sobre a primeira versão e de todos os participantes no seminário inter-regional realizado em Rabat, em Marrocos, em Setembro de 2014. Estamos muito gratos pelas observações feitas durante as primeiras fases do exercício e no seminário inter-regional. Agradecemos à equipa local das Contas WASH, que conduziu os testes da primeira versão do documento de orientação, nomeadamente: • No Brasil: Lauseani Santoni e Marta Litwinczik (Ministério das Cidades), João Batista Peixoto, Consultor, Brasil, com o apoio do Teófilo Monteiro e Paulo Teixeira do PAHO/OMS; • Em Gana: Fred Addae e Suzzy Abaidoo, Ministério dos Recursos Hídricos, Obras e Habitação, Kweku Quansah, Ministério do Governo Local e Desenvolvimento Rural, Harold Esseku, Consultor, Phillipa Ross, Consultor, do Reino Unido, com o apoio de Akosua Kwakye, da OMS; • Em Marrocos: Samir Bensaid, Instituto da Água e do Saneamento, Mokhtar Jaait, ONEE-Branche Eau, Marrocos, Khalid Nadifi, Consultor, Marrocos, com o apoio de Hamed Bakir e Rola Aleman, da OMS. Juntamente com as partes interessadas nacionais dos três países, deram um valioso contribuição para a elaboração do primeiro conjunto de Contas WASH e apresentaram a sua opinião sobre a metodologia. Por outro lado, agradecemos aos membros da Comissão Consultiva Técnica pelas suas úteis sugestões, incluindo Gérard Payen, Conselho Consultivo do Secretário-Geral das Nações Unidas para a Água (UNSGAB), Dominick de Waal e Guy Hutton, Banco Mundial, Patricia Hernandez, OMS, Meera Mehta, CEPT, Índia, Catarina Fonseca, IRC, Richard Franceys, Universidade de Cranfield, Xavier Leflaive, Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Económico, Alessandra Alfieri e Ricardo Martinez-Lagunes, Departamento de Estatística das Nações Unidas. vi Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Lista de terminologia alternativa usada no Brasil Os termos portugueses utilizados neste documento são os mais usados em Moçambique. A lista abaixo dos termos equivalentes utilizados no Brasil destina-se a apoiar uma melhor compreensão do conteúdo do documento por usuários brasileiros. Termo(s) usado neste documento Termo usado no Brasil aceite aceita alocação direcionamento afectação atribução águas residuaism esgotos esgotos aluguer aluguel auto-abastecimento auto-fornecimento casas de banho banheiros camião-cisterna caminhão-pipa colectar, recolhar coletar Condutas (adutoras) dutos controlo dos caudais dos rios contrôle das vazões dos rios credores mutuantes doadores/financiadores financiadores equipa equipe furo poço fonte de agua ponto de água governação governanca incluindo inclusive inquérito pesquisa lamas fecais lodos fecais monitoria monitoramento orçamentação orçamento planificação planejamento planificar planejar rácio proporção stock estoque stock de activos fixos estoque de activosfixos telemóvel celular decisores políticos tomadores de decisão transporte de água em grandes volumes através de condutas adutoras transporte de água em larga escala através de tubulações Tippy tap torneiras com folgas usuários servidos usuários atendidos viiRastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Lista de siglas e acrónimos 3T Tarifas, Taxas e Transferências (fontes de financiamento) de OCDE AMCOW Conselho da Água dos Ministros Africanos APD Ajuda Pública ao Desenvolvimento CAD Comité de Ajuda ao Desenvolvimento (OCDE) CEPA Classificação das Actividades de Protecção Ambiental COFOG Classificação das Funções do Governo Contas WASH Contas da Água, Saneamento e Higiene CPC Classificação Central de Produtos CRS Sistema de Notificação de Credores GFSM Manual de Estatisticas das Finanças Governamentais GIFMIS Sistema Integrado do Gana para a Informação sobre Gestão Financeira GLAAS Análise e Avaliação do Saneamento e Água Potável a Nível Mundial da UN-Water IBGE Instituto Brasileiro de Geográfia e Estatística IBNET Rede Internacional de Referência para os Serviços de Água e Saneamento IBRD Banco Internacional para a Reconstrução e Desenvolvimento IEA Instituto Nacional da Água e Saneamento INE Instituto Nacional de Estatística IRC Centro Internacional de Água e Saneamento ISIC Classificação Internacional Industrial Normalizada de Todas as Actividades Económicas IVA Imposto sobre o valor acrescentado JMP Programa Conjunto da OMS/UNICEF para a monitoria para o abastecimento de Água e Saneamento MA Ministério da Água MEA Activos Equivalentes Modernos MF Ministério das Finanças MICS Pesquisas de Indicadores Múltiplos Agrupados da UNICEF ONEE Bureau Nacional da Electricidade e Água ONG Organização Não Governamental OBC Organizações de Base Comunitária OCDE Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Económico ODM Objectivos de Desenvolvimento do Milénio ODS Objectivos do Desenvolvimento Sustentável Ofwat Regular econômica do sector de água na Inglaterra e País de Gales OMS Organização Mundial da Saúde PER Análise da Despesa Pública PIB Produto Interno Bruto PPP íridade do Poder de Compra PRSP Documentos de Estratégia de Redução da Pobreza SCN Sistema de Contas Nacionais SEEA Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental SEEA-Water Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental para a Água SFP Plano Financeiro Estratégico SHA System of Health Accounts (Sistema de Contas da Saúde) SNA System of National Accounts (Sistema de Contas Nacionais) SNIS Sistema Nacional de Informação sobre Saneamento SWA Saneamento e Água Para Todos UIS Instituto de Estatística da UNESCO UN Nações Unidas UNSD Divisão de Estatística das Nações Unidas UNICEF Fundo das Nações Unidas para a Infância USAID Agência dos Estados Unidos para o Desenvolvimento Internacional WASH Água, Saneamento e Higiene viii Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Introdução O presente Documento de Orientação estabelece uma metodologia para identificar e rastrear o financiamento para o sector de água, saneamento e higiene (WASH). Designado por Contas WASH, a sua finalidade é ajudar os países a rastrear o financiamento para o sector numa base regular e comparável. Espera-se que os indicadores retirados do exercício ajudem ajudem na tomada de decisões baseadas em dados concretos.. Embora o principal objectivo seja reunir Contas WASH a nível nacional, a metodologia pode ser aplicada a vários níveis, incluindo o nível regional ou municipal. Nos próximos anos serão indubitavelmente necessários novos desenvolvimentos metodológicos, à medida que mais países forem aplicando a metodologia. A ambição de longo prazo da iniciativa TrackFin (rastrear o financiamento) é desenvolver uma abordagem comum, para obter dados financeiros confiáveis. Isso permitirá uma melhor tomada de decisões a nível nacional e facilitará estudos comparativos dentro dos países e entre eles. Por que é necessária uma metodologia para rastrear o financiamento ao sector WASH? Esta metodologia baseia-se nos resultados do Documento de Trabalho da OMS e da UN-Water GLAAS “Rastrear os fluxos financeiros nacionais para o saneamento, higiene e água potável” (Trémolet & Rama, 2012), publicado em Julho de 2012. O documento salientava que é essencial existir um financiamento eficaz para a água, saneamento e higiene, para que seja possível fornecer e sustentar os serviços necessários para salvar dois milhões de vidas por ano. Até à data, a limitada disponibilidade de dados financeiros, juntamente com sistemas inadequados de monitoria, tem impedido a capacidade dos países para avaliar os progressos e melhorar o seu desempenho. O documento de trabalho concluía que o actual entendimento sobre os fluxos financeiros para o sector WASH, a nível nacional, é limitado. Neste contexto, existe um acordo comum de que um melhor entendimento do financiamento do sector WASH, a nível nacional, é fundamental para a elaboração e a implementação das políticas. É igualmente importante encorajar uma melhor e mais equitativa utilização dos fundos existentes e rastrear o financiamento adicional. Dadas as actuais insuficiências dos dados financeiros no sector, existe o consenso de que estamos perante uma tarefa difícil e um desafio. Mesmo quando existem dados, poderá não ser possível um nível adequado de desagregação. É necessária, portanto, uma metodologia que possa ser usada por um grande número de países. A necessidade de uma boa informação financeira no sector foi confirmada ao mais alto nível político, nomeadamente em reuniões de alto nível organizadas pelo programa Saneamento e Água para Todos (SWA), em Washington DC, em 2012 e 2014. Nessas ocasiões, vários países membros do SWA comprometeram-se a melhorar o rastreio do financiamento no sector WASH. O que é a Iniciativa TrackFin? Esses apelos à acção constituíram o fundamento para o lançamento de Iniciativa TrackFin do sector WASH, em Agosto de 2012. A sua finalidade é desenvolver e aplicar, ao longo do tempo, uma metodologia comum para rastrear o financiamento para o sector WASH. Este documento de orientação apresenta a metodologia TrackFin, na sua forma actual, com base nos resultados-piloto obtidos no Brasil, Gana e Marrocos, em 2014. A TrackFin é actualmente gerida por um secretariado instalado na OMS, em nome do programa UN-Water. A TrackFin está intimamente ligada ao relatório do GLAAS, que rastrea as contribuições destinadas ao sector, incluindo contribuições financeiras. A iniciativa será desenvolvida conjuntamente com instituições líderes no sector e peritos envolvidos no apoio financeiro, tais como o Banco Mundial, a Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Económico (OCDE) ou a Divisão de Estatística das Nações Unidas (UNSD). O trabalho prosseguirá repetidamente, começando com objectivos simples e desenvolvendo abordagens mais complexas, à medida que mais países adoptem a metodologia e a aplica-le regularmente. ixRastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Objectivos do documento de orientação O presente documento de orientação estabelece uma metodologia para ajudar os países a produzirem Contas WASH. A finalidade é o rastreio de todos os investimentos no sector WASH por parte de entidades económicas, incluindo governos e instituições públicas, organizações públicas e privadas, Organização Não Governamental (ONG), fundações, doadores nacionais e internacionais, investidores e famílias. A metodologia permite aos países responderem a quatro perguntas fundamentais: • Qual a despesa total no sector WASH? • Como é que os fundos são distribuídos aos diferentes serviços WASH e quais os tipos de despesas? • Quem paga pelos serviços WASH e quanto pagam? • Que entidades são os principais canais de financiamento do sector WASH? Há perguntas mais específicas sobre políticas que podem ser respondidas conforme o nível de detalhes gerados. Os dados podem, por exemplo, ser desagregados para avaliar a distribuição das despesas WASH ao nível regional e para examinar questões de equidade. A identificação rápida das questões específicas que os tomadores de decisão políticos pretendam abordar é fundamental para que os dados produzidos possam ser tão relevantes quanto possível para as políticas e capazes de fundamentar decisões específicas de financiamento. Por que motivo os países devem criar Contas WASH? As Contas WASH podem ajudar os tomadores de decisão políticos do país a reunir valiosa informação sobre o actual financiamento do sector, rastrear a sua evolução no tempo e comparar as despesas noutros sectores e noutros países. Essas contas fornecem informação detalhada sobre as origens do financiamento para o sector WASH e sobre o modo como ele é utilizado. Os vários benefícios desta abordagem são: • Maior transparência no financiamento do sector WASH: as Contas WASH permitem o rastreio das despesas ao longo do tempo e a comparação das despesas com as metas do sector ou metas noutros sectores ou países; • Capacidade de monitorar a alocação de fundos aos subsectores e regiões geográficas, de acordo com a necessidade e de modo equitativo; • Capacidade de monitorar a implementação de uma estratégia de financiamento para o sector, incentivar novos investimentos e apoiar as instituições responsáveis por canalizar os fundos para o sector; e • Capacidade de verificar se os compromissos assumidos pelos intervenientes no sector foram cumpridos. As Contas WASH podem igualmente constituir a base para uma comunicação robusta e transparente entre os intervenientes do sector e o público em geral, com relação aos meios financeiros direcionados no sector de águas. Isso facilita a comparação entre o investimento financeiro no sector e os resultados obtidos. Público-alvo O documento de orientação foi elaborado para os governos e seus conselheiros, especialmente nos países de renda média e baixa. O seu objectivo é orientar a preparação das Contas WASH, para reforçar a formulação de políticas nacionais e facilitar a elaboração de relatórios internacionais, tais como o relatório GLAAS. As Contas WASH, a nível nacional, poderão igualmente interessar aos doadores bilaterais, instituições multilaterais, ONGs e organizações filantrópicas que buscam dados financeiros para apoiar a planificação de programas a níveis nacional e internacional. A metodologia destina-se aos países que produzem Contas WASH pela primeira vez, além daqueles que já as prepararam. Neste último caso, as equipas das Contas WASH são fortemente encorajadas a inspirar-se no trabalho já existente, especialmente no que diz respeito ao mapeamento do sector, identificando as necessidades e as fontes de dados e melhorando a metodologia para estimar as despesas. As Notas Metodológicas no final do presente documento de orientação contêm informação detalhada sobre o aperfeiçoamento da metodologia ao longo do tempo. x Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Visão geral da metodologia A metodologia é aplicada em vários passos, como se mostra na Figura 1, abaixo. PASSOS REALIZAÇÕES REUNIÕES DOS GRUPOS DE PARTES INTERESSADAS NACIONAIS 1. Iniciar 1.1. Mobilizar apoio político para as Contas WASH 1.2. Criar uma equipa forte para as Contas WASH apoiada por instituições 1.3. Definir o âmbito e principais questões políticas das Contas WASH 1.4. Identificar requisitos de dados e plano de trabalho 2. Colectar dados 2.1. Definir os limites do sector WASH em termos de serviços 2.2. Mapear os acordos de prestação de serviços e os fluxos financeiros 2.3. Colectar dados sobre os fluxos financeiros e stocks de activos fixos 3. Analisar os dados e os resultados dos relatórios 3.1. Compilar Contas WASH e indicadores 3.2. Preparar um relatório das Contas WASH 3.3. Dvulgar os resultados aos decisores políticos 4. Preparar as próximas Contas WASH Relatório inicial Reunião inicial Relatório provisório Reunião de validação das Contas WASH Relatório final Informações resumidas sobre as políticas Workshop de divulgação do sector Figura 1. Visão geral da metodologia proposta para rastrear o financiamento ao sector WASH a nível nacional O relatório final das Contas WASH deve conter, aproximadamente, 60 páginas (podendo ser anexadas informações relevantes), incluindo um conjunto de 11 tabelas de Contas WASH e um resumo. O relatório deverá cobrir três aspectos principais: • Resultados da análise; • Recomendações de políticas com base nos resultados; e • Recomendações ao Secretariado da OMS e ao grupo de peritos sobre melhorias ou alterações à metodologia mundial, com base nos desafios encontrados e nas medidas tomadas para os superar. Os países são encorajados a reunir os dados existentes, se possível, mas quando estes forem frágeis ou não existirem, as lacunas deverão ser preenchidas por estimativas rigorosas, com base numa combinação de dados reais e pressupostos transparentes. Estes pressupostos podem ser aperfeiçoados em exercícios subsequentes, para melhorar gradualmente o nível de precisão das estimativas financeiras. A metodologia baseia-se nos sistemas internacionais existentes para monitorar as despesas. Estes incluem o Sistema de Contas Nacionais (SCN) (ver Caixa 1, abaixo) e sistemas específicos dos sectores, como o Sistema de Contas da Saúde (SHA) para o sector da saúde, ou as Contas de Água para o sector de águas, em geral. A metodologia implementa, portanto, o Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental para o Quadro da Água (SEEA-Water), concebido pelo UNSD. Ver Passo 1.3, Caixa 5, para mais informações sobre este sistema. xiRastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Caixa 1. Sistema de Contas Nacionais (SCN) O Sistema de Contas Nacionais (SCN) é uma estrutura alargada para uma contabilidade económica nacional. Este sistema foi inicialmente adoptado pelas Nações Unidas, em 1952, tendo sido, desde então, revisto e actualizado. As regras e a estrutura do SCN estão contidas num manual intitulado “Sistema de Contas Nacionais 2008”. Trata-se do conjunto de recomendações-padrão internacionalmente acordadas para compilar medidas da actividade económica. O SCN compreende um conjunto de contas macroeconómicas coerentes, consistentes e integradas, com base em conceitos, definições, classificações e regras de contabilidade internacionalmente acordadas. Apresenta uma visão geral dos processos económicos, demonstrando o modo como a produção é distribuída entre os consumidores, empresas, governos e outros países. Mostra como os rendimentos originários da produção, modificados por taxas e transferências, são transferidos para estes grupos e como eles atribuem esses fluxos ao consumo, poupanças e investimentos. Apresenta igualmente as definições subjacentes a conceitos como o produto interno bruto (PIB). As áreas específicas de aprendizagem e as referências a recursos adicionais ou Notas Metodológicas, são realçadas ao longo do texto, usando os seguintes símbolos. Aprender com as experiências dos países: a metodologia foi inicialmente testada e subsequentemente revista no Brasil, Gana e Marrocos. Noutros países, podem ter sido usadas abordagens semelhantes. As aprendizagens feitas com estas experiências são realçadas em caixas que mostram a bandeira do respectivo país. Aprender com o sector da saúde: a metodologia inspira-se muito no Sistema de Contas da Saúde, desenvolvido nos últimos 20 anos no sector da saúde e actualmente usado regularmente por mais de 100 países, em todo o mundo. As aprendizagens feitas com o SHA são apresentadas numa caixa com este símbolo. Coordenar com a SEEA-Water: a TrackFin está a ser desenvolvida em paralelo com o início do uso do sistema SEEA-Water de contabilidade do sector de águas, cujo objectivo é desenvolver Contas da Água abrangentes ao longo do tempo, acompanhando tanto o fluxo físico (hidrológico) como financeiro. As Contas WASH podem ser consideradas um subconjunto dessas Contas da Água mais abrangentes. Ao desenvolver as Contas SEEA-Water, deve-se enconrajar a coordenação das duas metodologias e o diálogo entre as equipas. As caixas com este símbolo indicam as áreas em que a metodologia SEEA-Water deve ser considerada, para melhorar a harmonização. Potencial desafio: a criação de Contas WASH poderá levantar alguns problemas específicos. Esses problemas, assim como as suas potenciais soluções, são realçados em caixas com este símbolo. Notas metodológicas: estas notas fornecem informações mais detalhadas sobre a metodologia, propondo abordagens alternativas para questões específicas e apresentando sugestões para futuro desenvolvimento. Aparecem como anexos ao documento de orientação. Recursos: estes recursos adicionais podem ser utilizados pela partes interessadas que procuram aplicar a metodologia TrackFin na preparação das Contas WASH. Incluem instrumentos práticos, os produtos existentes de anteriores fases da Iniciativa TrackFin e um resumo da política das Contas WASH, para fins de informação. Estão disponíveis no website da TrackFin. xii Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Estrutura do documento de orientação O documento de orientação conduz o leitor através de cada passo da metodologia proposta. Esses passos são os seguintes: • Passo 1. Iniciar: estabelece os passos iniciais necessários para começar a preparar as Contas WASH; • Passo 2. Colectar dados: inclui orientações sobre a colecta e organização dos dados necessários, recorrendo a vários métodos capazes de reflectir as diferentes circunstâncias; • Passo 3. Analisar os dados e comunicar os resultados: estabelece a forma como as Contas WASH e indicadores associados devem ser compilados e fornece orientações sobre o modo como os dados podem ser interpretados e utilizados para a elaboração de políticas; e • Passo 4. Preparar as próximas Contas WASH: resume aquilo que a equipa das Contas WASH deverá fazer para retirar e documentar as lições aprendidas, partilhar as reacções à metodologia internacional e preparar a ronda seguinte. As secções são apresentadas pela ordem correcta de implementação. A equipa das Contas WASH deverá familiarizar- se devidamente com o documento de orientação, antes de tomar qualquer acção, de modo a certificar-se de que compreende todo o processo. Para complementar as orientações aqui apresentadas, foi elaborada uma série de Notas Metodológicas. Estas Notas são parte integrante do documento de orientação, fornecendo mais detalhes e metodologias alternativas para áreas específicas, como se mostra na caixa abaixo. O Anexo A inclui um glossário dos principais termos usados neste guia, enquanto o Anexo B contém uma lista de referências e websites úteis. Nota Metodológica n.º 1: Sistemas de classificação dos serviços WASH Nota Metodológica n.º 2: Classificação dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento do sector WASH Nota Metodológica n.º 3: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa e metodologias alternativas Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento Nota Metodológica n.º 5: Estimar os custos do fornecimento de serviços usando a Abordagem Baseada em Custos Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos Nota Metodológica n.º 7: Tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH Há outros recursos disponíveis no website da TrackFin, para apoiar a preparação das Contas WASH e que são apresentados na caixa abaixo. Nota política: Como podem as Contas WASH apoiar a elaboração de políticas? Esta é uma leitura essencial para qualquer país que esteja a considerar a criação de Contas WASH e que procure entender melhor o seu uso e benefícios. Apresenta um contexto adicional sobre o modo como as Contas WASH podem ajudar na elaboração das políticas; Visão geral da metodologia. Esta rápida breve visão geral da metodologia pode ser usada pelos países interessados em aplicar a metodologia e pelas partes interessadas nacionais que participam em partes do processo. Entre estas, podem- se contar as entidades que fornecem dados ou recebem os resultados, mas que não necessitam de conhecimentos aprofundados sobre toda a metodologia; Um resumo apresentando os resultados sucintos dos exercícios-piloto realizados no Brasil Gana e Marrocos. Esse r333 Resumo dos resultados da Iniciativa TrackFin nos três países-piloto, com apresentações em Powerpoint; Termos de Referência padrão para o dinamizador e Ponto Focal da TrackFin, para o grupo nacional de partes interessadas e para a equipa de Contas WASH; Esboços para os relatórios provisórios e finais das Contas WASH; e Um questionário concebido para receber feedback sobre a metodologia e quaisquer outros pontos para futuros desenvolvimentos metodológicos identificados no decurso do processo. 1Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional 1 Passo 1 – Iniciar Passo 1 – Tarefas a executar • Mobilizar apoio político para as Contas WASH – Mobilizar o apoio dos altos funcionários do alto nivel do governo – Identificar um dinamizador nacional e um Ponto Focal nacional das Contas WASH – Constituir um grupo de partes interessadas a nível nacional, para supervisionar a colecta de dados e prestar apoio político ao projecto • Criar uma equipa forte de Contas WASH, apoiada por instituições nacionais • Identificar o âmbito geral e as principais questões de políticas para as Contas WASH – Organizar uma reunião de arranque com os membros do grupo de partes interessadas do nível nacional – Chegar a acordo sobre uma lista de questões políticas prioritárias a que o exercício deverá dar resposta – Definir um período de tempo para a colecta de informação (de preferência, 2 a 3 anos) – Chegar a acordo sobre o âmbito geográfico do exercício e o nível de desagregação geográfica • Identificar os dados necessários e planificar o trabalho – Identificar os dados disponíveis e definir um plano de colecta de dados – Elaborar um orçamento detalhado e um plano de trabalho para a colecta e a análise dos dados. 1.1 Mobilizar apoio político para as Contas WASH A produção de Contas WASH beneficiará mais os países se os resultados forem usados pelos decisores políticos e partes interessadas do sector. A preparação das Contas WASH deverá, por isso, realizar-se apenas em resposta a uma solicitação política claramente expressa. O primeiro passo consiste em mobilizar apoio para a preparação das Contas WASH por parte de altas entidades governamentais, tais como os ministérios encarregados dos serviços WASH ou o Ministério das Finanças. Isso é essencial para garantir o êxito do exercício e para ultrapassar potenciais dificuldades técnicas, tais como a limitada disponibilidade de informação, fracos sistemas de informação ou barreiras internas a uma maior transparência. Para esse fim, é preciso identificar um dinamizador da TrackFin no seio dos ministérios responsáveis pelo sector WASH. Essa pessoa conduzirá o exercício e designará um Ponto Focal da TrackFin, que ficará encarregado de criar a equipa das Contas WASH e supervisionar o processo das Contas WASH (ver o Passo 1.2 abaixo). Esse dinamizador será, normalmente, alguém que tenha expressado a intenção do governo de levar a cabo a Iniciativa TrackFin, quer directamente, quer em resposta a um convite do secretariado da TrackFin da OMS ou de outro órgão. O dinamizador será responsável por obter apoio para a preparação das Contas WASH ao mais alto nível do governo. Deverá explicar claramente os benefícios esperados da execução do exercício aos decisores políticos de sectores relevantes, tais como os ministérios encarregados dos serviços WASH, o Ministério das Finanças e o Instituto Nacional de Estatística. Nota política: Como podem as Contas WASH apoiar a elaboração de políticas? Esta nota estabelece mais detalhadamente os potenciais benefícios das Contas WASH para os tomadores de decisão políticos. É importante que seja lida por qualquer país que esteja actualmente a considerar a criação de Contas WASH e que procure entender melhor os seus usos e benefícios. Está disponível no website da TrackFin. O dinamizador da TrackFin deverá, posteriormente, convocar uma reunião do grupo de partes interessadas nacionais para supervisionar a produção das Contas. Esse grupo será responsável por nomear o Ponto Focal da TrackFin e a equipa das Contas WASH. O grupo identificará as questões de política a que as Contas WASH deverão responder, definirá o seu âmbito, facilitará a colecta de dados, analisará os resultados e fornecerá feedback ao Ponto Focal, em momentos críticos da análise. De preferência, o grupo de partes interessadas nacionais deverá ser presidido pelo dinamizador da TrackFin. 2 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS O grupo de partes interessadas nacionais é fundamental para o processo. Fornece o apoio político necessário e pode ajudar a garantir a participação das principais partes interessadas com os dados necessários para a compilação das Contas WASH. Serve igualmente para reforçar os laços entre o processo político e as Contas WASH, institucionalizando a sua preparação, para que o exercício possa ser repetido regularmente. Este grupo de partes interessadas nacionais pode ser criado a diferentes níveis. Poderá incluir um comité de direcção da TrackFin criada ao nível da tomada de decisões, como foi o caso em Marrocos (ver Caixa 2. Experiência-piloto da TrackFin em Marrocos: o papel do Comité de Direcção). Poderá também incluir um grupo mais amplo de partes interessadas, incluindo todas as partes que possam fornecer dados para o exercício e utilizar os resultados. As decisões finais sobre o grupo de partes interessadas nacionais dependem do número de instituições envolvidas no exercício e do nível de participação necessário, para assegurar o envolvimento dos principais actores institucionais. O grupo de partes interessadas nacionais deverá, de preferência, incluir representantes dos ministérios encarregados dos serviços WASH, o Ministério das Finanças e o Departamento de Estatística, assim como os principais serviços públicos, reguladores, doadores, ONGs e fundações activas no sector WASH. Na medida do possível, o grupo deverá inspirar-se nas plataformas existentes de coordenação do sector WASH, a nível do país. Caixa 2. Experiência-piloto da TrackFin em Marrocos: o papel do Comité de Direcção Em Marrocos, o Instituto Nacional de Água e Saneamento (IEA), instalado no Gabinete Nacional da Electricidade e Água (ONEE), actuou como Ponto Focal da TrackFin para a produção das Contas WASH, em 2014. Para obter um compromisso de alto nível de todas as instituições do sector com os objectivos da TrackFin, o IEA criou um Comité de Direcção, a nível do director. Isso revelou-se muito importante para obter apoio e facilitar a colecta de dados. O Comité de Direcção era constituído por directores de todas as principais instituições, incluindo o Ministério de Energia, Minas, Água e Ambiente, Ministério da Saúde, Ministério do Interior, Ministério das Finanças, Ministério dos Assuntos Gerais e Governação, Alta Comissão do Planificação, ONEE e IEA. Por outro lado, foi criada uma comissão técnica, com membros das mesmas instituições, para aconselhar a equipa das Contas WASH em questões de metodologia e colecta de dados. Marrocos beneficiou do facto de ter uma forte participação de partes interessadas, desde o início. A forte ligação entre o IEA e as partes interessadas nacionais do sector foi muito benéfica para criar uma coordenação de tão alto nível. Isso significou que a equipa das Contas WASH pôde recolher informação rapidamente e conseguiu completar o exercício em cinco meses. No website da TrackFin são apresentados os termos de referencia padrão para o dinamizador da TrackFin e o Ponto Focal das Contas WASH, assim como para o grupo de partes interessadas nacionais. Além disso, um pacote de informação sobre a TrackFin e as Contas WASH (com base nos recursos disponíveis no website da TrackFin) deve ser apresentado para divulgação junto das altas entidades governamentais e principais partes interessadas do sector. Isso aumentará a sensibilização para os benefícios de rastrear o financiamento WASH e o modo como os produtos podem ser usados para as políticas. 1.2 Criar uma equipa forte para as Contas WASH apoiada por instituições O papel do Ponto Focal é organizar e coordenar a equipa das Contas WASH. Esta equipa vai colectar e analisar os dados e preparar todos os produtos. Como o Ponto Focal reporta ao dinamizador, deve, de preferência, ser um funcionário do Ministério, principalmente o responsável pelos serviços WASH. Em alternativa, o Ponto Focal poderá ficar instalado numa instituição pública consagrada de política ou de investigação. A equipa das Contas WASH deve ser, de preferência, constituída por um número relativamente pequeno de pessoas de especialidades diferentes e complementares, incluindo peritos técnicos e políticos do sector WASH e representantes do Instituto Nacional de Estatística. Todos eles deverão ter boas competências de análise e comunicação. Alguns membros da equipa das Contas WASH deverão ser, preferencialmente, funcionários do governo, para garantir a capacitação a nível nacional e a apropriação do exercício por parte do país. Essa equipa pode executar, ela própria, o trabalho ou obter o apoio de um consultor nacional, que passará também a fazer parte integrante da equipa das Contas WASH. Foi este o caso no exercício-piloto do Brasil (ver Caixa 3 abaixo). 3Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Confiar o trabalho a consultores externos parece ser uma forma eficaz de garantir que os funcionários públicos não sejam desviados das suas responsabilidades diárias, em especial porque a colecta de dados deve ser feita, de preferência, num curto período de tempo. Esta abordagem, porém, requer consultores que mantenham um contacto íntimo com a equipa das Contas WASH, a fim de minimizar qualquer risco de que as competências e os conhecimentos técnicos adquiridos durante o processo apenas beneficiem o consultor e não sejam institucionalizadas para benefício do país. A equipa das Contas WASH deve ser informada pelo Ponto Focal e, se necessário, pelo Secretariado da TrackFin. Este último pode também ser contactado para o controlo de qualidade contínuo e para assistência na implementação da metodologia. A Figura 2, abaixo, resume as disposições organizacionais necessárias para a preparação das Contas WASH e os Termos de Referência necessários para cada nível de intervenção. NÍVEL DE INTERVENÇÃO RESOURCES AVAILABLE Nível de intervenção Secretariado da OMS para a TrackFin Apoio e aprendizagem Nível de intervenção Grupo de partes interessadas nacionais • Termos de referencia do grupo de partes interessadas • Termos de referencia do dinamizador e do Ponto Focal Nível de intervenção Equipa das Contas WASH • Termos de referencia da Equipa das Contas WASH Dinamizador da TrackFin Ponto Focal da TrackFin Nomeiahg Reporta Figura 2. Disposições organizacionais para a preparação das Contas WASH no âmbito da Iniciativa TrackFin Caixa 3. Exemplos de disposições organizacionais dos exercícios-piloto da TrackFin No Brasil, o dinamizador da TrackFin foi o Director da Coordenação Institucional do Ministério das Cidades — o principal Ministério responsável pelos serviços de água e saneamento. Ele nomeou para Ponto Focal o gestor do Sistema Nacional de Informação sobre Saneamento (SNIS), localizado no Secretariado Nacional para o Ambiente do Ministério das Cidades. A equipa das Contas WASH era constituída por um consultor local e um funcionário do Secretariado Nacional para o Ambiente. Em Gana, o dinamizador da TrackFin foi o Director da Água do Ministério dos Recursos Hídricos, Obras Públicas e Habitação. Ele nomeou para Ponto Focal um funcionário do Ministério da Água. A equipa das Contas WASH foi dirigida por um consultor local, tendo recebido o apoio do Ponto Focal. Em Marrocos, o dinamizador da TrackFin foi o Director do Instituto Internacional de Água e Saneamento (ONEE-IEA), um instituto de investigação e ensino instalado no ONEE, o principal fornecedor de serviços de água e saneamento. Nomeou para Ponto Focal o seu Chefe de Investigação e Desenvolvimento. A equipa das Contas WASH integrava um consultor local e recebeu o apoio de uma comissão técnica constituída por gestores do IEA, Ministério da Saúde, Ministério do Interior, Alto Comissariado do Planificação, Ministério das Finanças, Ministério dos Assuntos Gerais e Governação e ONEE. A comissão técnica, que era específica do país, foi concebida como braço executivo da Comité de Direcção (ver Caixa 2. Experiência-piloto da TrackFin em Marrocos: o papel do Comité de Direcção). Os termos de referencia padrão recomendados para a equipa das Contas WASH são apresentados no website da TrackFin. 4 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS 1.3 Definir o âmbito das Contas WASH e principais questões políticas Para garantir que os produtos servirão como evidências para a tomada de decisões, as Contas WASH têm de ser capazes de responder a questões colocadas pelos decisores políticos. O Ponto Focal para o exercício deve começar por procurar opiniões independentes ou, se possível, organizando uma acção de formação para obter reacções sobre as questões abaixo colocadas. Isso ajudará a definir o exercício e constituir a base para a redacção de Termos de Referência mais orientados para a equipa das Contas WASH (para mais informações, ver Passo 1.4). No mínimo, as Contas WASH deverão poder responder a quatro questões principais: • Qual o total das despesas no sector? • Como são os fundos distribuídos entre os diferentes serviços WASH e tipos de despesas? • Quem paga os serviços WASH e quanto? • Que entidades são os principais financiadores do sector WASH e qual a sua quota no total das despesas? Os países deverão desenvolver todas as tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH necessários para responder a estas quatro questões básicas. Para além das prioridades de nível nacional, isso também será útil para estabelecer referências internacionais. As formas de usar a informação estão resumidas na Caixa 4 abaixo e são debatidas mais detalhadamente, com exemplos relevantes, na Nota de Política que a acompanha. Os indicadores necessários para responder a essas questões estão especificados no Passo 3. Caixa 4. Como podem os dados das Contas WASH ser usados para formulação de políticas baseadas em evidências? As Contas WASH podem contribuir de modo significativo para a formulação de políticas baseadas em evidências. Podem ajudar na identificação das necessidades e prioridades de financiamento e na concepção de uma estratégia WASH, para planificar as despesas a nível nacional, com base nas prioridades acordadas. O rastreamento regular das despesas reais com os serviços WASH, ao longo do tempo, pode ajudar a monitorar a eficiência dessas políticas e assegurar a alocação de financiamento com base em evidências. • Os dados sobre o total das despesas no sector permitem monitorar as tendências do financiamento, ao longo do tempo, e comparar o financiamento do sector WASH com outros países ou sectores. A informação sobre o modo como as despesas WASH variam com o tempo e a comparação com as despesas de outros países e sectores pode ser usada para aumentar o conhecimento sobre os níveis de financiamento necessários para atingir as metas estabelecidas. Em fases posteriores, os dados sobre os contribuições financeiros em relação aos produtos e resultados podem ser usados para estimar a relação custo-benefício do financiamento do sector. • A informação sobre o modo de distribuição das despesas do sector WASH entre as regiões, zonas urbanas e rurais, subsectores, serviços, prestadores de serviços e tipos de despesas pode ser usada da seguinte forma: – Identificar desigualdades na distribuição das despesas entre as regiões e os grupos populacionais; – Mudar a alocação de fundos aos subsectores, serviços, prestadores de serviços e programas; – Planificar políticas e estratégias nacionais de WASH; e – Monitorar os resultados e a eficácia das políticas. • A informação sobre o valor pago pelos serviços WASH e a quem é pago pode ser usada do seguinte modo: – Definir as estratégias de financiamento, tais como o uso de subsídios específicos, ou rastrear os fundos privados e monitorar a eficácia dessas estratégias ao longo do tempo; – Coordenar a ajuda dos doadores e as transferências internacionais; e – Rastrear os compromissos e as metas expressas em termos financeiros. Os dados sobre as despesas reais com o sector WASH podem também ser usados para rastrear os compromissos dos governos e doadores relativamente ao financiamento do sector. Há vários governos que assumiram compromissos com o sector WASH a nível internacional. Por exemplo, a declaração de eThekwini de 2008 comprometia os países africanos signatários a criarem dotações orçamentais específicas do sector público para os programas de higiene e saneamento. Compilar este tipo de indicadores numa base consistente, abrangente e comparável é fundamental para rastrear a implementação desses compromissos. Além disso, as ONGs e fundações fazem, frequentemente, contribuições significativas que não são actualmente acompanhados; registar esses fluxos nas Contas WASH facilitaria a comparação com as despesas das famílias e dos governos. • A informação sobre o modo como e através de quem o financiamento é canalizado pode constituir informação essencial sobre quem controla o dinheiro e sobre quem será preciso exercer influência para conseguir a realocação das despesas. Por exemplo, os governos locais desempenham, muitas vezes, um importante papel na canalização de fundos para os níveis locais. Recolher dados sobre as despesas dos governos locais com o sector WASH pode ajudar a avaliar o desempenho das políticas de descentralização do financiamento. 5Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Os países são livres de identificar outras questões políticas para as quais precisem de respostas; isso implica a identificação de outros indicadores específicos. É essencial definir o nível apropriado de desagregação de dados no início, se quisermos que os resultados sirvam de base ao processo de tomada de decisões. Se, por exemplo, a distribuição regional das despesas em uma área que requeira atenção das políticas, as Contas WASH poderão ser concebidas para analisar a quota de despesas WASH por região ou grupo populacional. Informação deste tipo pode ser usada para identificar se as desigualdades entre os grupos populacionais e as regiões poderão ser atenuadas, redirecionando as transferências públicas às zonas mais vulneráveis. A colecta de dados e a produção das Contas WASH devem, por isso, focar as questões mais críticas para o país em causa, assegurando assim a melhor relação custo-eficácia do exercício. Exemplos de potenciais questões políticas que as Contas WASH podem abordar encontram-se, mais detalhadamente, na Nota Política “Como podem as Contas WASH apoiar a formulação de políticas?” Nota Metodológica n.º 7: Tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH . Esta nota contém uma lista de tabelas e indicadores que podem ser criados para abordar questões políticas. O grupo de partes interessadas nacionais e a equipa das Contas WASH deverão familiarizar-se com essas tabelas, antes de iniciarem o trabalho. As questões de política definidas orientarão o âmbito do exercício das Contas WASH e o nível de detalhar necessário para elementos específicos de análise. É, por isso, fundamental chegar a acordo sobre essas questões, antes de definir um plano de colecta de dados. Para tal, o Ponto Focal nacional das Contas WASH deverá convocar uma reunião de arranque com o grupo de partes interessadas, a nível nacional. Nessa reunião, os participantes deverão chegar a acordo sobre uma lista de questões políticas prioritárias e o nível de detalhar necessário para a análise. Por exemplo, será suficiente recolher informação separadamente sobre água, saneamento e higiene, ou será necessário uma discriminação mais detalhada das despesas por tipo de serviço de saneamento? A equipa das Contas WASH deverá também definir o calendário do exercício. Relativamente aos dados sobre o fluxo financeiro, será preferível recolher dados durante um período de, pelo menos, dois ou três exercícios financeiros completos, em vez de apenas um ano. Para garantir a maior validade para subsequentes decisões políticas, devem usar-se os dados mais recentes. Finalmente, para evitar duplicações, o grupo de partes interessadas nacionais deverá identificar outras iniciativas relacionadas, com as quais a colaboração deverá ser encorajada. Alguns países, por exemplo, poderão encontrar- se no processo de prepação das Contas Águas, com base na metodologia SEEA-Water (ver Caixa 5 abaixo). Se for esse o caso, as duas iniciativas deverão procurar harmonizar metodologias, na medida do possível, e colaborar na colecta de dados. A iniciativa TrackFin rastreia especificamente os financiamentos para os serviços de água, saneamento e higiene do que para o sector água como um todo. As Contas WASH podem, portanto, ser vistas como um subconjunto as Contas Águas, com base na SEEA-Water. Como esta última pode revelar-se algo complexa, para ser usada pelos profissionais do sector da água, seria aconselhável identificar que fase de desenvolvimento as Contas WASH atingiram e se pode ser estabelecida uma terminologia comum. As Contas Águas, por exemplo, usam os termos da contabilidade pública do SCN de 2008. 6 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Caixa 5. Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental para a Água (SEEA-Water) O Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental para a Água (SEEA-Water), preparado pela Divisão de Estatística das Nações Unidas (UNSD, 2012), fornece um quadro conceptual para organizar a informação hidrológica e económica de forma coerente e consistente, ultrapassando, desse modo, a tendência para dividir as questões de acordo com as linhas disciplinares. O SEEA-Water é um instrumento potencialmente importante para decisores políticos, uma vez que lhes fornece indicadores para monitorar a interacção entre o ambiente e a economia, uma base de dados para orientar a tomadas de decisões acerca das vias de desenvolvimento sustentáveis e dos instrumentos de política apropriados para as implementar. O SEEA-Water baseia-se no Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental 2003 (SEEA) e foi mais desenvolvido para reflectir o SCN 2008. Em 2007, o quadro do SEEA-Water foi adoptado como padrão internacional pela Comissão de Estatística das Nações Unidas, e os países foram encorajados a implementá-lo. Em 2010, as Recomendações Internacionais para a Estatística de Águas (UNSD, 2012) foram adoptadas, para ajudar os países na implementação do SEEA-Water. Para facilitar a aplicação, o SEEA-Water foi dividido em quatro áreas de aplicação política, apresentadas na Figura 3 abaixo. As Contas WASH estão ligadas ao primeiro quadrante “Melhorar os Serviços de Água Potável e Saneamento”. Figura 3. Contas WASH em relação às Contas SEEA-Water SISTEMA DE CONTAS NACIONAIS (SCN) Contas WASH da ONU-Água GLAAS I. Melhorar os serviços de água potável e saneamento II. Gerir o abastecimento e a demanda de água III. Minimizar a degradação dos recursos hídricos/ Melhorar a qualidade dos recursos hídricos IV. Adaptar-se a eventos hidro- meteorológicos extremos Segurança hidrica Sistema de Contabilidade Económica e Ambiental para a Água (SEEA-Water) O quadro SEEA-Water inclui cinco categorias de contas: • Categoria 1: Abastecimento físico e tabelas de uso que descrevem os fluxos de água do ambiente para a economia e que regressam ao ambiente; • Categoria 2: Contas de emissão de poluentes, que descrevem a quantidade de poluentes adicionados à água em resultado da produção e do consumo; • Categoria 3: Contas híbridas e económicas que ligam as contas físicas à informação monetária das contas nacionais, desagregadas para a água e o saneamento; • Categoria 4: Contas de recursos hídricos; e • Categoria 5: Contas de qualidade que descrevem a qualidade da água e as alterações da sua qualidade; estas contas são ainda experimentais. Destas, a Categoria 3 (Contas híbridas e económicas) é particularmente relevante para rastrear os fluxos nacionais de financiamento para serviços de água e saneamento, pois ela alinha a informação física com a informação monetária sobre o abastecimento e uso da água. Referidas como “híbridas” porque combinam diferentes tipos de unidades de medição, estas contas podem comparar quantidades físicas com os correspondentes fluxos económicos. Elas incluem informações acerca dos vários custos associados ao abastecimento e à uso da água, tais como captação, purificação e distribuição da água e tratamento das águas residuais. Fornecem ainda informação sobre financiamento — por exemplo, a quantia que os usuários pagam pelos serviços de tratamento das águas residuais, e até que ponto esses serviços são subsidiados pelo governo ou outras entidades. Informações deste tipo podem apoiar na tomada de decisões oficiais sobre a recuperação de custos e distribuição da água, podendo ser usada em modelos económicos, para avaliar os potenciais custos e benefícios da criação de novas infraestruturas. As contas híbridas e económicas podem fornecer dados sobre o seguinte: • Custos do abastecimento e uso da água • Rendimento gerado pela produção de serviços • Investimento em infraestruturas relacionadas com a água e custos relevantes de manutenção • Taxas pagas pelos usuários pelos servicos de água por serviços relacionados com a água, bem como subsídios recebidos. Até hoje, mais de 50 países manifestaram interesse em compilar a contabilidade nacional económica e ambiental para a água, de acordo com o quadro SEEA-Water. São, sobretudo, países desenvolvidos (países da União Europeia e a Austrália), mas alguns países em desenvolvimento estão também a começar a adoptar esse quadro. Estes incluem a Argélia, Bolívia, Botsuana, Brasil, Colômbia, República Dominicana, Equador, Egipto, Jordânia, Líbano, Mauritânia, Maurícias, México, Marrocos, Namíbia, Panamá, África do Sul, Tunísia, Cisjordânia e Faixa de Gaza e Zimbabwe. A nível nacional, o SEEA- Water está a ser implementado passo-a-passo. Apenas um pequeno número de países têm sido capazes de desenvolver uma série completa de Contas Águas que inclui tanto dados físicos como monetários. A UNSD está a encorajar os países a usarem este sistema de contas, organizando seminários regionais e actividades de formação de capacidades. Outras instituições, como o Banco Mundial, estão a fornecer apoio financeiro, em particular através da parceria WAVES.1 1 WAVES: Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services. Link: http://www.wavespartnership.org/en 7Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional 1.4 Identificar requisitos dos dados e planificar o trabalho Na sequência da identificação das necessidades políticas, o Ponto Focal deverá elaborar Termos de Referência adequados à produção de Contas WASH. Estes Termos de Referência deverão reflectir o contexto do país, os conhecimentos existentes acerca dos dados disponíveis e as questões políticas identificadas. A equipa das Contas WASH deverá desenvolver um trabalho preliminar para reunir a informação disponível, identificar as lacunas de dados e os problemas principais relativos ao contexto específico do país. Deverá ainda identificar potenciais estratégias, para a colecta de dados e métodos de estimativa para responder às lacunas e fraquezas, e apresentá-las numa acção de formação de nível nacional, em que deverão participar todos os membros do grupo das partes interessadas nacionais e, se possível, em conjunto com um leque alargado de actores relevantes. 1.4.1 Identificar dados disponíveis e definir um plano de colecta de dados Antes de lançar a fase inicial, as equipas precisam se familiarizar com a metodologia. O Passo 2, em particular, e as respectivas notas metodológicas, apresentam o tipo de dados necessários e as potenciais fontes de dados. Para manter baixos os custos do exercício, os países deverão começar por identificar dados relevantes já disponíveis, através dos relatórios e sistemas de informação existentes. A Caixa 6, abaixo, apresenta exemplos de uma potencial documentação. Se não houver dados disponíveis, a equipa deverá identificar uma estratégia para colectar ou estimar os dados em falta. É provável que a disponibilidade de dados seja um obstáculo significativo. A equipa das Contas WASH deverá, portanto, procurar inicialmente o maior rigor dentro deste obstáculo. Em certos casos, poderá ser preciso recolher dados primários, especialmente sobre os custos de certos serviços, como os de fornecedores informais ou sobre certos fluxos financeiros, como o investimento das famílias no saneamento local. É pouco provável que estas colectas sejam feitas regularmente. Quando não é possível realizar novas pesquisas ou estes são muito caros, será necessário formular previsões para derivar as estimativas iniciais, mesmo que essas previsões sejam aproximadas. O Passo 2 deste documento de orientação propõe os caminhos a seguir para questões específicas de dados. Como a colecta de novos dados traz implicações orçamentais, estas deverão ser tidas em conta desde o início. É ainda importante considerar compromissos entre os diferentes métodos de colecta de dados. Caixa 6. Exemplos de informação existente • Pesquisas às famílias, por exemplo, Pesquisas de Indicadores Múltiplos Agrupados da UNICEF (MICS) • Acesso a dados do Programa Conjunto OMS/UNICEF para a monitoria para o abastecimento da água e do saneamento (JMP) • Relatório GLAAS e respostas a pesquisas • Informação do Instituto Nacional de Estatística acerca do sector de águas • Panora da Situação nos Países do Programa do Banco Mundial para a Água e Saneamento (só na África Subsariana) • Documento da Estratégia de Redução da Pobreza (PRSP) e despesas previstas para a redução da pobreza • Quadros da Despesa a Médio Prazo • Planos e políticas nacionais do sector • Orçamentos nacionais • Orçamentos dos governos locais (para sectores WASH descentralizados, relativos à certas localidades) • Contas financeiras dos serviços públicos • Relatórios financeiros do sector elaborados pelo regulador do sector (quando existir) • Sistema de Notificação dos Países Credores da OCDE e informação da base de dados do Comité de Ajuda ao Desenvolvimento (CAD) • Grupo de Trabalho sobre a Eficácia da Ajuda ao SWA e documentação do Grupo de Trabalho dos Processos Nacionais • Informação da base de dados IBNET (Rede Internacional de Referência para os Serviços de Água e Saneamento) sobre o desempenho dos serviços públicos de água e saneamento • Informação sucinta da UN-Water sobre os países • Análises da Despesa Pública do Banco Mundial (PER) • Estudos relevantes das Comissões Económicas das Nações Unidas • Estudos de Diagnóstico das Infraestruturas nos Países Africanos • Relatórios do sector WASH • Documentação específica dos projectos • Relatórios sobre processos de descentralização • Relatórios de aferição das associações de serviços, governos (por exemplo, Brasil ou Índia) ou reguladores (por exemplo, Quénia ou Moçambique). 8 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Sempre que já tenham sido feitas algumas análises do sistema de financiamento WASH, os perfis e relatórios dos países sobre os diferentes segmentos do sistema poderão indicar outras fontes de dados. A equipa das Contas WASH deverá entrevistar informantes-chave em instituições das partes interessadas, para identificar o alcance da disponibilidade de dados dentro dessas organizações. Relativamente aos operadores privados e a organizações sem fins lucrativos, será importante procurar organizações de coordenação, como ONGs e associações industriais, pois estas podem possuir alguma informação consolidada acerca das suas actividades. Deverão ser contactadas organizações internacionais pois estas poderão ter bases de dados como complemento ou extensão das fontes nacionais, particularmente em questões de ajuda internacional. Potencial desafio: alinhamento com os sistemas do Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE) Ao identificar fontes de dados, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá avaliar até que ponto o INE já recolheu dados financeiros do sector WASH, a um nível de detalhar que permita conclusões a projectar para a definição de políticas. Seria preferível alinhar com o sistema de classificação do INE, para facilitar a integração futura, mas isto poderá nem sempre ser possível. • Se houver dados recolhidos pelo INE sobre o WASH, é importante trabalhá-los para identificar de que modo esses dados podem ser extraídos e usados por actores do sector. Isto garantirá que o exercício de colecta de dados esteja integrado nos sistemas nacionais e que possa ser repetido a um custo mínimo. Uma área-chave de coordenação será identificar como é que o INE e as partes interessadas no sector podem trabalhar conjuntamente nas necessidades políticas do WASH para produzirem dados ao nível mais adequado de desagregação. As partes interessadas no sector WASH poderão também aprender com o INE acerca dos métodos de colecta de dados. • Se os dados estatísticos do WASH não forem suficientemente detalhados, ou porque o desempenho do INE é fraco, ou porque eles não colectam dados de uma série abrangente de fornecedores de serviços WASH, será necessário iniciar um processo de colecta de dados a nível do sector. 1.4.2 Elaborar um orçamento e plano de trabalho detalhados Assim que toda a informação disponível tiver sido mapeada, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá preparar um relatório inicial. Este conterá um plano de trabalho e um orçamento detalhado para a produção de Contas WASH. Apresenta- se na Caixa 7 abaixo, o conteúdo recomendado para este relatório. Caixa 7. Pontos-chave a integrar no relatório inicial O relatório inicial deverá integrar a seguinte informação: • Panorama dos acordos institucionais estabelecidos para gerir a TrackFin no país • Resumo dos principais resultados da análise de documentos disponíveis sobre o financiamento do sector WASH • Resumo dos debates realizados nas reuniões iniciais e na reunião preliminar do grupo de partes interessadas nacionais, incluindo: – Definição do âmbito do exercício em termos de duração (número de anos da colecta de dados) e área geográfica; – Identificação das questões políticas essenciais delineadas pelo grupo de partes interessadas nacionais • Um plano de trabalho detalhado e respectivo orçamento. Os anexos deverão incluir as actas da reunião preliminar, uma lista de membros do grupo de partes interessadas nacionais e a equipa das Contas WASH com os seus Termos de Referência, bem como a lista das partes interessadas do sector mais alargado, com as suas informações de contacto. O relatório inicial deverá ser aprovado pelo grupo de partes interessadas do nível nacional ou pelo dinamizador da TrackFin. O trabalho deverá iniciar-se com algumas expectativas em termos de detalhar e de complexidade da informação produzida e a intenção de a melhorar ao longo do tempo. A equipa das Contas WASH e o grupo de partes interessadas nacionais deverão chegar a acordo relativamente a um orçamento realista, tendo em conta os eventuais obstáculos abaixo indicados. 9Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Potencial desafio: definir um orçamento e plano de trabalho para as Contas WASH • As Contas WASH deveriam, em termos ideais, cobrir a totalidade do país, mas podem incluir apenas informação detalhada para regiões específicas, com dados para outras regiões baseadas em extrapolação. Se houver discrepâncias significativas entre zonas geográficas, as regiões deverão ser classificadas por tipos e os dados deverão ser obtidos por, pelo menos, uma região de cada tipo, para fornecerem uma base adequada para uma extrapolação representativa. • Se responder a uma questão-chave das políticas requer desagregação dos dados por região, a equipa deverá controlar as fronteiras geográficas das diferentes fontes de dados. Algumas organizações poderão agregar dados, com base em bacias hidrográficas, enquanto que outras poderão usar as fronteiras municipais. Seria necessário um trabalho significativo para ajustar fronteiras geográficas divergentes — que eventualmente iriam requerer estimativas e triangulação. • Consoante a organização do sector WASH, a colecta de dados poderá precisar ser conduzida separadamente em cada sub-sector. Nos países em desenvolvimento, os acordos sobre fornecimento de serviços e financiamento para a água e saneamento urbanos e para a água e saneamento rurais tendem a ser diferentes. Por isso, cada um dos quatro sub-sectores deverá ser considerado separadamente e a análise poderá assim precisar ser repetida em cada um, apesar dos instrumentos e abordagens metodológicas serem as mesmas. Potencial desafio: contratar apoio de consultoria para a equipa das Contas WASH O calendário do apoio de consultoria poderá ser difícil de cumprir e pode variar entre os países. O alcance e o orçamento detalhados para o exercício TrackFin — e portanto o orçamento para a ajuda de consultores — só serão conhecidos depois da fase inicial ter sido concluída (após o Passo 1.4). Em condições ideais, o consultor deverá estar envolvido desde o início. Uma eventual solução seria preparar um contrato flexível, acordando uma taxa aplicável e o número de dias de trabalho. Assim, o contrato poderá ser emendado e redefinido no final da fase inicial, para reflectir qualquer variação no âmbito da aplicação. 10 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS 2 Passo 2 – Colecta de dados Esta secção estabelece mais detalhadamente o quadro de preparação das Contas WASH. A sua finalidade é servir como guia prático para identificar, colectar e classificar os dados financeiros. Para definir o plano da colecta de dados, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá estar numa posição tal que possa responder a três perguntas principais: • Que serviços WASH são consumidos e por quem? • Como são fornecidos esses serviços e por quem? • Quanto custam esses serviços e como são eles financiados? A Figura 4 abaixo baseia-se numa figura elaborada para as Sistema da Contas de Saudé. Ela apresenta as principais “dimensões” para analisar durante o rastreio do financiamento do sector WASH a nível nacional. Estas dimensões são as principais classificações usadas para criar Contas WASH. Custos (C) Custos dos bens e serviços WASH produzidos • Custos de investimento, incluindo apoio e assistência associados1 • Custos de operação e manutenção • Custos de manutenção de grande capital • Custos financeiros • Custos de apoio ou de assistência • Impostos e taxas Serviços (S) Serviços WASH consumidos Serviços de abastecimento de água • Abastecimento de água através de grandes sistemas de rede • Abastecimento básico de água potável Serviços de saneamento • Saneamento através de grandes sistemas de rede • Saneamento básico Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH • Elaboração de políticas, governanção do sector da água e saneamento • Formação de capacidades em abastecimento Gestão dos recursos hídricos (relacionados com serviços de água e saneamento) • Protecção dos recursos hídricos • Desenvolvimento de bacias hidrográficas Serviços de higiene • Promoção da higiene (incluindo escolas e centros de saúde) • Actividades de higiene a nível das famílias Prestadores de serviços WASH (P) Actores envolvidos na produção e distribuição de serviços WASH • Organismos governamentais • Empresas prestadores de serviços por rede de distribução • Empresas prestadores de serviços sim rede de distribução • ONGs e OBCs • Usuários auto-fornecidos Usos de serviços WASH (U) Tipo de uso dos bens e serviços WASH • Uso doméstico dos serviços prestados • Uso doméstico dos serviços auto-fornecidos • Uso não doméstico dos serviços prestados • Uso não doméstico dos serviços auto- fornecidos Tipos de financiamento (FT) Fluxos financeiros entre as unidades de financiamento e os fornecedores de serviços • Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos • Despesas dos usuários com o auto- abastecimento • Transferências públicas domésticas • Transferências públicas internacionais • Contribuições voluntárias • Financiamento reembolsável O que está a ser financiado e por quem ? Unidades de financiamento (FU) Entidades institucionais que financiam o sector • Usuários • Autoridades nacionais • Autoridades regionais • Autoridades locais • Empresas prestadores de serviços com rede de distribução • Empresas prestadores de serviços sim rede de distribução • Reguladores económicos e da qualidade • Doadores bilaterais e multilaterais • ONGs e Organizações de Base Comunitária (OBCs) • Bancos e instituições financeiras O que está ser produzido, por quem e a que custo? O que está a ser consumido e por quem? Figura 4. Mapeamento dos fluxos financeiros com base no consumo, produção e tipos de financiamento 11Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Usando este quadro, as secções seguintes fornecem mais detalhados sobre a colecta de dados para as Contas WASH. Fornecem orientações sobre questões como: • Passo 2.1: Definir as fronteiras do sector WASH, i.e., definir que serviços estão incluídos • Passo 2.2: Mapear acordos e fluxos financeiros para o fornecimento de serviços • Passo 2.3: Recolher dados sobre fluxos financeiros e stocks de activos fixos. 2.1 Definir os limites do sector WASH em termos de serviços A equipa das Contas WASH deverá começar por definir os limites do sector WASH, com base numa lista de potenciais serviços a incluir nas Contas WASH. Isto far-se-á através das tarefas a seguir indicadas. Passo 2.1 - Tarefas a executar • Familiarizar-se com a classificação de serviços WASH proposta no Documento de orientação e compreender os fundamentos para essa classificação; • Identificar as classificações e categorias dos serviços WASH usadas no sistema nacional de informação e o tipo de actividades que elas incluem; • Analisar semelhanças e diferenças com a classificação proposta no Documento de orientação (ver 45 Tabela 1 e Tabela 6. Semelhanças entre as classificações CPC, ISIC e COFOG ao longo da cadeia de valor da água e saneamento ), para estabelecer se podem ser usadas as mesmas categorias e se os dados são recolhidos nesta base; • Identificar os serviços WASH para os quais a despesa será reportada nas Contas WASH; • Declarar muito claramente quais as actividades que são incluídas ou excluídas, ao abrigo de cada categoria de serviços WASH; e • Colectar dados de acordo com estas categorias, sempre que possível, ou com base em categorias agregadas (por exemplo, serviços de abastecimento de água, serviços de saneamento, serviços de construção, serviços de apoio). 2.1.1 Fundamentos É essencial adoptar e usar uma classificação comum de produtos, serviços e actividades relevantes para o sector WASH. A definição do sector WASH varia muitas vezes de um país para outro sendo, por isso, crucial esclarecer o que está incluído ou excluído no país em questão1. É essencial definir os limites do sector WASH por diversas razões: • Identificar a lista de produtos e serviços para os quais serão angariados custos e tipos de financiamento, através das Contas WASH: esses produtos e serviços poderão ser produzidos em conjunto com outros serviços de água. Por exemplo, certas empresas de abastecimento de água podem estar também envolvidas na gestão dos recursos hídricos a montante, ou na gestão de sistemas de irrigação para fins agrícolas. Outros serviços podem ser encarados como funcionando em paralelo com o fornecimento dos serviços WASH, como o tratamento de resíduos sólidos, enquanto que outros países não incluem, em princípio, o tratamento de resíduos sólidos na definição de serviços de saneamento. Muitos países têm também dificuldades na definição de higiene, e a maioria não acompanha de forma abrangente os serviços de higiene relacionados com o WASH. • Ajudar a garantir a consistência dos dados nos diferentes países: A lista-padrão proposta neste documento poderá ajudar os países a identificar os serviços que deverão ser incluídos, por exemplo, a gestão dos lamas fecais a jusante, e outros que deverão ser excluídos – como a construção de barragens para gerar energia hidroeléctrica. Se os serviços que eles pretendem incluir não fizerem parte desta lista-padrão porque os dados são monitorados juntamente com outros serviços WASH nos seus sistemas nacionais, isso deverá ser claramente identificado, de forma a se conseguir compreender a razão para as diferenças entre os países. • Definir categorias de serviços dentro do sector WASH para as quais o financiamento deverá ser rastreado separadamente: Isto é necessário para avaliar se o financiamento está actualmente a ser alocado aos serviços ou produtos mais adequados. Para a primeira ronda de Contas WASH, poderá apenas ser viável desagregar os fluxos financeiros para um número limitado ou tipo de serviço. No mínimo, no entanto, deverá ser mostrada a desagregação entre os serviços de água e saneamento. A longo prazo o objectivo metodológico é mostrar a dotação financeira para uma variedade de categorias de serviços, incluindo higiene, para gerar uma análise mais detalhada e profunda. 1 A Iniciativa TrackFin centra-se actualmente no rastreamento do financiamento aos serviços de abastecimento de água, saneamento e higiene e não no sector mais vasto da água. A lista padrão dos serviços aqui fornecidos concentra-se, portanto, nestes serviços. A lista poderá ser eventualmente alargada numa fase posterior, se a iniciativa tiver um âmbito mais vasto. 12 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Aprender com o sector da saúde O Sistema das Contas da Saúde (OECD, 2011) define os limites das actividades de cuidados de saúde de uma perspectiva internacional, baseada nas funções dos cuidados de saúde. A despesa da saúde está incluída nas Contas da Saúde, com base nos seguintes quatro elementos: a) uma transacção b) que está ligada a um consumo individual c) cuja primeira finalidade é a saúde. A finalidade dos gastos determina as funções dos cuidados de saúde. Tal é definido como “o tipo de necessidade que a transacção pretende satisfazer ou o tipo de objectivo perseguido” d) que envolve a aplicação de conhecimentos de saúde qualificados, directamente ou através da supervisão. As actividades incluídas nos limites das Contas da Saúde são os que pretendem “melhorar, manter e evitar a deterioração do estado de saúde de pessoas e mitigar as consequências da falta de saúde, através da aplicação de conhecimentos de saúde qualificados”. Com base nestes critérios, as actividades de saúde são classificadas em sete principais categorias de funções de cuidados de saúde, que são eles próprios subdivididos num total de 36 categorias. São estas as sete categorias: promoção e prevenção da saúde; diagnóstico, tratamento, cura e reabilitação das doenças; cuidados às pessoas afectadas por doenças crónicas; cuidados às pessoas com deficiências e incapacidades relacionadas com a saúde; cuidados paliativos; fornecimento de programas de saúde comunitária; e governação e administração do sistema de saúde. Os países escolhem o que puderem classificar, com base na natureza do seu sistema nacional da estatística da saúde, os dados disponíveis e a sua capacidade para fazer a ligação entre um quadro contabilístico e a sua classificação. 2.1.2 Classificação TrackFin dos serviços WASH No sentido mais lato, o sector WASH refere-se ao fornecimento de serviços de água, saneamento e higiene. No entanto, proporcionar acesso a água e saneamento é apenas um subconjunto dos serviços necessários para gerir de modo sustentável o ciclo da água e saneamento, contemplando as necessidades de todos os usuários. A Figura 5 abaixo mostra os serviços WASH necessários, para além do acesso, de forma a garantir a sua sustentabilidade. Esta abordagem reflecte-se nos Objectivos do Desenvolvimento Sustentável (ODS), que requerem um conjunto mais alargado de serviços WASH a serem monitorados, antes e depois de prestação do serviço. A disponibilidades ou não destes serviços depende do nível de desenvolvimento do sector de águas em determinado país. Na maioria dos países em desenvolvimento, isto é improvável. Onde o acesso é uma prioridade, por exemplo, os serviços de colecta e tratamento das águas residuais são frequentemente muito limitados, mas dever-se-ão tornar mais prevalentes através da implementação dos ODS. Figura 5. Cadeia de valor dos serviços WASH ao abrigo dos Objectivos do Desenvolvimento Sustentável (ODS) ACTIVIDADES A MONTANTE • Produção (aumentar e proteger os recursos hídricos) • Tratamento, transporte e distribuição de água Fonte: Adaptado de “Benefits of investing in water and sanitation: An OECD Perspective” (OECD, 2011), p.31. ACTIVIDADES A JUSANTE • Transporte de águas residuais, tratamento e eliminação segura Os ODMs fornecem acesso • Acesso à água • Acesso ao saneamento • Promoção da higiene Gestão integrada dos recursos hídricos Aumento das reservas Armazenamento de água Captação de água Tratamento da água Transporte da água Distribuição da água Gestão da demanda Fornecimento de serviços ao consumidor Fornecimento de água Fornecimento de saneamento Promoção da mudança de comportamentos Transporte de esgotos via redes Colecta das lamas fecais Protecção dos recursos Reutilização das lamas fecais ou efluentes tratados Eliminação das lamas fecais Desenvolvimento de sistemas de tratamento naturais Tratamento das águas residuais Tratamento de lama fecais Transporte de águas residuais ou lamas fecais 13Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Para apoiar esta abordagem mais alargada e garantir que a globalidade do sector WASH está a funcionar adequadamente, será necessário levar a cabo mais funções, nomeadamente de planificação, gestão e coordenação, ao nível ministerial (ou ao nível regional, no caso de um sistema federal). A classificação TrackFin dos serviços WASH apresentados na Tabela 1 abaixo, cobrem os serviços necessários a um fornecimento sustentável de água e saneamento. A tabela apresenta as categorias alargadas de serviços, actividades incluídas nesses serviços e, para facilidade de consulta, a referência ISIC do Sistema de Contas Nacionais. O seu valor reside em esclarecer os limites do sector WASH, a nível nacional, e em identificar as actividades a incluir ou excluir durante a preparação das Contas WASH. Código Categoria Actividades incluídas Incluídas em S1 Serviços de abastecimento de água Abastecimento de água através de grandes sistemas de rede • Colecta das águas pluviais e de várias outras fontes, como rios, lagos, poços • Purificação da água para fins de fornecimento, dessalinização da água do mar /das águas subterrâneas por estações de tratamento • Armazenamento de água • Transporte de grandes volumes de água através de condutas • Distribuição de água por adutoras (inclui bombeamento de água e transporte através de redes locais de abastecimento de água) • Gestão de ligações de água e actividades de apoio ao consumidor. ISIC 36 Abastecimento básico de água potável • Colecta das águas pluviais e de várias outras fontes (rios, lagos, poços) usando bombas manuais, captação nas nascentes, sistemas alimentados por gravidade, recolha de águas pluviais e captação de água do nevoeiro • Armazenamento da água em tanques • Distribuição da água através de pequenos sistemas de distribuição (condutas, poços ou camiões- cisterna) ou redes locais de vizinhança normalmente com ligações/ pontos de uso partilhados • Gestão dos pontos de acesso à água e actividades de apoio ao consumidor. S2 Serviços de saneamento1 Saneamento através de grandes sistemas de rede • Construção de serviços de saneamento nas casas particulares e comunidades e ligação a grandes sistemas de esgotos • Colecta de esgotos por sistemas em larga escala, incluindo camiões, estações de tratamento de esgotos e drenagem • Tratamento de esgotos, incluindo eliminação das lamas residuais. ISIC 37 Saneamento básico • Promoção do saneamento, inscluindo promoção da demanda e comercialização do saneamento (excluindo promoção da higiene se esta puder ser desagregada) • Construção de serviços de saneamento básico nas casas e comunidades (latrinas, sistemas de fossas sépticas) • Colecta e transporte das lamas fecais em instalações locais (esvaziamento de fossas e serviços de limpeza) • Tratamento e eliminação de lamas fecais por serviços de tratamento de lamas fecais. S3 Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH • Elaboração de políticas e governação do sector da água e saneamento, incluindo: – Desenvolvimento de políticas do sector – Legislação: definição e aplicação de normas de água potável e descargas para águas residuais municipais – Regulação das actividades de abastecimento de água e saneamento e dos fornecedores de serviços – Planificação do sector, incluindo estimativas de futuras necessidades financeiras do sector – Administração de programas de água e saneamento • Formação de capacidades em abastecimento de água saneamento ISIC 8412 S4 Gestão dos recursos hídricos (relacionados com serviços de água e saneamento) Protecção dos recursos hídricos • Colecta e uso de dados quantitativos e qualitativos sobre recursos hídricos • Criação e partilha de conhecimentos sobre recursos hídricos • Conservação e reabilitação de águas superficiais interiores (rios, lagos), lençóis freáticos e águas costeiras • Prevenção da contaminação da água Categoria não existente Desenvolvimento das bacias hidrográficas • Projectos integrados das bacias hidrográficas e actividades institucionais relacionadas; controlo dos caudais dos rios, barragens e reservatórios S5 Serviços de higiene Promoção da higiene • Programas de promoção da higiene pelos governos ou fornecedores de serviços, incluindo campanhas de lavagem das mãos, gestão da higiene menstrual e distribuição de cloro Categoria não existente Actividades de higiene a nível das familias • Lavagem das mãos, banhos, lavagem de roupa e de material /equipamento (sabão, tippy tap, cass de banho/latrinaçã) • Tratamento da água no ponto de uso. Tabela 1. Classificação TrackFin dos serviços WASH1 1 Embora resíduos sólidos não faça parte da cadeia de serviços de WASH (veja figura 5), um país pode decidir incluir resíduos sólicos como parte do TrackFin por uma razão específica. Neste caso, resíduos sólidos NÃO deve ser incluído sob S2. Uma categoria adicional deve ser criada para resíduos sólidos. 14 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Há muitos desafios potenciais ao procurar aplicar esta classificação. Potencial desafio: definir os limites do sector WASH • As actividades da gestão dos recursos hídricos não recaem normalmente na definição de serviços WASH. Algumas destas actividades são, porém, implementadas pelos fornecedores de serviços de água e são essenciais para o abastecimento sustentável de tais serviços. Sempre que possível, as actividades de gestão dos recursos hídricos directamente relevantes para o fornecimento dos serviços de água e saneamento deverão ser incluídas no âmbito das Contas WASH. Deverão ser excluídas actividades mais alargadas de gestão de recursos hídricos, como a construção de barragens para fins de irrigação. • Definição de serviços de higiene. Não há nenhuma definição internacional acordada para higiene, e nenhuma das classificações internacionais existentes identifica os serviços de higiene relacionados com a água e o saneamento, enquanto produto específico ou categoria de serviços. Por conseguinte, a higiene pode significar coisas muito diferentes em diferentes países, o que reduz a comparabilidade. No entanto, dada a importância da higiene para os ODS, e a necessidade de priorizar estas actividades, é fundamental defini-las e acompanhá-las como categorias separadas. Fornece mais detalhares sobre as classificações internacionais existentes (com particular incidência na Classificação Central de Produtos (CPC), Classificação Internacional Industrial Normalizada de Todas as Actividades Económicas (ISIC) e Classificação das Funções do Governo (COFOG)), que foram usadas como base para elaborar as categorias de serviços WASH apresentadas na Tabela 1 acima. Esta nota explica como elas funcionam e que lacunas é preciso preencher. Faz recomendações para a criação de uma classificação mais abrangente dos serviços WASH, particularmente no que diz respeito aos serviços de higiene. 2.1.3 Tarefas a executar A equipa das Contas WASH deverá identificar os serviços e actividades que recaem na definição do sector WASH. Tanto quanto possível, os dados deverão ser colectados com base na classificação TrackFin, de modo a facilitar a comparação. A equipa deverá identificar as classificações de serviços WASH já em uso no país, e identificar até que ponto elas correspondem à classificação da TrackFin. Deverá depois estabelecer claramente como foi derivada a classificação para as Contas WASH e até que ponto ela está alinhada com a classificação TrackFin. Os países podem ainda precisar de introduzir mais desagregação para certas categorias, de modo a reflectir as suas próprias necessidades políticas. Por exemplo, um país com atraso significativo no investimento na área do saneamento rural poderá preferir adoptar um maior nível de desagregação para estes serviços; um país que deseje rastrear o financiamento de diferentes tipos de serviços de saneamento poderá definir sub-categorias para esse fim. No primeiro caso, é pouco provável que os países sejam capazes de notificar informação financeira sobre sub- categorias para todos estes serviços separadamente. Os países devem tentar notificar, no mínimo, o financiamento até ao mais alto nível de categorias de serviços, como a água, saneamento e higiene. Inicialmente, porém, até esse nível de detalhar poderá apresentar dificuldades, especialmente no caso da higiene, como se refere na Caixa abaixo Potencial desafio: rastrear os fundos para actividades de higiene • O financiamento das actividades de higiene é difícil de separar do financiamento de serviços mais alargados de água e saneamento, dado que estes serviços são vulgarmente fornecidos em conjunto. Isto ainda é mais problemático quando se trata de grandes despesas do programa WASH, para as quais é difícil de obter dados detalhados sobre os gastos com as actividades. Neste caso, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá realizar entrevistas com os gestores dos programas, para estimar a percentagem da despesa total canalizada para actividades de higiene. Eles deverão ainda identificar programas específicos de higiene, particularmente os que são crealizados pelo Ministério da Saúde. 15Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional 2.2 Mapear acordos de fornecimento de serviços e fluxos financeiros A equipa deverá identificar os principais actores do sector WASH e fluxos financeiros entre eles. Passo 2.2 - Tarefas a executar • Familiarizar-se com as classificações TrackFin dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH e compreender os fundamentos que lhes são subjacentes; • A nível de país, identificar e classificar usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH; – Com base nos dados recolhidos no Passo 1.4, identificar as classificações dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH usadas no país; – Analisar as semelhanças e as diferenças entre as classificações TrackFin e mapear as áreas em que a terminologia corresponde; – Definir as classificações a usar para criar as Contas WASH; e • Mapear o financiamento do sector WASH com base nestas classificações; – Representar os actores e tipos de financiamento do sector WASH separadamente para cada um dos quatro sub-sectores, consoante o contexto do país. 2.2.1 Fundamentos É essencial identificar os principais actores e fluxos financeiros do sector WASH que circulam entre si para compreender que dados será preciso obter e de onde. Fazer uma representação gráfica dos fluxos financeiros, como mostra a Figura 6 abaixo, pode facilitar este processo, garantindo que todos os actores e fluxos são registados. Ajuda também a comunicar os resultados. Todos os países deverão usar preferencialmente um sistema de classificação idêntico ou semelhante para os actores e fluxos financeiros do sector WASH. Isso facilitará a comparação internacional e garantirá que a informação produzida seja consistente. Actualmente, não há nenhuma classificação-padrão dos actores do sector WASH. Os gabinetes de estatística nacionais e os funcionários do sector WASH usam a sua própria classificação, que varia consoante a estrutura do sector WASH. A classificação TrackFin aqui proposta dos actores e fluxos financeiros do sector WASH é suficientemente abrangente para incluir todas ou quase todas as organizações do sector. Ela poderá ser usada como um guia para classificar usos, actores e fluxos financeiros WASH a nível de país, facilitando, assim, a produção de dados comparáveis. A classificação TrackFin está em linha com as classificações existentes usadas ao nível internacional, mas inclui melhorias destinadas a ultrapassar certas fraquezas identificadas. Nota Metodológica n.º 2: Classificação dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento. Esta nota apresenta os actuais sistemas internacionalmente aceites de classificação de usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH que foram usados como pontos de referência na elaboração das classificações TrackFin. A classificação dos usos, fornecedores de serviços e unidades de financiamento dos serviços WASH foi adaptada da SEEA-Water, enquanto que a classificação de tipos de financiamento deriva da terminologia da OCDE 3T—Tarifas, Taxas e Transferências. 2.2.2 Classificação TrackFin dos usos, actores e fluxos financeiros do WASH A classificação proposta distingue entre: • Uso de serviços WASH, i.e., quem consome os serviços e como; • Actores do sector WASH, distinguindo entre fornecedores de serviços WASH e unidades de financiamento; • Tipos de financiamento, caracterizados pela origem e a natureza dos fluxos financeiros. A classificação TrackFin foca o ratreio de fluxos financeiros por tipo de uso, em vez de categorias de usuários. Isto acontece sobretudo porque, para fins de políticas, os fluxos financeiros deverão ser acompanhados independentemente da forma como os usuários obtêm os seus serviços. A Tabela 2 abaixo apresenta uma classificação sintética TrackFin, que integra todas as definições dos actores, fontes de financiamento e uso de serviços do sector WASH requeridos pela metodologia proposta. Apresentam-se mais explicações no texto que se segue à Tabela 2. 16 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Código Categoria Definição U: Usos dos serviços WASH Tipos de uso dos bens e serviços WASH U1 Uso doméstico dos serviços prestados Consumo das famílias através de prestadores de serviços pagos por uma tarifa. Inclui o abastecimento de água às casas, ligadas à rede de água e/ou esgotos, mas também a que for obtida de um fontanário público ou de outros fornecedores como camiões-cisterna. U2 Uso doméstico de serviços auto-fornecido Consumo das famílias por serviços de água e saneamento auto-fornecidos. Os usuários pagam um investimento inicial adiantado (num poço ou latrina privada) pelo acesso aos serviços, assumindo eles próprios os custos de operação e manutenção. U3 Uso não doméstico dos serviços prestados Consumo por usuários não domésticos através da compra de água e saneamento a um fornecedor de serviços. Isto inclui usuários institucionais (organismos governamentais, como ministérios, hospitais, escolas), organizações de voluntários, como ONG, Organizações de Base Comunitária (OBC), fundações e usuários industriais e comerciais. Os fornecedores de serviços são pagos por uma tarifa. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em duas sub-categorias: U3.1 Serviços prestados para uso institucional, e U3.2 Serviços prestados para uso industrial e comercial. U4 Uso não doméstico auto- fornecido Consumo de serviços de água e saneamento auto-fornecidos por usuários não domésticos. Inclui usuários institucionais, nomeadamente organismos governamentais - ministérios, hospitais, escolas, organizações de voluntários, tais como ONG e OBC, fundações e usuários industriais e comerciais. Os usuários fazem um investimento inicial adiantado para terem acesso aos serviços, assumindo eles próprios os custos de operação e manutenção. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em duas sub-categorias: U4.1 Uso institucional auto-fornecido e U4.2 Uso industrial e comercial auto-fornecido. P: Prestadores de serviços WASH Actores envolvidos na produção e distribuição de serviços WASH, incluindo instituições governamentais que fornecem apoio P1 Organismos governamentais Prestadores governamentais, incluindo organismos públicos, como ministérios, hospitais ou escolas, assim como municípios auto-abastecedores (i.e., que operam os serviços directamente e não através de uma entidade empresarial). Isto inclui instituições governamentais que fornecem serviços de apoio ao sector em domínios como a elaboração, o planificação ou a regulação de políticas. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em sub-categorias, tais como P1.1 Autoridades nacionais, P1.2 Autoridades regionais e P1.3 Autoridades locais. P2 Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede de distribuição Serviços de utilidade pública que possuem e/ou operam instalações para a produção e distribuição de serviços de água e saneamento, através de sistemas de rede para o público, assim como serviços avulsos. Podem ser privados ou públicos, mandatados ou independentes, de grande, média ou pequena dimensão, fornecendo serviços públicos ou auto-fornecendo os serviços para uso próprio. P3 Empresas prestadoras de serviço sem rede de distribuição Empresas que fornecem bens, por exemplo água engarrafada ou em sachê, ou serviços WASH de pequena escala, ao longo da cadeia de valor, através de sistemas sem rede de distribuição. Normalmente, envolvem trabalhadores com poucas qualificações e um baixo nível de investimento inicial, assumindo várias formas de organização, desde cooperativas até empreendimentos privados, podendo ser formais ou informais. Esta categoria inclui promotores imobiliários envolvidos na construção de infraestruturas. P4 ONG e Organizações de Base Comunitária (OBCs) Organizações sem fins lucrativos que procuram complementar os serviços públicos WASH. Normalmente, têm uma estrutura formal e oferecem serviços que estão além dos seus próprios membros. Na maioria dos casos, estão registados junto das autoridades nacionais. As OBCs, normalmente, operam dentro de uma zona local. P5 Usuários auto-fornecidos Usuários que fornecem eles próprios os serviços. Podem ser usuários domésticos (famílias) ou não domésticos (institucionais, industriais ou comerciais). Pagam um investimento inicial adiantado para acesso a um poço, latrina privada ou sistema privado e assumem eles próprios os custos de operação e manutenção. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em duas sub-categorias: P5.1 Usuários domésticos auto-fornecidos e P5.2 Usuários não domésticos auto-fornecidos. Os usuários não domésticos auto-fornecidos incluem, por exemplo, uma companhia mineira ou outra indústria que produza água para seu próprio consumo. FU: Unidades de financiamento Entidades institucionais que financiam o sector. Mobilizam financiamento para pagar aos fornecedores de serviços WASH. Podem afectar fundos directamente aos fornecedores de serviços ou canalizá-los através de outras unidades de financiamento. FU1 Usuários Usuários de serviços WASH que são servidos por prestadores de serviçoes ou que prestam seus próprios serviços WASH, tais como sistemas de saneamento no local. Pagam adiantado através de um investimento inicial (por exemplo, para poço ou latrina privada) ou compram serviços de vários fornecedores, incluindo camiões-cisterna. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em sub-categorias: FU 1.1 Usuários servidos, FU1.2 Usuários auto-fornecidos; FU1.1.1 Usuários domésticos servidos e FU 1.1.2 Usuários não domésticos servidos; FU1.2.1 Usuários domésticos auto-fornecidos, FU 1.2.2 Usuários não domésticos auto-fornecidos . FU2 Autoridades nacionais Autoridades públicas a nível de governo central, incluindo os ministérios relevantes, como o Ministério das Finanças ou o Ministério da Água ou instituições nacionais. FU3 Autoridades regionais Autoridades públicas que operam a nível regional. FU4 Autoridades locais Organismos públicos que operam num área geográfica mais pequena, como uma cidade, vila ou distrito. FU5 Empresas prestadoras de serviços com rede de distribuição Empresas que possuem e/ou operam serviços de produção e distribuição de água e serviços de saneamento, através de sistemas de rede para o público, assim como serviços avulsos. Podem ser privados ou públicos, mandatados ou independentes, de grande, pequena ou média dimensão, fornecendo serviços públicos ou auto-fornecendo os serviços para uso próprio. Tabela 2. Classificação TrackFin para uso de serviços WASH, actores e tipos de financiamento do sector WASH 17Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Código Categoria Definição FU6 Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição Empresas que fornecem bens ou serviços WASH de pequena escala, ao longo da cadeia de valor, por meio de sistemas sem redes de distribuição. Normalmente, envolvem trabalhadores com poucas qualificações e um baixo nível de investimento inicial, assumindo várias formas de organização, desde cooperativas até empreendimentos privados, podendo ser formais ou informais. FU7 Reguladores económicos e da qualidade Autoridade pública responsável pela supervisão global do sector WASH em áreas como o controlo das tarifas, qualidade da água e competição no sector. FU8 Doadores bilaterais e multilaterais Governos que fornecem ajuda pública ao desenvolvimento directamente a um país ou através de instituições internacionais multilaterais (ONU, Banco Mundial ou bancos de desenvolvimento regional). FU9 ONG e Organizações de Base Comunitária (OBC) Organizações sem fins lucrativos que procuram complementar os serviços públicos WASH. Normalmente, têm uma estrutura formal e oferecem serviços que estão além da sua própria afiliação. Na maioria dos casos, estão registados junto das autoridades nacionais. As OBC, normalmente, operam dentro de uma zona local. FU10 Bancos e instituições financeiras Uma instituição financeira que presta serviços bancários, tais como depósitos e serviços de crédito e empréstimos a indivíduos e/ou pequenas empresas. FT: Tipos de financiamento Fluxos financeiros entre as unidades de financiamento e os fornecedores de serviços, caracterizados pela sua origem e natureza FT1 Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos Pagamentos feitos pelos usuários aos fornecedores de serviços para obterem e usarem esses serviços. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em duas sub-categorias: FT1.1 Tarifas domésticas pelos serviços fornecidos, FT1.2 Tarifas não domésticas pelos serviços fornecidos. FT2 Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento Financiamento usado pelos usuários para investirem ou prestar o próprio serviços. Estes usuários pagam um investimento inicial adiantado, para obterem acesso aos serviços (por exemplo um poço, um sistema privado de produção de águas ou uma latrina privada). Eles próprios assumem todos os custos de operação e manutenção. Esses custos podem ser assumir a forma de dinheiro, material ou tempo, mas apenas os pagamentos em dinheiro são incluídos nas Contas WASH. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em duas sub-categorias: FT2.1 Despesas do usuário doméstico com o auto- abastecimento, FT2.2 Despesas do usuário não doméstico com o auto-abastecimento. FT3 Transferências públicas domésticas Transferências públicas para as agências WASH de organismos do governo central ou local. Trata-se, muitas vezes, de subsídios oriundos de impostos ou outras fontes de receita governamental. Incluem subvenções, mas excluem empréstimos em condições favoráveis que estejam incluídos em FT6 –Financiamento reembolsável. FT4 Transferências públicas internacionais Doações ou subvenções voluntárias de doadores públicos externos e agências multilaterais. Os empréstimos em condições favoráveis estão excluídos e integralmente cobertos em FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. FT5 Contribuições voluntárias Doações ou subvenções voluntárias de doadores não governamentais internacionais e nacionais, incluindo fundações de beneficência, organizações não governamentais (ONG), organizações da sociedade civil e indivíduos (remessas de valores). Os empréstimos em condições especiais estão excluídos e inteiramente cobertos em FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. FT6 Financiamento reembolsável Financiamento oriundo de fontes privadas ou públicas e que requerem reembolso. Exemplos são empréstimos (incluindo empréstimos favoráveis e garantias), investimentos de capital ou outros instrumentos financeiros, como títulos. Esta categoria pode ser dividida em duas sub-categorias: FT6.1 Financiamento em condições favoráveis reembolsável e FT6.2 Financiamento normal reembolsável. 2.2.2.1 Classificação dos usos WASH Usos WASH referem-se ao modo como os serviços são obtidos e usados. Ao diferenciar entre uso WASH servido e auto-fornecido, a principal distinção refere-se à forma como os serviços são obtidos. Eles podem ser auto-fornecidos – o que significa que os usuários organizam os seus próprios serviços – ou ser obtidos junto de um fornecedor de serviços. A classificação TrackFin refere-se a este último caso como “uso servido”. Muitas famílias ou usuários industriais fornecem a si próprios serviços de água e saneamento, particularmente quando as redes de serviços são muito caras ou inacessíveis, ou quando a qualidade dos serviços da rede não são satisfatórios, por razões de horário de funcionamento incerto ou pela qualidade inadequada. Nestas circunstâncias, os usuários industriais podem criar a sua própria fonte de abastecimento de água. Ao nível das Contas WASH, é importante rastrear os fluxos financeiros separados para estes tipos de uso, pois “auto-abastecimento” normalmente indica usuários com características socioeconómicas diferentes das categorias de “servidos”. A TrackFin recomenda rastrear os fluxos financeiros por tipo de uso e não por usuários (i.e., os consumidores de bens e serviços WASH). Isto porque os fluxos financeiros terão que ser angariados independentemente do modo como os diferentes usuários obtêm ou recebem serviços. De facto, os usuários nem sempre podem ser incluídos numa única categoria. Os usuários domésticos, por exemplo, podem obter água de múltiplas fontes, incluindo através de fontes de auto-fornecimento ou de diferentes fornecedores. Os usuários podem investir num poço, por exemplo, através do auto-fornecimento, mas podem também pagar uma tarifa pelo abastecimento de água canalizada. É, por isso, difícil definir “categorias de usuário” capazes de englobar formas tão diversas de acesso a serviços, embora seja essencial para as Contas WASH distinguir entre os fluxos financeiros para os diferentes tipos de uso. Tabela 2. Classificação TrackFin para uso de serviços WASH, actores e tipos de financiamento do sector WASH (cont.) 18 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Os tipos de uso divergem também segundo a finalidade – principalmente, doméstica ou não doméstica. Os fins não domésticos incluem fins institucionais, industriais, agrícolas ou comerciais. Como a TrackFin está intimamente ligada ao relatório GLAAS, que acompanha as entradas gerais de recursos no sector, ela está especialmente dirigida para a identificação do financiamento dos serviços WASH destinados a uso doméstico, escolas e unidades de cuidados de saúde, em sintonia com os objectivos dos ODS. A metodologia recomenda a inclusão de fluxos financeiros para todos os tipos de uso que provavelmente são servidos em conjunto, mas requer que eles sejam rastreados separadamente. Isto significa que os usos doméstico, institucional, comercial e industrial deverão ser rastreados, ao contrário dos usos agrícola, hidroeléctrico ou ambiental, os quais tendem a ser servidos por sistemas separados. 2.2.2.2 Classificação dos actores WASH Os actores do sector WASH são caracterizados de acordo com o papel que desempenham no fornecimento e financiamento dos serviços WASH, sendo identificados do seguinte modo: • Prestadores/fornecedores de serviços que produzem e distribuem serviços WASH; e • Unidades de financiamento que recolhem fundos de várias fontes e os transferem para os fornecedores de serviços, eventualmente através de outras unidades de financiamento que reúnem e distribuem o financiamento, nomeadamente famílias, governos nacionais e internacionais, corporações privadas e organizações sem fins lucrativos. Potencial desafio: classificar os prestadores de serviços • Os prestadores de serviços podem ser classificados de muitas formas, conforme a sua dimensão, tipo de propriedade (privada ou pública, mandatada ou independente), ou estatuto (formal ou informal). Uma vez que a propriedade não é necessariamente relevante para as políticas públicas e é difícil de atribuir, a divisão entre operadores públicos e privados não é recomendada. Também é difícil separar os fornecedores segundo a sua dimensão. A classificação TrackFin centra-se, assim, no sector institucional a que pertencem (governos, corporações ou famílias). As empresas fornecedoras estão simplesmente divididas em categoria P2 – Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede, e P3 – Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição, uma vez que são financiadas de modo diferente. • Conforme as necessidades das políticas, os países poderão desagregar mais a classificação TrackFin e caracterizar os prestadores de serviços segundo critérios, como público ou privado, formal ou informal, dimensão do serviço, mandatado ou independente, etc. Quando as empresas são auto-fornecedoras, poderão ser registadas especificamente numa sub- categoria. Potencial desafio: incluir os actores numa única categoria WASH • Os actores podem desempenhar papéis diferentes mas simultâneos no sector WASH. Por isso, incluí-los numa única categoria poderá ser difícil. As famílias podem ser simultaneamente categorizadas como unidades de financiamento (pagando tarifas por um serviço) e como auto-fornecedores. Elas podem investir os seus próprios recursos e receber ao mesmo tempo subsídios do governo. Toda a informação sobre o fluxo do financiamento deverá ficar registada e codificada de forma apropriada, com um fluxo simples potencialmente registado de diferentes modos, para reflectir esta multiplicidade de papéis. • Distinguir entre fornecedores de serviços e unidades de financiamento: os fornecedores de serviços, tais como um serviço público (classificado como P2 – Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede), só são considerados como unidades de financiamento se injectarem capital no sector como investidores privados. Eles não são considerados unidades de financiamento que geram fundos através de tarifas e que as redirecionam ao sector, uma vez que apenas recolhem tarifas dos usuários. Neste caso, portanto, a unidade de financiamento é definida como FU1 – Usuários. Esta questão foi debatida durante o exercício-piloto, em que Gana e Brasil seguiram a abordagem proposta, mas Marrocos preferiu apresentar os fornecedores de serviços como uma fonte de tarifas. Os relatórios do Brasil e do Gana sobre a fase-piloto apresentam exemplos do modo de interpretar tabelas e gráficos das Contas WASH, usando estas classificações. 19Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional 2.2.2.3 Classificação dos tipos de financiamento WASH Os fluxos financeiros podem ser caracterizados de acordo com a natureza e origem do financiamento. Os tipos de financiamento são diferenciados de acordo com a sua origem. O financiamento pode provir de fontes privadas ou públicas. As fontes privadas incluem as famílias, através das tarifas pagas ou do seu próprio investimento, doações beneficentes ou investimento privado. As fontes públicas são resultantes de taxas geridas pelos governos nacionais ou internacionais, sob a forma de transferências públicas, através da ajuda pública ao desenvolvimento. Como os tipos financiamento não são, só por si, actores do sector, é importante identificar separadamente as unidades de financiamento que canalizam os fundos (ver o desafio da caixa que se segue). Potencial desafio: alinhar com os sistemas de classificação existentes • Os diferentes sistemas de classificação referem-se aos tipos de financiamento de forma ligeiramente diferente. Na terminologia 3T da OCDE, fonte de financiamento refere-se à origem do financiamento e ao tipo de fundos que podem ser mobilizados. A terminologia SEEA-Water refere-se a unidades de financiamento (actores agrupados por sectores de financiamento) que fornecem fundos ao sector. Para confundir ainda mais, a terminologia SHA refere-se a estas unidades de financiamento como fontes de financiamento. Nota Metodológica n.º 2: Classificação dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH fornece mais informação sobre as classificações 3T da OCDE e da SEEA-Water, e identifica quando os diferentes sistemas de classificação usam termos semelhantes ou idênticos. • Na classificação TrackFin, tipo de financiamento refere-se a fluxos financeiros, enquanto unidades de financiamento designam os actores cujos fundos são mobilizados. As usuários servidos (FU1.1) são unidades de financiamento que potencialmente fornecem dois tipos de financiamento ao sector: tarifas (FT1) e despesas do usuário com o auto-abastecimento (FT2). As autoridades nacionais (FU2) podem fornecer transferências públicas domésticas (FT3) e empréstimos em condições favoráveis, categorizados como financiamento reembolsável (FT6). Os grandes tipos de financiamento podem ser desagregados, por exemplo, para diferenciar entre vários tipos de financiamento reembolsável (favorável ou não favorável) ou entre tarifas pagas pelas famílias e as pagas por usuários não domésticos. 2.2.3 Tarefas a executar A equipa das Contas WASH identificará e classificará os usos, actores e fluxos financeiros WASH, com a finalidade de mapear a organização e o financiamento do sector 1. Este exercício de mapeamento poderá ter de ser realizado para cada um dos quatro principais subsectores, isto é, água e saneamento urbanos e água e saneamento rural, uma vez que a organização de cada um pode variar substancialmente. Por exemplo, os serviços de saneamento podem ser fornecidos conjuntamente com os serviços de água ou em separado. Em muitos casos, não há fornecedor formal de serviços de saneamento e as famílias têm de investir em saneamento local e fazerem elas próprias a manutenção das infraestruturas. A isto chama-se “auto- abastecimento”. A equipa deverá identificar quais as classificações existentes para os actores e tipos de financiamento WASH que estão a ser usadas pelo próprio INE ou pelo próprio sector WASH. Quando elas existem e são usadas, deverão ser identificadas as semelhanças e as diferenças em relação à classificação TrackFin. A partir deste conhecimento, cada país deverá então decidir que classificações deverá usar, para maximizar a quantidade de dados que podem ser razoavelmente recolhidos num determinado período de tempo. As classificações escolhidas deverão ser claramente explicadas. Na medida do possível, os dados deverão ser recolhidos de acordo com as classificações TrackFin apresentadas em Tabela 2. Consoante a estrutura do sector WASH no país, poderá não ser necessário usar todas as categorias. As categorias podem ainda ser adaptadas para facilitar uma maior desagregação, se as políticas assim o exigirem. Um país com um significativo atraso no investimento na área do saneamento rural, por exemplo, pode precisar de um maior grau de desagregação para esses serviços. 2.2.3.1 Identificar e classificar todos os usos e actores do sector WASH Isto implica elaborar uma lista de todos os actores do sector WASH e recolher informação básica a seu respeito. Apresentam-se, em seguida as orientações para este processo. 1 O mapeamento dos fluxos financeiros deve ser distinguido (e mantido em separado) do mapeamento dos acordos institucionais. Estes últimos mostram linhas de responsabilidade e atribuição de poderes e funções, incluindo formulação de políticas, regulamentos, propriedade dos activos e fornecimento de serviços, enquanto o mapeamento financeiro se concentra, principalmente, nos actores e na localização das origens do financiamento, o seu modo de entrada e o seu destino. 20 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Identificar os usos dos serviços WASH A equipa das Contas WASH deverá identificar os diferentes tipos de usos dos serviços WASH e identificar métodos de colecta de dados para cada tipo, focando especialmente o uso doméstico e institucional. A separação dos serviços WASH por tipo de uso, de acordo com a finalidade, poderá levantar alguns problemas de metodologia, como a seguir se descreve. Potencial desafio: separar os serviços WASH por tipo de uso, de acordo com a finalidade • Os prestadores de serviços WASH englobam um vasto leque de tipos de usuários, incluindo industriais, comerciais e usuários institucionais. Trata-se de uma diferença essencial em comparação com o sector da saúde, por exemplo, onde os serviços são usados, sobretudo, por pessoas individuais. • A desagregação financeira dos dados por uso (por exemplo, distinguir entre uso doméstico e institucional) é provável que seja mais demorada e, em certos casos, impossível de conseguir, dado que a maioria dos fornecedores municipais servem não só as famílias e instituições, mas também outros consumidores. • Em relação ao auto-fornecimento, as diferenças são mais fáceis de estabelecer, desde que haja informação disponível sobre este tipo de usuário. Os fluxos financeiros relativos às famílias em auto-abastecimento serão obtidos de fontes diferentes, por exemplo, da informação sobre usuários industriais que se auto-abastecem de água para a produção. • Para os usuários servidos, o financiamento dos fornecedores que servem, sobretudo, usuários domésticos e institucionais, deverá ser acompanhado prioritariamente, registando, se possível, a percentagem de receitas e despesas envolvidas relativamente a outros usuários (comerciais ou industriais). Para ser mais específico, os dados do fluxo financeiro para diferentes usos deverão ser recolhidos com base na tarifa paga pelos consumidores de serviços. Poderá assumir-se, por exemplo, que a água vendida a uma tarifa industrial é fornecida para uso industrial. Rastrear os fluxos financeiros para outros tipos de uso, como uso industrial, é também importante, porque os usuários industriais podem estar a fornecer subsídios cruzados às famílias, se estiver envolvido o mesmo fornecedor de serviços. Neste contexto, o crescimento no uso industrial auto-fornecido poderá ser uma fonte de problemas para o sector em geral, pois poderá traduzir-se numa redução de subsídios cruzados ao sector WASH doméstico. Se, no entanto, os dados sobre o uso em auto-fornecimento forem escassos, a prioridade é rastrear o uso doméstico. Os países podem ainda usar outros critérios para classificar os usos, consoante as questões políticas a que pretendam dar resposta e a disponibilidade de dados. Os usos domésticos podem ser ainda classificados do seguinte modo: • Regiões geográficas (R) – Regiões ou distritos definidos pelo pais, usando central quando as atividades abrangerem todas as regiões. • Áreas de serviços (A) – Urbana, rural ou central, de acordo com a definição do pais. Use central quando nem urbana nem rural se aplicam porque as duas áreas se beneficiam, por exemplo, atividades de apoio do estado ou uma ONG, desempenhada por um ator centralizado ou descentralizado. • Estratos socioeconómicos (nível de rendimentos, escalão tarifário). Identificar prestadores de serviços A equipa das Contas WASH deve identificar os fornecedores de serviços para os quatro principais subsectores (serviços urbanos de água, serviços urbanos de saneamento, serviços rurais de água e serviços rurais de saneamento) e para os serviços que fornecem. Devem colectar-se dados sobre os principais fornecedores ou principais tipos de fornecedores, com foco no seguinte: • Suas características e estatuto jurídico (propriedade pública ou privada, empresa ou não empresa, formal ou informal); • Os serviços WASH que produzem; • Os tipos de usu e de usuários que abrangem (incluindo números); • Cobertura geográfica e recursos humanos; • Número de entidades que se incluem nesta categoria. 21Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Potencial desafio: garantir que serão considerados todos os fornecedores de serviços • O papel das famílias como auto-fornecedores deverá ser cabalmente reconhecido. Em muitos países da África Subsariana não há fornecimento formal de serviços de saneamento. As famílias e, por vezes, os usuários comerciais, investem em soluções de água e saneamento num só local e mantêm, eles próprios, as instalações. Essa despesa pode representar uma parte substancial do total da despesa no sector e deve ser incluída na categoria P5 – Usuários auto-fornecidos. • Os fornecedores de serviços informais devem, quando possível, ser incluídos no mapeamento. Embora as actividades económicas dos actores informais possam não ser contabilizadas pelos institutos de estatística, elas representam, frequentemente, uma percentagem significativa dos fornecedores de serviços WASH nos países em desenvolvimento. Usando a classificação TrackFin, eles seriam classificados como categoria P3 – Empresas prestadores de servieços sem rede de distribuição. Os fluxos financeiros para actores informais terão, provavelmente, de ser estimados, visto que, oficialmente, raramente são registados. O Instituto Nacional de Estatística poderá dar orientações sobre o modo como as actividades informais no sector WASH são valorizadas. • Algumas empresas que, por si só, não são fornecedoras de serviços WASH, mas que, de algum modo, estão envolvidas no ciclo das actividades WASH, podem ser mais difíceis de classificar. Em Marrocos, por exemplo, uma percentagem significativa do investimento em hardware para as redes de água e esgotos, não provém de fornecedores de serviços, mas de promotores de habitação e imobiliário. Os promotores investem em redes e depois transferem a gestão e as operações dessas redes para a principal empresa de serviços de água. Na Classificação TrackFin, estes promotores de habitação estão categorizados como P3 – Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição. Identificar unidades de financiamento A equipa das Contas WASH deverá identificar unidades de financiamento relevantes que forneçam e/ou aloquem fundos ao sector. Algumas unidades de financiamento, tais como instituições do governo central, fazem-no com os seus próprios recursos, enquanto outras canalizam fundos que lhes são fornecidos por outras instituições, recebidos de diferentes tipos de financiamento. A Categoria FU4 – Autoridades Locais, por exemplo, pode canalizar fundos da categoria FU2 – Autoridades Nacionais ou da categoria FU8 – Doadores bilaterais e multilaterais. Estes podem também ter as suas próprias fontes de financiamento, tais como fundos gerados internamente a partir de recursos locais, impostos sobre a propriedade, contribuições autárquicas ou taxas de saneamento. São, por isso, necessários dados sobre as características e estatuto dessas entidades e sobre as organizações e programas que elas financiam, para se compreender se actuam como fontes de financiamento primárias ou secundárias. Se forem secundárias, isso significa que estão apenas a canalizar fundos. A caixa abaixo fornece informações mais detalhadas. Potencial desafio: evitar a dupla contagem entre as unidades de financiamento • Para determinar a despesa global no sector WASH, os fluxos financeiros devem ser calculados ao nível da unidade de financiamento, através da qual eles entram no sector. Um dos princípios básicos é o de que um fluxo deve ser registado apenas como um tipo de financiamento. O financiamento dos doadores canalizado para as autoridades locais, através do governo nacional, por exemplo, deve ser sempre registado como FT4 – transferências públicas internacionais. É também por isso que FT1 – Tarifas pelos serviços prestados, é considerada como originária da FU1 – Usuários (i.e., a unidade financiadora que injectou a receita no sector), e não FU5 – Empresas prestadores de serviços com rede de distribuição. A aplicação sistemática desta regra elimina o risco de dupla contagem na despesa global. Do mesmo modo, os únicos fundos injectados pela FU5 – Empresas prestadoras de serviços com rede de distribuição seriam lucros reinvestidos ou investimentos de capital, registados como FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. • No entanto, os fluxos financeiros também terão de ser registados de outras formas, para permitir a investigação de várias questões políticas essenciais, nomeadamente para que são usados os fundos e como são canalizados. Cada fluxo financeiro deverá, portanto, ser “codificado” com mais detalhe, para controlar a sua distribuição de várias formas, tais como: – Desembolso directo para os fornecedores de serviços – Canalizados através de outra unidade financiadora – Recebidos de outra entidade financiadora e desembolsados para os fornecedores de serviços. Outras orientações são fornecidas na Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento 22 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS 2.2.3.2 Mapear os actores do WASH e os fluxos financeiros Depois de recolhido o essencial desta informação, a segunda tarefa consiste em mapear a organização e o financiamento do sector, mostrando como o dinheiro circula entre os diferentes actores. O mapeamento visual dos fluxos financeiros é a melhor forma de o fazer, como se apresenta esquematicamente na Figura 6 abaixo, para um sector WASH hipotético. A figura é apenas ilustrativa, não cobrindo todas as possibilidades. A figura pode também ser usada para colectar informação sobre a disponibilidade dos dados. A equipa das Contas WASH pode demonstrar visualmente as diferenças entre os fluxos financeiros, em relação aos quais a TrackFin possui, provavelmente, dados precisos e fidedignos, e aqueles em que se prevêem dificuldades. Podem usar-se linhas sólidas para indicar os dados potencialmente fidedignos e linhas pontilhadas para os fluxos em relação aos quais apenas se podem esperar estimativas grosseiras. A cada tipo pode igualmente atribuir-se um número, para facilitar a identificação das fontes dos dados e as metodologias das estimativas em fases posteriores. Governos doadores e agências multilaterais Credores comerciais ONGs internacionais e locais e fundações Instituto de microfinancais Investidores em capital próprio Famílias “servidas” (tarifas) Famílias, investimentos em auto-abastecimento (parte de tarifas) Governo central Tipos de financiamento: Tarifas por serviços fornecidos Financiamento privado reembolsável Transferências voluntárias Transferências públicas internacionais Transferências públicas domésticas Despesas próprias das famílias para auto- abastecimento Entidades institucionais: Unidades financiadoras Prestadores de serviços Prestação de serviços Prestação de serviços Figura 6. Mapeamento dos fluxos financeiros para o fornecimento de serviços WASH: exemplo ilustrativo Prestadores de serviços Governos regionais Governos regionais 23Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Caixa 8 abaixo ilustra os conceitos acima apresentados, usando o Brasil como exemplo. Mostra como os actores e os fluxos foram identificados e classificados, para mapear o financiamento do sector. Caixa 8. Identificação e classificação dos actores e fluxos financeiros do sector WASH – o exemplo do Brasil O fornecimento de serviços WASH no Brasil tem de ser visto no contexto da estrutura política geral. A Federação Brasileira consiste num governo nacional (federal) e em governos subnacionais, que compreendem 26 Estados, 5570 municípios e um Distrito Federal. Os três níveis do governo são política e administrativamente independentes uns dos outros. Os municípios são responsáveis pela organização, gestão e fornecimento directo ou indirecto de serviços públicos WASH locais, nas zonas urbanas e rurais. O governo federal e os governos dos Estados, em colaboração com os municípios, implementam programas de água, habitação e saneamento básico. O governo federal é igualmente responsável pela criação de orientações e regulamentos gerais, para a gestão de serviços por todos os níveis de governo, em coordenação com o Ministério das Cidades, que é responsável pela água e saneamento. O Ministério das Cidades coordena ainda o SNIS. Este sistema tem sido usado ao nível federal e recolhe um manancial de informação do sector sobre os fornecedores de serviços de todo o país (91% dos municípios com relação à água e 65,5% com relação à recolha de lixo). O Ministério da Saúde é também responsável pelo fornecimento directo de serviços WASH às populações indígenas das zonas rurais. Não existe um regulador nacional central dos serviços de água e saneamento, mas os recursos hídricos são regulados a nível central. Os fornecedores de serviços e as unidades de financiamento fornecem serviços de água e saneamento nas zonas urbanas e rurais e, por isso, não foi necessário criar quatro mapas de subsectores para os actores. Prestadores de serviços No Brasil, 26% dos municípios fornecem água directamente através dos prestadores de serviços locais e 78% fornecem directamente serviços de saneamento. Por outro lado, há 26 prestadores regionais que fornecem serviços de abastecimento de água, a nível de estado, a 64% dos municípios e serviços de saneamento a 22%. Há seis pequenos prestadores regionais que servem um pequeno número de municípios. Alguns destes prestadores de serviços são entidades públicas e outros são entidades privadas. Estes prestadores oferecem serviços WASH através de vários acordos de fornecimento, incluindo acordos directos, indirectos (delegados), geridos em conjunto, centralizados, descentralizados, por consórcios e através de contratos de concessão. As ONG e as OBC participam na promoção da higiene. As famílias das zonas rurais que constroem as suas próprias instalações de saneamento actuam igualmente como fornecedores de serviços. Unidades de financiamento (apresentadas em negrito) e tipos de financiamento (apresentados em itálico): • Os principais tipos de fluxos financeiros são as tarifas pagas pelos usuários servidos, nomeadamente famílias, indústrias e instituições. Os usuários também fornecem despesas para auto-fornecimento. • As principais despesas do governo federal são feitas com as transferência públicas (subvenções) do orçamento federal e com o financiamento reembolsável gerido através de 1) Esquema de financiamento do Fundo de Garantia por Tempo de Serviço (FGTS) gerido pela Caixa Económica Federal (CAIXA), um banco público, e 2) o Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Económico e Social (BNDES), com financiamento do Fundo de Assistência ao Trabalhador (FAT), que é um fundo público sob a tutela do Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego, e outros fundos mais pequenos que fornecem financiamento de capital próprio. • Alguns Estados também possuem programas específicos para o sector, financiados através de transferências públicas dos seus próprios fundos estatais, normalmente oriundos dos direitos de exploração petrolífera ou de multas ambientais e compensações (por exemplo, os estados do Rio de Janeiro, Espírito Santo e Bahia) ou de receitas dos recursos hídricos (Fehidro de São Paulo). Alguns programas estatais também são financiados por financiamento reembolsável das suas próprias instituições financeiras estatais de desenvolvimento, tais como o Banco de Desenvolvimento de Minas Gerais (BDMG). Estas fontes são importantes, numa perspectiva local, mas não muito significativas a nível nacional. • O restante do financiamento é recebido de doadores multilaterais e bilaterais pela execução de obras e desenvolvimento institucional. Esses doadores incluem o Banco Internacional para a Reconstrução e Desenvolvimento (IBRD), o Banco Internacional de Desenvolvimento (IDB), o KFW da Alemanha e a agência japonesa JICA /JBIC. O Governo Federal também recebeu financiamento significativo do IBRD, para implementar o Programa de Desenvolvimento do Sector da Água (INTERÁGUAS), focado na formação de capacidades institucionais e no planificação integrado do sector da água. Trata-se, sobretudo, de subvenções (transferências públicas internacionais). • Desde 2004, as parcerias público-privadas têm sido permitidas por lei e o seu número aumentou bastante, mas, apesar disso, as contribuições de capital privado de empresas prestadoras de serviço (uma forma de financiamento reembolsável) do sector continuam a ser escassas. • As ONG e OBC também atribuem algumas contribuições voluntárias ao sector. 24 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS 2.3 Estimar os fluxos financeiros e os stocks de activos fixos O objectivo principal da metodologia TrackFin é colectar dados financeiros, nomeadamente os seguintes dois tipos de dados: • Dados sobre os fluxos financeiros: uma estimativa do financiamento que entra anualmente no sector e que é oriundo de tarifas, despesas familiares para o auto-abastecimento, transferências públicas domésticas, transferências públicas internacionais, transferências voluntárias e fundos reembolsáveis, e quanto se “gasta” no fornecimento de serviços; • Dados sobre os stocks de activos fixos: uma estimativa de quanto foi investido pelos actores económicos na criação de activos WASH ao longo dos anos. Isso constitui a base para planificar a gestão dos activos, o que é fundamental para o futuro planificação financeira. Passo 2.3 – Tarefas a executar • Compreender as abordagens para a estimativa dos fluxos financeiros e stocks de activos fixos e familiarizar-se com a classificação dos custos. • Identificar os dados necessários para responder às perguntas sobre políticas feitas no Passo 1.3. – Identificar se o Instituto Nacional de Estatística já colecte dados sobre o financiamento WASH e, em caso afirmativo, compreender a sua metodologia; – Identificar se existe uma base de dados nacional para o sector que já colecte informação financeira; – Criar uma visão geral das bases de dados disponíveis e propor métodos de colecta dos dados em falta; e – Decidir se os fluxos financeiros e/ou os stocks de activos fixos serão incluídos no âmbito das Contas WASH, conforme a disponibilidade dos dados. • Colectar dados sobre fluxos financeiros na fonte, começando com a abordagem que permita a criação de um conjunto de dados mais abrangentes (a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento ou a Abordagem Baseada em Custos). – Note-se que ambas as abordagens terão de ser aplicadas em paralelo, visto que fornecem informação complementar essencial para a atribuição de custos aos tipos de serviços; • Colectar dados sobre stocks de activos fixos, usando a Abordagem de Stocks de Activos Fixos (se esta abordagem também for seleccionada). • Introduzir os dados financeiros na base de dados das Contas WASH: – Criar uma ferramenta de colecta de dados ou definir a estrutura da base de dados e os registos de dados, de modo a facilitar a sua manutenção regular e contínua; e – Codificar todas as entradas de dados, usando os códigos de classificação das Contas WASH. • Ajustar os dados, identificar as lacunas na informação e recomendar/efectuar pesquisas suplementares. 2.3.1 Fundamentos Até o momento, a maioria das iniciativas de controlo financeiro têm-se centrado nos fluxos financeiros. Isso tem origem, muitas vezes, na importância atribuída ao controlo dos fluxos financeiros públicos, visto que os orçamentos públicos, normalmente, estabelecem uma distinção entre despesas “correntes” e despesas de “desenvolvimento” (i.e., investimento de capital). Por conseguinte, os dados sobre os orçamentos para o desenvolvimento das contas de organismos públicos são, frequentemente, usadas para fazer uma estimativa do investimento de capital dos governos. O presente documento de orientação defende que a colecta de dados sobre stocks de activos fixos, juntamente com os dados sobre fluxos financeiros, é importante para se compreender melhor o valor global dos activos. No entanto, isso torna-se muitas vezes difícil, devido a deficiências nos dados. Propõe-se, portanto, que a colecta de dados sobre stocks de activos fixos apenas seja tentada se as Contas WASH baseadas em fluxos financeiros já tiverem sido calculadas, pelo menos, uma vez, e as fontes de dados tiverem sido todas bem mapeadas com antecedência. Notas Metodológicas 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos Esta nota constitui a fundamentação para se usar a Abordagem dos Stocks de Activos Fixos como complemento à Abordagem dos Fluxos Financeiros, fornecendo outras orientações sobre o modo como esta abordagem pode ser aplicada. Refere-se também à experiência do Brasil neste domínio. 25Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional 2.3.2 Metodologias de colecta de dados sobre fluxos financeiros e stocks de activos fixos A colecta de informação sobre fluxos financeiros pode fazer-se segundo duas abordagens: • A Abordagem por Tipo de Financiamento consiste em rastrear os fluxos de cada unidade de financiamento, para estimar a quantidade de dinheiro atribuída ao sector e agregar as estimativas por tipo de financiamento; • A Abordagem Baseada em Custos consiste em rastrear as despesas efectuadas com os diferentes serviços, para estimar o que está a ser gasto e calcular os números totais das despesas, agregando-as por tipo de custo. A Abordagem por Tipo de Financiamento responde a perguntas como “Quais são as principais unidades de financiamento do sector?” e “Quanto se gastou?”. Na maioria dos casos, esta parece ser a abordagem mais directa ao acompanhamento dos fluxos financeiros públicos, visto que muitas entidades públicas que actuam como unidades financiadoras têm uma dotação orçamental para o sector e poderão apresentar os respectivos relatórios. A equipa das Contas WASH deve procurar recolher dados sobre as despesas reais das unidades financiadoras, a partir dos seus relatórios financeiros e das fontes de dados acima indicadas. Devem também recolher dados sobre as receitas a partir das demonstrações de fluxos de caixa dos fornecedores de serviços. No entanto, esta abordagem, só por si, não é suficiente, quando se procura saber como os fundos são gastos — a sua distribuição entre água e saneamento, por exemplo — ou recolher informação sobre certas fontes de financiamento, tais como despesas familiares. Pelas razões acima mencionadas, muitas vezes, é necessário combinar a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento com a Abordagem Baseada em Custos, para avaliar os custos do fornecimento de serviços. Isso deve fazer-se com base na tipologia de custos proposta pela TrackFin, distinguindo, no mínimo, entre despesas de capital (incluindo as grandes despesas de manutenção, que devem ser contabilizadas como um item separado), custos operacionais e despesas de manutenção menores. A combinação das duas abordagens melhora a qualidade da informação e facilita o nível de informação necessária para criar Contas WASH capazes de dar resposta a importantes questões de políticas públicas. Uma abordagem alternativa, que consiste na colecta de dados sobre stocks de activos fixos, é designada de Abordagem de Stocks de Activos Fixos. Este método estima o valor dos stocks de activos existentes no sector e está em linha com o Sistema de Contas Nacionais, embora seja potencialmente mais difícil de aplicar. Os dados desta abordagem também terão de ser obtidos a nível dos fornecedores de serviços, com foco nos seus activos (e potencialmente nos passivos) e não nas suas receitas e despesas. Estas abordagens e a forma como podem ser combinadas são apresentadas esquematicamente na Figura 7 abaixo. Figura 7. Metodologias para estimar as despesas no sector WASH ABORDAGEM DOS STOCKS DE ACTIVOS FIXOS Valores dos stocks de activos fixos ABORDAGEM COMBINADA Calcular as despesas WASH nacionais e alocar por: Regiões geográficas Usos WASH Tipo de despesa Despesas WASH nacionais estimadas ABORDAGEM DO TIPO DE FINANCIAMENTO Fundos das unidades financiadoras alocados por tipos de financiamento ABORDAGEM BASEADA EM CUSTOS Despesas dos prestadores com o fornecimento de serviços FLUXOS FINANCEIROS Áreas de serviços 26 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Ao estimar os fluxos financeiros, é importante usar a mesma abordagem de contabilidade e terminologia comum para os tipos de financiamento e os custos. Isso permitirá a comparabilidade dos dados, não só em todas as actividades, anos e países, mas também em compração com outros agregados económicos, tais como o produto interno bruto1. O documento de orientação recomenda a colecta de dados sobre os fluxos financeiros reais, usando um método de contabilidade dos fluxos de caixa, tanto para as despesas como para as receitas. A justificativa para proceder desta maneira é discutida em mais detalhas nas alternativas. Ao usar a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento, é também essencial esclarecer se devem ser recolhidos os fluxos orçamentados ou os fluxos reais. Este documento recomenda que, quando possível, devem ser recolhidos os fluxos reais; isso constituirá um retrato mais fiel do que realmente se gasta e permitirá comparar com as despesas feitas. Eventualmente, poderemos deparar-nos com alguns problemas metodológicos, como abaixo se descreve. Qualquer que seja a metodologia usada, os tipos of fluxos financeiros a controlar devem ser claramente registados, para se poderem fazer comparações. Potencial desafio: controlar as despesas reais vs. despesas orçamentadas • Quando se usa a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento, podem registar-se diferentes fluxos financeiros, oscilando desde as despesas comprometidas ou orçamentadas até às despesas reais no local. Embora a informação orçamental possa ser mais fácil de colectar (particularmente em relação às transferências de instituições públicas), é preferível obter montantes de despesas reais para todos os tipos de fluxos financeiros controlados, usando a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento. Isso permite a comparação entre diferentes fontes de financiamento (incluindo com o financiamento fornecido pelas famílias, para o qual só os números reais estarão disponíveis) e constitui uma representação mais rigorosa das despesas no sector. Também facilita a ajuste da informação sobre o fluxo financeiro total, usando tanto a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento como a Abordagem Baseada em Custos. • Se é difícil obter informação sobre as despesas reais, é possível estimá-las com base nos montantes orçamentados e nas percentagens estimadas para as despesas orçamentais reais, com base na experiência passada. Isso pode ser complementado com uma avaliação qualitativa e quantitativa de programas ou investimenos específicos, para determinar a diferença entre os montantes orçamentados e as despesas reais. A mais longo prazo, rastrear múltiplos tipos de fluxos financeiros em paralelo pode ser útil para avaliar a eficácia das despesas. No entanto, este não é um objectivo imediato do exercício e a necessidade de manter mútiplos conjuntos de dados pode gerar complexidades. Nem sempre o financiamento atribuído ao sector poderá traduzir-se em serviços realmente consumidos, devido a perdas ocorridas no caminho. De preferência, essas perdas deveriam ser quantificadas. A Iniciativa TrackFin poderá ajudar a quantificar os montantes que foram orçamentados ou atribuídos, mas não resultaram em prestação de serviços. As seguintes notas metodológicas fornecem orientações adicionais para a aplicação dessas abordagens e as necessidades de dados associados: • Nota Metodológica n.º 3: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa e metodologias alternativas. • Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento • Nota Metodológica n.º 5: Estimar os custos do fornecimento de serviços usando a Abordagem Baseada em Custos • Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos 2.3.3 Tarefas a executar 2.3.3.1 Identificar fontes de dados e definir métodos de colecta de dados A primeira tarefa é identificar que dados devem ser recolhidos, e em que detalhe, para conseguir a alocação da despesa a categorias específicas. Antes de começar, é importante compreender as Notas Metodológicas 3 a 6, que fornecem orientações detalhadas sobre os métodos e fontes de dados, para estimar os diferentes tipos de financiamento, custos e stocks de activos fixos. Ao colectar os dados, a equipa das Contas WASH deve adoptar uma abordagem combinada, procurando fontes agregadas e abrangentes, mas combinando-as com a colecta de dados mais detalhados da fonte. 1 O Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) é um indicador do fluxo financeiro: o PIB estima o valor total dos bens e serviços produzidos num país, com base nas despesas de produção e consumo. Indica o valor monetário total de todos os bens acabados e serviços produzidos dentro das fronteiras de um país, num determinado período de tempo (normalmente, um ano). Inclui todo o consumo público e privado, despesas públicas, investimentos e exportações menos as importações que ocorrem dentro de um território definido. É derivado dos números da despesa reportados nas Contas Nacionais. 27Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Com base numa análise inicial dos dados disponíveis, a equipa das Contas WASH terá de preparar questionários e documentos pró-forma para a colecta de dados. O secretariado da TrackFin pode disponibilizar alguns elementos, a pedido. Para fins dos testes-piloto do Documento de Orientação, foi elaborado um formato simples de Excel para a colecta de dados, com base no software usado para preparar as Contas da Saúde, que é conhecido como o instrumento de produção e análise de Contas da Saúde. Durante os testes-piloto, verificou-se que se podem usar folhas de cálculo normais como guias para desenvolver instrumentos de colecta de dados específicos para o país. No Brasil e em Marrocos, a equipa das Contas WASH desenvolveu a sua própria folha de cálculo Excel adaptada, de modo a que refletisse a disponibilidade de dados a nível do país. Isso foi feito para minimizar a necessidade de repetir o tratamento dos dados. No entanto, o exercício de colecta de dados implicou a colecta de um grande número de dados financeiros (até 13 000 dados no caso de Marrocos) e a sua compilação em múltiplas dimensões, o que foi difícil de tratar no Excel. O instrumento TrackFin foi usado em Gana, o país que tinha os dados menos detalhadas. Com base no exercício-piloto e na experiência do sector da saúde, existem planos de médio prazo para desenvolver um “instrumento automático de colecta de dados”, com vista a facilitar a compilação das Contas WASH ao longo de vários anos. Isso facilitará a monitoria contínua, como abaixo se explica em mais detalhar. Desenvolver um instrumento de colecta de dados das Contas WASH com base no modelo dos instrumentos das Contas da Saúde • Com base na experiência do sector da saúde, será desenvolvido nos próximos anos um instrumento de colecta e análise de dados semelhante aos instrumentos das Contas da Saúde. Ele poderá ser usado para preparar as Contas WASH com regularidade e o mínimo de apoio externo. O sector da saúde desenvolveu dois instrumentos separados: um instrumento de produção de Contas da Saúde e outro de análise das Contas da Saúde. Estes instrumentos são, actualmente, usados por mais de 40 países, e são valorizados pelo apoio sistemático que fornecem. Os instrumentos de produção e análise poderão ser combinados num único instrumento. • Um software semelhante aos instrumentos das Contas da Saúde será criado para simplificar o exercício, normalizando o tratamento de dados e reduzindo os custos da replicação anual do exercício. Este instrumento processará informação em diferentes formatos, para diferentes países, mas os operadores terão de atribuir códigos a cada tipo de dados, para que possam ser processados para a produção das Contas WASH. Se forem usados os mesmos formatos de dados nos anos seguintes, a necessidade de codificação dos dados será muito reduzida nas sucessivas repetições. • O instrumento ajudará, igualmente, a codificar diferentes tipos de fluxos, a evitar a duplicação de contas, a visualizar como os fluxos financeiros são distribuídos entre os diferentes tipos de financiamento ou unidades financiadoras e a produzir tabelas resumidas e tabelas dinâmicas das Contas WASH. Ajudará também no acompanhamento e responsabilização adequada do trabalho subjacente aos números, podendo ser usado como repositório dos questionários e documentos pró-forma para a colecta de dados que foram adaptados ao país. Uma importante fonte de dados é, provavelmente, o Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). É importante verificar se o INE já colecte dados sobre o financiamento da WASH e, em caso afirmativo, compreender a metodologia por ele usada. A informação recolhida pelos INE pode constituir importante informação de base e indicar se eles criaram ou não sistemas de colecta de dados do sector WASH. No entanto, a informação recolhida pelos INE tem limitações. Em primeiro lugar, o SCN foca um aspecto principal da despesa nacional, nomeadamente a criação de valor nos processos de produção. Portanto, esta informação pode, principalmente, ser usada para estimar as despesas e as receitas dos fornecedores de serviços. Em segundo lugar, a informação recolhida através do sistema de contas nacionais poderá ser difícil de compreender e interpretar. Usa terminologia e conceitos com os quais os actores do sector WASH podem não estar familiarizados e não é provável que a informação forneça o nível de detalhe necessário para apoiar a elaboração de políticas do sector. Apesar disso, é importante envolver o INE para compreender melhor as suas metodologias de colecta de dados e influenciar o modo como eles conduzem as pesquisas regulares (por exemplo, sobre as despesas familiares com o WASH). Isso deverá facilitar a colecta de dados rigorosos e assegurar o envolvimento dos INEs na preparação periódica das Contas WASH. Outras importantes fontes de informação são os principais fornecedores de serviços e as unidades financiadoras do país. A equipa deve ter capacidade para recolher informação primária sobre os padrões de despesa dessas fontes. Poderá também ser possível obter dados de um sistema já existente de monitoria e informação, tal como foi o caso no Brasil, através do SNIS. Este sistema já existe há 20 anos e recolhe dados sobre um número muito vasto de fornecedores de serviços, em todo o país (ver mais detalhadas na Caixa 10). Os dados relativos ao Tipo de Financiamento e Abordagens baseadas em Custos devem ser identificados em paralelo. Para ajudar a criar a base de dados, a equipa das Contas WASH deve identificar as principais fontes de dados, das 28 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS quais se poderá extrair informação sobre a despesa. A criação de um inventário das fontes de dados pode ajudar a rastrear os conjuntos de dados essenciais disponíveis e a identificar se há informação em falta ou se é necessária mais investigação, designadamente, pesquisas às famílias. Para cada tipo de dados, é útil recolher o tipo de informação indicado na Caixa 9 abaixo. Caixa 9. Criar um repositório de fontes de dados Para cada fonte de dados, é importante recolher os seguintes meta dados (i.e., dados que descrevam e forneçam informação acerca de outros dados). Isso ajudará a rastrear a proveniência dos dados, como são recolhidos e esclarecer o que elese incluem, de modo a constituir uma base para replicar o exercício em anos seguintes. • Nome da fonte de dados • Administração/instituição/ origem da fonte • Tipo de fonte de dados (registos, pesquisas às empresas) • Método de colecta (fonte administrativa, âmbito estatístico completo ou modelo de pesquisa; fonte nacional versus pesquisa internacional normalizado) • Disponibilidade de dados (anos dos dados disponíveis) • Conceito de unidades de medição (custos, despesas, facturação) • Variação na metodologia usada para estimar os dados ao longo do tempo • Margens de fiabilidade dos dados, i.e., até que ponto os dados são fiáveis? A metodologia de compilação dos dados é identificável? Isto pode ser avaliado através de um sistema de pontuação. Relativamente aos dados referente às despesas, será importante registar o nível de desagregação possível para as diferentes fontes de dados, para responder às seguintes questões: • A despesa pode ser atribuída a categorias de fornecedores ou tipos de financiamento e unidades? • A despesa pode ser atribuída a categorias de serviços WASH ? • A despesa pode ser atribuída por tipo (por exemplo, para diferenciar entre os custos de investimento, operação e manutenção ou grandes despesas de capital para manutenção? Quando for evidente que não estão disponíveis dados “objectivos” fiáveis, a equipa das Contas WASH terá de fazer estimativas para preencher as lacunas. Terá igualmente de especificar como essas estimativas poderão ser ajustadas em futuras repetições do exercício. Para tal, o repositório de dados deverá assinalar claramente onde as estimativas foram feitas para cada tipo de dados recolhidos. A Caixa 10 abaixo apresenta o principal tipo de fontes de dados usado nos países onde a metodologia foi testada e os métodos propostos para estimar os dados em falta. As fontes de dados usadas para cada país dependia do estado do sistema de monitoria e informação para o sector e da disponibilidade de dados financeiros. Nos três países, não havia informação prontamente disponível dos Institutos Nacionais de Estatística, mas o exercício TrackFin constituiu uma plataforma útil para as partes interessadas do sector WASH entrarem em diálogo com os INE sobre formas de aumentar a disponibilidade de dados WASH. Caixa 10. Exemplo de métodos de colecta de dados do exercício-piloto No Brasil, a equipa das Contas WASH baseou-se no SNIS, uma base de dados electrónica que reúne dados económicos e financeiros sobre o fornecimento de serviços WASH pelos municípios. O SNIS cobre todo o país, mas como o fornecimento de dados é voluntário, actualmente contém dados para, aproximadamente, 89% dos municípios relativamente aos serviços de abastecimento de água e 35% relativamente ao saneamento. No entanto, a maioria dos municípios que não fornecem dados são pequenos e rurais. Isso significa que os dados existentes representam 97,3% e 80,4%, no que diz respeito, respectivamente, à água e ao saneamento nos centros urbanos. O SNIS não tem quaisquer dados sistemáticos sobre os serviços nas zonas rurais, particularmente nas aldeias mais pequenas. Para povoações rurais de maiores dimensões, os dados são, normalmente, agregados com o sector urbano. Para conhecer as despesas dos fornecedores de serviços em mais detalhe, recolheram-se também os relatórios financeiros dos maiores fornecedores de serviços WASH. O relatório anual sobre despesa pública para o “saneamento básico” (que inclui abastecimento de água, saneamento e resíduos sólidos), preparado pelo Ministério das Cidades, constituiu também uma importante fonte de dados, tal como o Portal da Transparência do governo federal. Contém informação sistemática e detalhada sobre a despesa do governo federal no sector WASH, a todos os níveis de governo, incluindo transferências domésticas para os governos subnacionais e instituições públicas regionais e locais e ONG que operam no sector. Finalmente, o pesquisa nacional às famílias e os pesquisas sobre os orçamentos familiares do IBGE (Instituto Brasileiro de Geográfia e Estatística) foram usados para estimar as auto- despesas familiares. O exercício TrackFin ajudou a identificar potenciais melhorias nesses pesquisas, que o IBGE estava preparado para assumir no final do exercício. Estão disponíveis dados desagregados entre as regiões, que indicam que a análise regional é possível, quando há recursos disponíveis. 29Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Caixa 10. Exemplo de métodos de colecta de dados do exercício-piloto (cont.) Em Gana, a disponibilidade de dados foi uma das grandes dificuldades do exercício, uma vez que os dados não estão prontamente disponíveis em nenhum sistema de informação. Os dados tiveram de ser recolhidos no sistema ou relatórios das próprias instituições, quando existiam. Os dados obtidos estiveram, normalmente, disponíveis ao nível de desagregação necessário para a análise. O exercício TrackFin foi, por isso, fundamental para identificar a falta de dados e propor medidas para melhorar a colecta de dados no sector. O exercício coincidiu com o lançamento de um sistema de gestão financeira central para o sector público - o Sistema Integrado do Gana para a Informação sobre Gestão Financeira (GIFMIS) - com vista a melhorar o acompanhamento das despesas governamentais. Um importante problema identificado durante o exercício foi a inexistência, neste momento, no sistema, de um código específico para a água ou o saneamento. O consultor nacional fez uma apresentação à Comissão Directiva do GIFMIS sobre o desenvolvimento dos sistemas de informação do sector WASH, sublinhando a necessidade de rastrear as despesas governamentais com o WASH e de criar novos códigos do GIFMIS para aumentar o potencial de acompanhamento desagregado das despesas WASH. Em Marrocos, o sistema de informação do sector não colete informação financeira dos serviços de utilidade pública. Foi, por isso, concebido um questionário para colectar dados primários directamente dos principais serviços de utilidade pública, organismos públicos e ministérios. Foram também recolhidos relatórios financeiros dessas instituições. Não foi possível recolher dados dos municípios pequenos não servidos pela ONEE (o principal serviço de utilidade pública), nem por um concessionário privado. Estes pequenos municípios fornecem os serviços directamente, ou através de uma OBC. Como resultado, foram muito escassos os dados sobre o WASH nas zonas rurais. Para o exercício seguinte, foi proposta a realização de uma pesquisa a uma amostra de municípios, para corrigir essa lacuna. Também não existe informação consolidada sobre o financiamento de doadores internacionais e, por isso, no próximo exercício, poderá ser elaborado um questionário para doadores, com o objectivo de se obterem mais detalhes sobre os tipos de financiamento. Uma vez identificadas as fontes e as categorias dos dados, e antes de iniciar a colecta dos dados, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá preparar um relatório provisório, resumindo os principais resultados dos Passos 1, 2.1 e 2.2, para ser apresentado ao dinamizador da TrackFin e ao grupo de partes interessadas nacionais. Este relatório deve, de preferência, ser apresentado numa reunião do grupo de partes interessadas nacionais, onde se poderá fazer um debate aprofundado sobre a disponibilidade de dados, obstáculos e modos de completar a falta de dados, antes de se iniciarem exercícios de colecta de dados. No website da TrackFin, encontra-se um esboço de proposta de relatório provisório. Esse relatório deve conter a seguinte informação: • Definição do âmbito das Contas WASH (duração, limites geográficos e serviços WASH para os quais os fluxos financeiros serão acompanhados); • Identificação dos principais actores e fluxos financeiros no sector WASH e mapa associado dos fluxos financeiros; • Classificações das utilizações, actores e fluxos financeiros do WASH; • Uma visão geral das fontes de dados potencialmente disponíveis; • Definição de métodos específicos de estimativas, para avaliar os fluxos financeiros e os stocks de activos fixos, com identificação de eventuais questões metodológicas; • Uma lista preliminar das tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH a preparar; e • Possíveis considerações sobre implementação, que possam afectar a preparação das Contas WASH. 2.3.3.2 Colectar dados, criar uma base de dados e categorizar os fluxos financeiros A terceira tarefa é criar uma base de dados para os dados financeiros de WASH, com base na investigação inicial. Depois de completada a lista das fontes de dados e de se esclarecerem as metodologias a aplicar, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá criar uma base de dados para alojar todos os dados disponíveis. A sua estrutura deverá facilitar a manutenção contínua. A equipa deverá, depois, recolher os dados sobre os fluxos financeiros e introduzi-los na base de dados, começando com a abordagem com maior probabilidade de gerar o conjunto mais abrangente de dados, isto é, a abordagem que ofereça a maior disponibilidade de dados e a maior facilidade de acesso. Outras abordagens poderão ser introduzidas numa fase posterior, para completar as lacunas e reunir informação complementar, quando forem necessários mais detalhes para a análise das políticas. Para estimar os fluxos financeiros, terão de aplicar, em paralelo, a abordagem do Tipo de Financiamento e a Abordagem Baseada nos Custos, visto que alguns dados apenas poderão estar disponíveis com base no custo, enquanto outros dados poderão estar mais rapidamente disponíveis através do exame das fontes de financiamento, expressas como despesa. De preferência, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá tentar recolher informação sobre os custos de cada fornecedor de serviços. Se isso não for possível, por exemplo, em circunstâncias em que os países tenham um grande número de fornecedores de serviços, poderá ser viável recolher dados numa amostra desses fornecedores e extrapolar a partir dos resultados. 30 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Para ajustar as estimativas iniciais, o processo de colecta de dados terá de ser repetitivo. A base de dados será concluída gradualmente através de sucessivos ciclos, durante os quais as lacunas restantes de dados poderão ser completadas e as estimativas reconciliadas, à medida que haja mais dados disponíveis. A colecta de dados deve ser cuidadosamente planificada, para evitar sobrecarregar os fornecedores de dados com pedidos maciços de dados e tarefas correlacionadas. Quando a introdução de dados estiver concluída, devem atribuir-se códigos de classificação das Contas WASH a todas as entradas, para permitir a identificação do seguinte: • A unidade financiadora de onde o fluxo originou; • O fornecedor de serviços que recebe os fundos; • Os serviços WASH que financiou, sua uso pretendida e em que zona geográfica; • Os custos que foram cobertos por esse fluxo financeiro. Nas Notas Metodológicas 3 a 6 poderão encontrar-se mais orientações sobre o modo de afectar despesas a diferentes categorias - por exemplo, estimar as despesas numa determinada uso ou uma categoria de despesas, tais como despesas familiares com o auto-abastecimento. 2.3.3.3 Fazer a triangulação e a ajuste dos dados coletidos A última actividade consiste em ajustar os diferentes conjuntos de dados, combinando-os para ajustar a alocação das despesas às diferentes categorias. Se forem encontradas lacunas significativas entre os resultados das duas diferentes abordagens de recolha de informação sobre os fluxos financeiros, é necessário fazer novas investigações para identificar erros de estimativa ou fluxos em falta. As eventuais razões para essas lacunas estão identificadas na Caixa 11 abaixo. Isso poderá exigir a recolha de informação suplementar de fontes de dados primárias, aplicando estimativas ou usando chaves de alocação dos custos, para estimar dados. Caixa 11. Ajustar as diferenças entre a Abordagem Baseada em Custos e a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento Como as duas abordagens usam fontes de dados diferentes, é provável que a despesa total calculada seja também um pouco diferente. Se este desvio parecer significativo, após o cálculo dos dados iniciais, é essencial identificar as eventuais razões para o desvio, de modo a reduzir as fontes de erro e chegar à melhor estimativa possível da despesa total do sector. Os factores que podem explicar as diferenças, ao nível do fornecedor, entre os fluxos financeiros recebidos (entradas de caixa) e os custos /despesas (saídas de caixa) são os seguintes: • Variações do saldo de caixa líquido entre o início e o final do período. Esta é uma diferença normal, para a qual não existe correcção possível. A diferença pode resultar, por exemplo, da despesa ou reembolso de um empréstimo. Mais orientações sobre o tratamento dos empréstimos são apresentadas em Nota Metodológica n.º 3: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa e metodologias alternativas. • Dados em falta ou inadequação dos métodos de estimativa usados. Por uma questão de consistência, foram concebidos métodos para estimar os custos e os tipos de financiamento. No entanto, as fontes de dados poderão não fornecer os números previstos pelo método, o que pode criar falsas variações entre as duas abordagens: – Na Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento, o valor considerado para FT1 – Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos, deve ser o valor dos fundos recolhidos e não a receita bruta facturada—que é a que aparece na conta dos lucros e perdas do fornecedor de serviços. Se apenas estiver disponível a receita bruta facturada, esses números devem ser ajustados, aumentando ou diminuindo o balanço das contas a receber. – Na Abordagem Baseada em Custos: ° Os dados sobre a despesa de capital corrente com obras em curso podem estar ausentes da categoria Custos de Investimento (C1). De facto, os dados disponíveis podem incluir apenas a despesa com obras concluídas, especialmente se as estimativas se basearem no valor do activo concluído que consta na folha de balanço; ° A depreciação e a amortização de activos fixos não devem ser incluídas na categoria Custos de Investimento (C1); e ° Os dados sobre Custos Financeiros (C4), que incluem os reembolsos de capital, pagamentos de juros e dividendos, poderão não estar disponíveis. • Dupla contagem de alguns fluxos. 31Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Caixa 12. Preencher lacunas de informação: formular hipóteses e usar chaves de alocação Em alguns casos, não haverá dados disponíveis para estimar completamente uma categoria de Contas WASH. Nesses casos, devem ser propostas metodologias de estimativa, juntamente com recomendações para a obtenção de informação mais rigorosa na repetição seguinte do exercício. Poderá ser necessário usar outros tipos de informação, tais como informação física, para derivar as “chaves de alocação” destinadas a estimar a repartição dos fluxos financeiros. Se, por exemplo, não existir informação sobre a distribuição da despesa nos serviços WASH para um determinado actor, a distribuição das suas actividades pode ser usada como a “chave” para alocar as despesas. Pode também ser necessário formular hipóteses, quando a informação for insuficiente. Estimar a alocação dos custos do apoio (i.e., custos associados ao desenvolvimento de infraestruturas, tais como actividades de preparação de projectos, reforço de capacidades, formação ou a mobilização das comunidades e mudança de comportamentos) através das actividades de um fornecedor de serviços pode ser difícil, quando se conhece apenas a sua despesa total. Pode ser necessário formular uma hipótese acerca dos montantes que devem ser atribuídos a cada tipo de actividade de apoio. Os custos do apoio, porém, poderão não estar directamente ligados à despesa geral com os serviços. Normalmente, para um fornecedor público de serviços WASH em zonas rurais, os custos do apoio como percentagem dos custos totais tendem a ser mais elevados para o saneamento do que para o abastecimento de água. Isso acontece porque se espera que as famílias invistam, elas próprias, cada vez mais no saneamento e não dependam tanto de subsídios, o que significa que os custos do apoio suportados pela parte pública podem representar uma parte mais elevada do seu investimento total do que em relação à água. O investimento público em água, particularmente no que respeita às despesas de capital, continua a ser ainda a principal norma. O uso de estudos em pequena escala e sua extrapolação para o resto da população: em alguns casos, os resultados de um estudo de pequena escala podem ser usados para estimar os dados de uma determinada componente. Por exemplo, uma pesquisa sobre a alocação da despesa das ONGs pode ser usado num âmbito mais vasto para cobrir esta componente nas Contas WASH, visto que a despesa das ONGs e a sua alocação, normalmente, não é conhecida em detalhe. No entanto, esta abordagem comporta riscos, uma vez que a amostra seleccionada poderá não ser representativa de todas as ONGs do país. Torna-se, por isso, importante documentar os métodos usados e quaisquer potenciais desvios desses métodos. As famílias, as ONGs ou as OBCs podem usar esta abordagem em várias áreas em que não exista um mecanismo separado de contabilidade para as despesas WASH. Como se indica na Caixa “Desafio”, na Secção acima, sobre unidades financiadoras, uma potencial dificuldade é evitar a contagem duplicada dos fluxos financeiros, particularmente quando os recursos são canalizados através de várias unidades financiadoras. Outras orientações podem ser encontradas na Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento. Finalmente, como já foi indicado, será necessário algum grau de estimativa (ver Caixa 12 abaixo) ou a colecta de dados adicionais. Neste último caso, a equipa das Contas WASH deve fazer um pedido ao grupo de partes interessadas nacionais, uma vez que será necessário um orçamento adicional. As hipóteses devem ser testadas, possivelmente estudando melhor a estrutura de custos do fornecedor de serviços. Todos os métodos de estimativa e as hipóteses devem ser claramente apresentadas nos meta dados anexados aos resultados finais, devendo ser justificados e bem documentados. A transparência é uma parte fundamental do desenvolvimento das Contas WASH e contribui para compreender melhor a forma como os dados foram compilados. Facilita também as rondas de compilação posteriores. 32 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS 3 Passo 3 – Analisar os dados e os resultados dos relatórios Esta secção indica como as Contas WASH e os indicadores associados devem ser compilados, apresentando orientações sobre o modo de interpretar os dados e de os usar para a formulação de políticas. 3.1 Compilar Contas WASH e indicadores As Contas WASH e os indicadores podem ser compilados apenas depois da colecta dos dados. Passo 3.1 – Tarefas a executar • Identificar, na lista completa de potenciais tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH, aqueles que são mais relevantes para as políticas sectoriais do país; • Compilar as tabelas das Contas WASH e verificar a sua coerência; • Calcular os indicadores das Contas WASH; e • Preparar um Anexo ao relatório das Contas WASH. 3.1.1 Criar tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH A equipa das Contas WASH deverá construir algumas tabelas, apresentando a informação obtida num formato que possa ser facilmente compreendido e usado pelos decisores políticos. No seu conjunto, essas tabelas formam as Contas WASH e delas poderão derivar-se indicadores comparáveis. A metodologia TrackFin propõe algumas tabelas padrão que poderão responder à maioria das necessidades políticas. O seu principal propósito é fornecer respostas às questões políticas fundamentais definidas no início do exercício. São elas: • Qual é a despesa total no sector WASH? • Como são distribuídos os fundos pelos diferentes serviços WASH e tipos de despesa? • Quem paga os serviços WASH e quanto pagam? • Que entidades são os principais canais de financiamento do sector WASH? Todos os países que participam na Iniciativa TrackFin deverão, de preferência, usar um conjunto básico de tabelas e indicadores comuns para as Contas WASH, criados num formato semelhante, para facilitar a comparação internacional. Conforme as suas necessidades políticas e a informação disponível, os países poderão optar por preparar menos tabelas ou apresentar informação mais detalhada sobre aspectos relevantes para as suas próprias prioridades. A Tabela 3 abaixo apresenta o conjunto de tabelas necessárias para se obter um quadro nacional abrangente do financiamento WASH. As tabelas minimamente necessárias estão realçadas com texto em negrito. Tabela WA 1 (SxA) – Despesa WASH pelos principais serviços WASH e área de serviço Tabela WA 2 (SxU) – Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços WASH e uso Tabela WA 3 (SxP) – Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços WASH e prestador Tabela WA 4 (PxFT) – Despesa WASH por tipo de fornecedor WASH e tipo de financiamento Tabela WA 5 (SxFT) – Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços WASH e tipo de financiamento Tabela WA 6 (SxFU) – Despesa WASH por serviços WASH e unidade financiadora Tabela WA 7 (PxFU) – Despesa WASH por prestador WASH e unidade financiadora Tabela WA 8 (FTxFU) – Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e unidade financiadora Tabela WA 9 (CxP) – Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e prestador WASH Tabela WA 10 (CxS) – Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e principais serviços WASH Tabela WA 11 (ASxP) – Stocks de activos fixos por tipo de prestador WASH Tabela 3. Tabelas recomendadas para as Contas WASH 33Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Os indicadores das Contas WASH são um conjunto dos principais números derivados das tabelas. Fornecem informação essencial de forma mais rápida e mais compreensível, o que os torna úteis para uma fácil assimilação e divulgação geral dos resultados. A Caixa 13 abaixo apresenta os principais indicadores das Contas WASH, que podem ser calculados a partir das tabelas. Devem ser sistematicamente estimados, usando os mesmos parâmetros, para assegurar a sua comparabilidade internacional.1 Caixa 13. Principais indicadores das Contas WASH 1. Despesa total do sector WASH, a nível nacional 2. Despesa total WASH per capita, a nível nacional 3. Despesa total WASH no país, como percentagem do PIB (isto pode ser comprado com o total da despesa na saúde como percentagem do PIB) 4. Despesa com o saneamento como percentagem da despesa total WASH 5. Despesa WASH no sector urbano como percentagem da despesa total WASH 6. Despesa pública com WASH como percentagem da despesa pública total. (Despesa pública inclui financiamento das autoridades nacionais e regionais, e doadores bilaterais e multilaterais para todas as transferências públicas domésticas e transferências públicas internacionais, assim como empréstimos públicos) 7. Despesa do usuário como percentagem da despesa total WASH (a soma de FT1 – Tarifas e FT2 – Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento) 8. Transferências públicas domésticas como percentagem da despesa total WASH 9. Transferências públicas internacionais como percentagem da despesa total WASH 10. Custos totais de manutenção e operação como percentagem da despesa total WASH. Outros indicadores poderão ser derivados com base nas necessidades do país: estes são apresentados na das Contas WASH. Os países podem seleccionar aqueles os que forem mais representativos para as suas necessidades. Nota Metodológica n.º 7: Tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH contém as tabelas reais, explicando em detalhar como foram criadas e para que fins podem ser usadas. 3.1.2 Seleccionar tabelas apropriadas e verificar a consistência dos dados A equipa das Contas WASH deverá, em primeiro lugar, determinar quais tabelas de toda a lista proposta planifica produzir (das Contas WASH). Isso dependerá da sua relevância para as necessidades das políticas nacionais e dos dados disponíveis. As referências internacionais deverão também ser tidas em consideração ao seleccionar as tabelas apropriadas. Os dados terão de ser extraídos da base de dados (Passo 2.3), para completar as tabelas. Poderá ser útil começar com as tabelas mais desagregadas e passar depois aos níveis mais agregados. Uma das grandes vantagens de desenvolver software de colecta e análise dos dados, como se descreve na Secção 2.3.3.1, é que isso facilita a criação automática de tabelas, a partir da base de dados, poupando assim muito tempo. Finalmente, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá verificar se os dados apresentados nas tabelas são robustos e internamente consistentes. É importante verificar pontos como os seguintes: • Os totais devem ser consistentes em todas as tabelas. A despesa total com o consumo deve também contar com o fornecimento e o financiamento; • Os totais reportados devem ser iguais à soma das partes constituintes; • Os valores para itens semelhantes de despesa com a mesma classificação devem ser consistentes em todas as tabelas; e • Os indicadores são plausíveis em relação a a) números da despesa, b) população (valor per capita), c) PIB e d) valores históricos, se houver várias séries temporais de Contas WASH. 1 Com relação às taxas de câmbio, a equipa deverá converter os resultados em dólares e usar a taxa de câmbio oficial do Banco Mundial (a média para o período) que está disponível em World Data Bank. 34 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Em todo este processo, os procedimentos e os métodos de compilação usados para estimar os números apresentados nas tabelas devem constar dos relatórios, para permitir a avaliação da qualidade dos dados. Um anexo ao relatório final deve indicar claramente o modo como as estimativas foram feitas e como as tabelas foram construídas (ver Passo 4.2.1). É essencial documentar os meta dados e as fontes dos dados num anexo às tabelas, para que sejam devidamente interpretados e utilizados. No mínimo, a informação básica deve incluir as fontes dos dados, o modo como são validados (especialmente quando há varias fontes), a hipótese usada para avaliar os dados (método de contabilidade escolhido), fundamento para a selecção dos dados usados na estimativa e procedimentos aplicados para tornar os dados utilizáveis. 3.2 Preparar relatórios das Contas WASH Passo 3.2 – Tarefas a executar • Preparar o relatório final das Contas WASH: – Colectar informação sobre o contexto do sector (dados de acesso, contexto institucional e político) – Resumir a metodologia usada – Resumir os principais resultados das Contas WASH usando gráficos e tabelas, para responder às quatro principais questões e a quaisquer outras questões sobre as políticas – Interpretar os dados das Contas WASH, para responder a questões sobre políticas do sector • Apresentar os resultados das Contas WASH ao grupo de partes interessadas nacionais, para validação. 3.2.1 Fundamentos Os dados não são informação. Além de produzir tabelas e indicadores, é importante analisar os dados em relação à informação de base sobre o sector WASH. Isso constituirá uma garantia de que os números derivados são correctamente interpretados. Para que seja utilizada com eficácia pelos decisores políticos, a informação das Contas WASH deve ser concisa, significativa e directamente relevante para fins das políticas públicas do sector. A Tabela 4 abaixo resume a forma como os elementos das tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH podem responder a questões de políticas e apoiar a formulação de políticas. Segue-se um debate sobre o modo como estes dados podem ser usados e interpretados, para responder às principais questões políticas do exercício. Tabelas das Contas WASH (T) Indicadores das Contas WASH (I) Questões relacionadas com as políticas do setor que podem ser respondidas a partir destes dados 1. Qual é a despesa total no sector? Total da Tabela CW 10 (CxS) e Tabela WA 5 (SxFT) Comparação da despesa total WASH estimada a partir da Abordagem do Tipo de financiamento e da Abordagem Baseada nos Custos • Despesa total no sector WASH (a nível nacional) • Despesa total WASH per capita (a nível nacional) • Despesa total WASH no país como percentagem do PIB (pode ser comparada com a despesa total na saúde como percentagem do PIB) • Qual é o total do financiamento para o WASH? O financiamento actual é suficiente? • Qual a tendência do financiamento ? Está a aumentar ou a diminuir? • Como se pode comparar o nível de financiamento com os países que têm um nível de rendimentos semelhante ou com os países vizinhos? • Como se pode comparar o nível de financiamento com outros sectores sociais, como a saúde ou a educação? 2. Como são os fundos distribuídos aos diferentes serviços WASH e tipos de despesa? Tabela CW 1 (SxA) – Despesa WASH por principais serviços WASH e áreas de serviços (urbano/rural) • Despesa com o saneamento (rural/urbano) como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Despesa com o abastecimento de água (rural/urbano) como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Despesa WASH no sector urbano como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Despesa WASH no sector rural como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Qual a distribuição da despesa pelos sectores urbano/rural, água/saneamento? • A despesa é alocada aos subsectores WASH mais necessitados? Tabela 4. Ligação entre a informação das Contas WASH e as questões políticas do sector 35Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Tabelas das Contas WASH (T) Indicadores das Contas WASH (I) Questões relacionadas com as políticas do setor que podem ser respondidas a partir destes dados Tabela CW 2 (SxU) – Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços WASH e uso • Despesa total por tipo de uso dos serviços • Que tipos de uso beneficiam mais dos recursos financeiros afectados ao sector WASH? Tabela CW 10 (CxS) – Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e principais serviços WASH • Custos de manutenção e operação como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Custos de investimento como percentagem da despesa total WASH • As despesas afectadas ao operação e manutenção são suficientes, em comparação com as despesas de investimento? Tabela CW 11 (ASxP) – Stocks de activos fixos por tipo de prestador WASH • Total de stocks de activos WASH per capita • Qual o stock de activos fixos para os serviços WASH e para cada subsector? • O stock de activos fixos está a aumentar ou a diminuir? 3. Quem paga os serviços WASH e quanto? Tabela CW 5 (SxFT) – Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços WASH e tipo de financiamento • Despesa pública no WASH como percentagem da despesa pública total • Despesa de uso como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Transferências públicas domésticas como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Transferências públicas internacionais como percentagem da despesa total WASH • Por quem é financiado cada tipo de serviços? • Qual o peso financeiro para as famílias? As políticas e a uso de fundos públicos são eficazes para impulsionar o investimento privado, incluindo o das famílias? • Qual a proporção entre despesa pública e despesa privada? • Qual a quota da contribuição dos doadores? Quanto é a despesa dos doadores em relação ao orçamento total do governo? • Os compromissos dos governos e dos doadores com o financiamento WASH são respeitados? 4. Que entidades são os principais canais de financiamento do sector WASH? Tabela CW 6 (SxFU) – Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços WASH e unidade financiadora • Foco na despesa WASH por unidades financiadoras que canalizam fundos • Como é canalizado o financiamento no sector WASH? • Que percentagem da despesa pública com o WASH é canalizada via governos locais e como podem ser apoiados? Tabela 4. Ligação entre a informação das Contas WASH e as questões políticas do sector (cont.) 3.2.2 Relatório final das Contas WASH Para concluir o exercício, a equipa das Contas WASH deve produzir um relatório final, apresentando os resultados sistematicamente, em resposta às principais questões políticas e necessidades de reformas. O relatório deve incluir um projecto de Resumo e apresentar documentação criteriosa das fontes de dados, classificações e a metodologia usada para estimar os resultados, para que as diferenças observadas entre os países ou num país ao longo do tempo possam ser compreendidas e colocadas no contexto apropriado. O relatório final deve cobrir o contexto do exercício, a motivação nacional para o realizar e os seus desafios sectoriais específicos, mas, sobretudo, deve ser conciso e directo, não devendo exceder 40 páginas, excluindo os anexos. Os resultados devem ser resumidos, preferencialmente em tabelas e gráficos. Na medida do possível, os relatórios finais devem usar um formato semelhante em todos os países, para facilitar a comparação e a utilização de dados, tanto ao nível nacional como internacional. O relatório final das Contas WASH deve conter os seguintes elementos: • Uma introdução com os objectivos das Contas WASH e as questões políticas a que o exercício pretende dar resposta; • Informação sobre o contexto no país, apresentando as características socioeconómicas gerais do país e os principais dados sobre o acesso aos serviços WASH. Isso constitui o contexto para interpretar e compreender os resultados das Contas WASH. • Uma visão geral do sector da água e saneamento no país, apresentando os acordos institucionais e financeiros e mapeando os principais actores e fluxos financeiros. Para colocar os resultados em contexto, deve também apresentar as principais questões políticas, tais como reformas recentes e as que ainda são necessárias, as políticas actuais e o quadro institucional do sector WASH; 36 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS • A metodologia usada para calcular as tabelas das Contas WASH, incluindo informação sobre o âmbito do exercício, o alcance geográfico, os subsectores envolvidos e o número de anos abrangidos pelo estudo. Deve indicar as classificações usadas para gerar as Contas WASH, assim como as abordagens usadas, realçando as principais escolhas metodológicas para a colecta e análise dos dados; • Os resultados, que são o cerne do relatório, devem abranger os principais indicadores calculados a partir dos dados das Contas WASH, traduzindo os resultados quantitativos essenciais das tabelas em informação qualitativa, para dar resposta às principais questões políticas; e • Recomendações sobre políticas, extraindo dos resultados as principais implicações políticas e formulando recomendações para exercícios futuros no país. Devem também ser apresentadas orientações sobre a futura aplicação da metodologia. Os anexos do relatório devem conter o seguinte: • As tabelas completas das Contas WASH; • Informação detalhada sobre a colecta de dados e os métodos de estimativa utilizados; • Documentação sobre as fontes de dados das Contas WASH e toda a informação metodológica essencial para interpretar correctamente os resultados; e • As lições aprendidas com o exercício: feedback da equipa das Contas WASH sobre a implementação da iniciativa TrackFin, focando a metodologia utilizada e também os aspectos organizacionais e processuais, por exemplo, os custos e os recursos necessários para o exercício. Por outro lado, deve ser apresentado um resumo, sintetizando os principais resultados. Este deve ser um documento autónomo com um máximo de dez páginas, que possa ser partilhado com os tomadores de decisão políticos de alto nível. O projecto de relatório final das Contas WASH e o projecto de resumo devem ser apresentados na reunião do grupo das partes interessadas nacionais. A reunião deverá validar os resultados e ajudar a esclarecer os principais resultados das políticas. Isso constituirá uma base para uma maior divulgação dos resultados, como se descreve na Secção 3.3 abaixo. No website da TrackFin, encontram-se esboços para o relatório final das Contas WASH e para o Resumo. Eles incluem uma síntese dos resultados nos três países onde o exercício foi testado. 3.3 Divulgar a análise de políticas Passo 3.3 – Tarefas a executar • Preparar resumos políticas para os tomadores de decisão, com foco nas suas questões políticas específicas; e • Comunicar os resultados a todo o sector WASH e a um público geral alargado. Depois de validados os resultados e extraídas as principais mensagens resultantes da análise, a equipa das Contas WASH deve finalizar o resumo. Devem preparar-se pequenos resumos das políticas (no máximo, quatro páginas) que extraiam a principal informação em resposta às principais questões políticas expressas no Passo 1. Trata-se de uma medida essencial para comunicar os resultados do exercício aos tomadores de decisão políticos e outros actores do sector, de forma clara e facilmente compreensível. Cada resumo das políticas poderá centrar-se numa questão específica, tal como, “O saldo geográfico 37Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional da despesa do sector WASH precisa de ser reequilibrado?” “O país precisa de gastar mais no saneamento?” ou “Como pode ser aumentado o financiamento adicional dos usuários?” Elaborar estes resumos sobre as políticas requer uma sólida compreensão do contexto do sector e das principais decisões políticas em debate. Essa informação e análise podem ser usadas nas seguintes fases do processo da política, como se discute em mais detalhar nas Notas Políticas disponíveis no website da • Advocacia e atracção de fundos • Definição de estratégias de financiamento • Orçamentação e planificação • Monitoria • Acompanhamento regular do financiamento, compromissos e metas • Comparação com outros sectores ou outros países • Coordenação da ajuda dos doadores. Estes resumos das políticas devem ser divulgados tanto quanto possível em todo o sector WASH, aos decisores políticos, funcionários do alto nivel do governo, dinamizadores do WASH, ONG e organizações internacionais no país. Esta ampla divulgação é essencial para garantir que os resultados das Contas WASH sejam compreendidos e também para sensibilizar, obter apoio e criar futura procura dessa informação financeira. Por outro lado, os países deverão disponibilizar online os dados coletidos (descarregados em formato Excel, por exemplo), para que possam ser usados para outras análises pelos actores do sector, tais como ONGs, grupos de reflexão ou instituições de investigação sobre políticas. Isso contribui para melhorar a transparência no sector e oferecer perspectivas para fundamentar as políticas. 38 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS 4 Passo 4 – Preparar as próximas Contas WASH Passo 4. – Tarefas a executar • Fazer recomendações para o próximo exercício, em termos de: âmbito e anos a abranger; prazo para a próxima fase da colecta de dados; testes de outros métodos de estimativa; colecta de dados adicionais; e possíveis melhorias nos sistemas de informação existentes; • Plano para a próxima fase: procurar financiamento para o exercício e modalidades de formação das capacidades da equipa das Contas WASH; e • Contribuir para melhorar a metodologia, respondendo ao questionário de feedback: – Avaliar e comentar a adequação das classificações propostas, que definem o sector WASH e o seu financiamento; – Avaliar e comentar a viabilidade de recolher o tipo de dados necessários; – Avaliar a metodologia proposta para apreciar os fluxos financeiros e os stocks de activos fixos; – Sugerir melhorias relativamente às classificações e metodologia. 4.1 Justificativa para novas rondas O exercício das Contas WASH pode proporcionar uma valorização optimizada, se muitos países aplicarem a metodologia e a repetirem com regularidade. O objectivo final das Contas WASH não é a produção de dados, que, em si, tem um valor limitado, mas assegurar que os dados gerados sejam traduzidos em perspectivas políticas e usados para reforçar a formulação de políticas públicas do sector. É fundamental usar os dados, especialmente no primeiro exercício, para “defender” as Contas WASH, demonstrar a sua pertinência para a tomada de decisões no sector e para incentivar os decisores políticos nacionais a continuarem a produzir dados WASH ao longo dos anos. A monitoria da despesa ao longo do tempo poderá igualmente ajudar a promulgar as Contas WASH noutros países. O envolvimento de mais países na produção regular de Contas WASH irá beneficiar todos, uma vez que isso constituirá a base para comparar os resultados e aumentar o conhecimento sobre as diferenças na análise dos dados e nos resultados. A utilização das Contas WASH para reforçar as políticas do sector também irá abrir caminho para a institucionalização do processo. Isso só acontecerá, se houver uma produção e utilização de rotina, com mandato governamental e apropriada pelos países, de um conjunto de indicadores da despesa WASH. A Figura 8 abaixo baseia-se nas lições aprendidas no sector da saúde e ilustra o modo como a produção e utilização regulares das Contas WASH podem gerar um ciclo virtuoso. Para que tal aconteça, é preciso que estejam instalados três factores estruturais: • Uma estrutura de governação clara para o exercício das Contas WASH (incluindo acordos formais e informais), definindo os responsáveis pelos diferentes aspectos da actividade das Contas WASH. Se o exercício for realizado por consultores, terá de haver continuidade dos exercícios. A liderança, planificação, supervisão e garantia de qualidade das Contas WASH devem ser da competência de uma única instituição. Essa instituição deve também ser responsável pela base de dados onde os dados de anteriores exercícios estão registados e as tabelas das Contas WASH informatizadas. O grupo de partes interessadas nacionais e a equipa das Contas WASH devem ser estabelecidos como órgãos permanentes e fazer reuniões periódicas; • Capacidade do pessoal: os membros da equipa das Contas WASH devem receber formação para a implementação da metodologia, quer por anteriores membros da equipa (se houver rotação de pessoal), quer por consultores internacionais ou pessoal de outros países que já tenha implementado a metodologia. Isso deverá incluir uma componente de “aprendizagem prática” sobre o modo de usar o instrumento de colecta de dados; e • Financiamento para a produção das Contas WASH e divulgação e tradução dos resultados: As actividades de financiamento das Contas WASH devem ser asseguradas pela instituição-líder. Os países poderão procurar financiamento junto dos parceiros de desenvolvimento ou pedir apoio ao Secretariado da TrackFin para esse esforço. 39Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Fonte: Autores. Adaptada do Banco Mundial (2011), Utilizar as Contas da Saúde Nacionais para Reforçar a Formulação de Políticas – Compêndio de Estudos de Casos Figura 8. Estructura para a institucionalização da produção e uso das Contas WASH 4.2 Formular recomendações para as próximas Contas WASH no país Para facilitar a produção regular de Contas WASH, a equipa deve iniciar a repetição seguinte, logo que esteja concluído um exercício em curso. É crucial manter a dinâmica, para que não se percam as capacidades e a experiência. Com base na sua experiência, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá formular recomendações ao dinamizador da TrackFin e ao grupo de partes interessadas nacionais sobre o modo de melhorar o processo no exercício seguinte. Deverá aconselhar sobre o âmbito (por sub-sector) e duração e indicar se devem ser recolhidos dados de outros actores ou tipos de financiamento, possivelmente através de pesquisas ad hoc. Estes poderão incluir pesquisas às famílias ou pesquisas ao nível dos governos locais, para recolher estimativas mais detalhadas sobre a alocação de fundos e a despesa. Outros dados poderão ser obtidos através de instrumentos, pesquisas ou sistemas de informação existentes para a colecta de dados no sector. Isso significa que é preciso trabalhar com as instituições parceiras responsáveis por esses instrumentos ou métodos de colecta de dados. Procura e uso de dados • Enquanto os líderes nacionais fazem cedências difíceis para garantir uma alocação equitativa e eficaz dos escassos recursos WASH, existe a necessidade crítica de uma base de evidências. • O uso regular dos resultados das Contas WASH na formulação de políticas contribui para uma análise das políticas mais sofisticada. Produção, gestão dos dados e garantia de qualidade das Contas WASH • A inclusão de um requisito para os sistemas de monitoria e informação do sector destinados a colectar dados financeiros permitirá a produção de Contas WASH de forma sustentável, em comparação com a colecta de dados pontual do “manual”. Tradução dos dados e divulgação de análises de políticas específicas • Os dados das Contas WASH têm mais valor quando são usados para fundamentar decisões financeiras baseadas em evidências. • Quando uma instituição é proprietária do processo de tradução e defende as perspectivas das políticas, isso aumenta a probabilidade de que as respostas que os dados das Contas WASH apresentam serão usadas para influenciar a política. Divulgação dos resultados • Disponibilizar para análise os dados e os resultados colectidos aumenta a transparência e, com a experiência, a análise e as perspectivas que fundamentam as políticas. • A divulgação ocorre em duas fases: (1) quando as tabelas das Contas WASH são produzidas e (2) depois de os dados terem sido traduzidos em sínteses relevantes sobre políticas. FACTORES ESTRUTURAIS QUE INFLUENCIAM A PRODUÇÃO E A USO DAS CONTAS WASH • Estrutura da governação e organização da produção das Contas WASH (quem é responsável pelo quê) • Capacidade das instituições para planificarem e implementarem as actividades das Contas WASH • Financiamento das actividades das Contas WASH 34 1 2 40 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Os dados poderão também ser colectados a um nível mais desagregado. A despesa com o financiamento reembolsável dos doadores internacionais, por exemplo, poderá ser dividida em financiamento reembolsável em condições especiais ou normais, se for possível recolher, em fontes primárias, dados suplementares sobre a natureza de cada empréstimo. 4.2.1 Plano para a fase seguinte No final do exercício, o dinamizador da TrackFin e o Ponto Focal das Contas WASH deverão encontrar-se para planificar a repetição seguinte, com base nas orientações do grupo de partes interessadas nacionais. É essencial aproveitar a dinâmica criada pelo relatório final e os resumos das políticas e maximizar a atenção dos decisores políticos e dos parceiros do desenvolvimento para os resultados que apresentam. Angariar fundos é um aspecto fundamental para o planificação da fase seguinte. O planificação deverá ocorrer em simultâneo com a divulgação dos resultados, para que o Ponto Focal nacional os possa analisar rapidamente com os financiadores interessados, incluindo o governo nacional, e apresentá-los uma proposta para um futuro exercício. A equipa das Contas WASH, sob a supervisão do Ponto Focal, deverá elaborar um orçamento e um plano de trabalho para a fase seguinte, que deverá incluir a capacitação da equipa. A equipa das Contas WASH deverá aconselhar sobre o momento mais adequado para a fase seguinte da colecta de dados. A nova colecta de dados poderá realizar-se todos os anos ou de dois em dois anos, conforme o que for mais apropriado para cada país e os ciclos orçamentais e tendo em conta o momento habitual para a divulgação dos principais dados, tais como os dados dos pesquisas nacionais às famílias ou do recenseamento. 4.2.2 Comunicar feedback sobre a metodologia proposta A equipa das Contas WASH deve também preencher os questionários de feedback, relatando a sua experiência com a preparação das Contas WASH e usando o presente documento de orientação. Isso permite-lhes avaliar as questões metodológicas que enfrentaram e sugerir eventuais modificações à metodologia e às classificações. O feedback é essencial para melhorar exercícios futuros a nível nacional, mas também para fundamentar as revisões em curso da metodologia e do documento de orientação, a nível internacional. Apresenta-se um questionário de feedback, para que os países relatem as suas experiências com a implementação da iniciativa TrackFin e a aplicação da metodologia. 41Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Nota Metodológica n.º 1: Sistemas de classificação dos serviços WASH Objectivos: esta nota apresenta os actuais sistemas internacionais de classificação dos produtos, serviços e actividades relacionados com o sector WASH. Estes sistemas têm sido usados para elaborar o sistema de classificação TrackFin. A finalidade desta Nota é reforçar o entendimento da equipa das Contas WASH sobre os dados do Instituto Nacional de Estatística, que usa frequentemente estas classificações. Realça também áreas que requerem um ajustamento metodológico a mais longo prazo, para melhor compreender as actividades WASH ao nível do detalhamento necessário para fundamentar a formulação de políticas. Em particular, propõe uma categoria separada para os serviços de higiene a usar imediatamente e a desenvolver posteriormente nos exercícios TrackFin. NM 1.1. Sistemas actuais de classificação dos serviços WASH Esta secção apresenta uma lista dos actuais sistemas internacionais de classificação, mostrando o modo como identificam as actividades de abastecimento de água, saneamento e higiene. Existem três sistemas internacionais de classificação principais, que são usados para categorizar as indústrias, actividades, bens e serviços. São eles: Classificação Finalidade CPC VERSÃO 2 (Classificação Central de Produtos) Classifica bens e serviços, para ajudar a responder à questão “O que está a ser consumido?” ISIC REV. 4 (Classificação Internacional Industrial Normalizada de Todas as Actividades Económicas) Classifica os fornecedores de serviços, para ajudar a responder à questão “Quem fornece estes bens e serviços ?” COFOG (Classificação das Funções do Governo) Classifica as funções desempenhadas, para garantir que estes produtos sejam fornecidos. Existem ainda outras classificações funcionais, tais como a CEPA (Classificação das Actividades de Protecção Ambiental), que são menos usadas. Tabela 5. Resumo dos principais sistemas de classificação internacionais de bens e serviços WASH A Tabela 6. Semelhanças entre as classificações CPC, ISIC e COFOG ao longo da cadeia de valor da água e saneamento abaixo apresentada resume os pontos de correspondência entre as classificações CPC, ISIC e COFOG ao longo da cadeia de valor da água e saneamento. A natureza destas classificações é apresentada por baixo da tabela, com explicação dos códigos mais relevantes para o sector WASH. A Classificação Central de Produtos (CPC) é um sistema usado nas contas nacionais para classificar todos os bens e serviços, com base nas suas propriedades físicas e natureza intrínseca, assim como na sua origem industrial. É abrangente, internacionalmente reconhecida e inclui todas as actividades económicas. A sua repartição das actividades por categorias, porém, não representa uma equivalência aproximada às necessidades das Contas WASH. Não existe uma categoria CPC claramente identificada para os serviços de promoção do saneamento e higiene, embora eles possam ser agregados noutras categorias de “serviços públicos”, por exemplo actividades de educação não WASH. Por outro lado, os serviços prestados pelo governo (i.e., funções administrativas públicas) são classificados numa base altamente agregada. Isso impede a identificação de funções governamentais específicas. Aprender com o SEEA-Water: As tabelas normalizadas simplificadas do SEEA-Water usam apenas dois dos produtos relacionados com a água: CPC 18000 (água natural) e CPC 94100 (serviços de saneamento, tratamento de esgotos e limpeza de fossas sépticas). Isso acontece porque tratam de produtos produzidos pelas indústrias de água e saneamento (ISIC 36 e 37) e consideram que outros produtos são produzidos pela indústria da construção. No entanto, para identificar as despesas relacionadas com investimentos de capital, é essencial identificar os serviços de construção relacionados com a água e o saneamento. 42 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Ca de ia d e v al or CP C ( Cl as sifi ca çã o C en tr al d e P ro du to s ) IS IC (C la ss ifi ca çã o I nt er na cio na l I nd us tr ia l N or m al iza da ) CO FO G Có di go De sc riç ão Có di go De sc riç ão O qu e i nc lu i Có di go De sc riç ão Se rv iço s d e ab as te cim en to de ág ua (S 1) 53 23 3 Ba rra ge ns 42 90 Co ns tru çã o o u o ut ro s pr oje cto s d e e ng en ha ria ci vil 53 23 1 Aq ue du to s e ou tra s c on du ta s d e a ba ste cim en to de ág ua , e xc ep to re de s 42 20 Co ns tru çã o d e r ed es de tra ns po rte Se rv iço s d e p er fu ra çã o d e p oç os e ins ta laç ão de fo ssa s s ép tic as 54 34 1 Se rv iço s d e p er fu ra çã o d e p oç os de ág ua 18 00 0 Ág ua na tu ra l 36 00 Co lec ta , t ra ta m en to e ab as te cim en to de ág ua Co lec ta de ág ua s p luv iai s e ág ua de vá ria s f on te s, co m o r ios , la go s e p oç os Pu rifi ca çã o d a á gu a p ar a fi ns de ab as te cim en to De ssa lin iza çã o d a á gu a d o m ar ou su bt er râ ne a p ar a p ro du zir ág ua co m o p ro du to pr inc ipa l 69 21 0 Di str ibu içã o d e á gu a c an ali za da , e xc ep to va po r e ág ua qu en te (a ex pe ns as pr óp ria s) Di str ibu içã o d e á gu a c an ali za da 86 33 0 Se rv iço s d e d ist rib uiç ão de ág ua ca na liz ad a ( co m ba se nu m a t ar ifa ou nu m co nt ra to ) 69 23 0 Di str ibu içã o d e á gu a, ex ce pt o c an ali za da (a ex pe ns as pr óp ria s) Di str ibu içã o d e á gu a p or ca m iõe s-c ist er na ou ou tro s m eio s 86 35 0 Se rv iço s d e d ist rib uiç ão de ág ua , e xc ep to ca na liz ad a (co m ba se nu m a t ar ifa ou nu m co nt ra to ) Se rv iço s d e sa ne am en to (S 2) 54 34 2 Se rv iço s d e i ns ta laç ão de fo ssa s s ép tic as 42 20 Co ns tru çã o d e r ed es de tra ns po rte Se rv iço s d e p er fu ra çã o d e f ur os e ins ta laç ão de fo ssa s s ép tic as 94 12 0 Se rv iço s d e e sv az iam en to e lim pe za de fo ssa s s ép tic as 37 00 Sa ne am en to Co lec ta de ág ua s r es idu ais po r r ed es ou se rv iço s d e t ra ta m en to de ág ua s r es idu ais 94 11 0 Se rv iço s d e s an ea m en to e tra ta m en to de ág ua s re sid ua is Tra ta m en to e eli m ina çã o d e á gu as re sid ua is po r r ed es de es go to s ou se rv iço s d e t ra ta m en to de ág ua s r es idu ais Ta be la 6. Se m el ha nç as en tre as cl as sifi ca çõ es CP C, IS IC e CO FO G ao lo ng o d a c ad ei a d e v al or d a á gu a e sa ne am en to 43Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Ca de ia d e v al or CP C ( Cl as sifi ca çã o C en tr al d e P ro du to s ) IS IC (C la ss ifi ca çã o I nt er na cio na l I nd us tr ia l N or m al iza da ) CO FO G Có di go De sc riç ão Có di go De sc riç ão O qu e i nc lu i Có di go De sc riç ão Ac tiv ida de s de co ns tru çã o n ão at rib uíd as (p ar a se rv iço s d e á gu a e sa ne am en to ) (S 1 e S2 ) 53 25 1 Re de s l oc ais (á gu a e sa ne am en to ) 42 20 Co ns tru çã o d e r ed es de tra ns po rte Co ns tru çã o d e r ed es de tr an sp or te de ág ua e sis te m as de es go to s de lo ng a d ist ân cia 53 25 3 Es ta çõ es de tr at am en to de ág ua s e es ta çã o d e tra ta m en to de ág ua s r es idu ais Co ns tru çã o d e e sta çõ es de tr at am en to de ág ua s r es idu ais 54 24 1 Co ns tru çã o g er al de co nd ut as de lo ng a d ist ân cia Co ns tru çã o d e r ed es d e t ra ns po rte de ág ua e sis te m as de es go to s de lo ng a d ist ân cia 54 25 1 Co ns tru çã o g er al de re de s l oc ais Co ns tru çã o d e r ed es d e t ra ns po rte de ág ua e sis te m as de es go to s de lo ng a d ist ân cia 54 25 3 Co ns tru çã o g er al de es ta çõ es de tr at am en to de ág ua s e es ta çã o d e t ra ta m en to de ág ua s r es idu ais Se rv iço s d e a po io (S 3) 91 12 3 Se rv iço s a dm ini str at ivo s p úb lic os re lac ion ad os co m ha bit aç ão e eq uip am en to s c ole cti vo s 84 12 Re gu laç ão da s ac tiv ida de s qu e p re sta m se rv iço s d e sa úd e, ed uc aç ão , s er viç os cu ltu ra is e o ut ro s s er viç os so cia is, ex clu ind o a se gu ra nç a so cia l Ad m ini str aç ão pú bli ca de pr og ra m as pa ra au m en ta r o be m -e sta r pe sso al: sa úd e, ed uc aç ão , c ult ur a, de sp or to , e nt re te nim en to , am bie nt e, ha bit aç ão ou se rv iço s s oc iai s Es ta cl as se in clu i: • p ro gr am as de ad m ini str aç ão do ab as te cim en to de ág ua po tá ve l • a dm ini str aç ão da s o pe ra çõ es de re co lh a e tr at am en to de re síd uo s 5.2 Ge stã o d as ág ua s re sid ua is 6.3 Ab as te cim en to de ág ua Ta be la 6. Se m el ha nç as en tre as cl as sifi ca çõ es CP C, IS IC e CO FO G ao lo ng o d a c ad ei a d e v al or d a á gu a e sa ne am en to (c on t.) 44 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS A Classificação Internacional Industrial Normalizada de Todas as Actividades Económicas (ISIC) é um sistema das Nações Unidas. Classifica dados económicos de acordo com o tipo de actividade realizada por uma unidade económica. Uma “indústria” é definida como um conjunto de unidades de produção envolvidas, sobretudo, nas mesmas actividades económicas produtivas ou semelhantes. Esta classificação examina apenas as actividades realizadas e não distingue entre elas, de acordo com o seu estatuto legal (i.e., se os fornecedores são governamentais, não governamentais ou privados). Há duas categorias principais relacionadas com as actividades WASH, nomeadamente a classe ISIC 36, que abrange a recolha, tratamento e abastecimento de água, e a classe ISIC 37, que cobre o saneamento. Estas duas categorias são utilizadas pelo SEEA-Water na suas contas Económicas. Embora se tratem de serviços orientados, não abrangem toda a gama de actividades destinadas a dar acesso e a distribuir os serviços de água e saneamento, tais como a construção de infra-estruturas WASH ou a gestão dos recursos hídricos. Além disso, a ISIC 36 não diferencia a água fornecida para uso doméstico da fornecida para uso industrial ou para canais de irrigação, embora a ISIC 37 não inclua explicitamente o tratamento do material fecal ou a promoção da higiene. Finalmente, as actividades realizadas ao abrigo da ISIC 84 (actividades ligadas às actividades governamentais colectivas) são agregadas e, por isso, as especificamente relacionadas com o sector da água e saneamento não podem ser incluídas neste sistema. A Classificação das Funções do Governo (COFOG) é uma classificação das despesas governamentais segundo a finalidade. Classifica as transacções, tais como os desembolsos para despesas de consumo final, consumo intermédio, formação bruta de capital e as transferências de capital e correntes, de acordo com a função que a transacção serve. Estas categorias COFOG permitem repartir mais a vasta categoria ISIC, em que se incluem o abastecimento de água e a administração de esgotos, i.e. ISIC 8412 (Administração Pública). Quatro categorias COFOG estão relacionadas com a gestão da água em geral: tratamento de águas residuais, protecção das águas de superfície e subterrâneas, protecção ambiental não classificada noutro local e abastecimento de água. Estas categorias COFOG referem-se a serviços colectivos da administração pública (formulação e administração das políticas governamentais, criação e aplicação de normas públicas e regulação, licenciamento ou supervisão dos fornecedores, como acontece com a educação e da saúde). Outros sistemas de classificação das actividades governamentais para a protecção do ambiente foram desenvolvidos e poderão ser usados. Por exemplo, a Classificação das Actividades de Protecção Ambiental (CEPA) foi desenvolvida pelo Eurostat, em cooperação com as Nações Unidas, para classificar as actividades de protecção ambiental, produtos de protecção ambiental e despesas com a protecção ambiental. Estas actividades de protecção ambiental são actividades de produção no sentido da SCN, uma vez que combinam recursos, como equipamentos, trabalho, técnicas de fabrico e redes ou produtos de informação, para criar uma produção de bens ou serviços. No caso da água, a CEPA inclui a gestão de águas residuais e a protecção e descontaminação dos solos, águas subterrâneas e águas de superfície. Aprender com o SEEA-Water: O SEEA-Water usa a definição CEPA da gestão das águas residuais para classificar a despesa com actividades e medidas destinadas a evitar a poluição e a proteger a água, através da redução no lançamento de águas residuais para as águas superficiais interiores e água do mar. Como não existe uma categoria CEPA para a gestão e exploração da água, o SEEA-Water criou essa classificação, que corresponde à ISIC 36 e parte da ISIC 84. No entanto, de acordo com o Departamento de Estatística das Nações Unidas, esta classificação não é muito usada nos países em desenvolvimento. NM 1.2. Abordagem para definir a classificação TrackFin dos serviços Os actuais sistemas de classificação internacionais não retratam a realidade do sector WASH e, por isso, a sua capacidade para dar resposta às questões políticas é limitada. As categorias CPC são excessivamente baseadas nas infra-estruturas, enquanto as categorias ISIC não incluem explicitamente alguns serviços essenciais para os países em desenvolvimento, tais como a gestão da matéria fecal. A Classificação TrackFin para os serviços de água e saneamento apresentada no Documento de Orientação baseia-se, na medida do possível, nas classificações e definições existentes. Procura igualmente reflectir melhor as realidades do abastecimento de água e dos serviços de saneamento, particularmente nos países em desenvolvimento. Esta classificação abrange as principais actividades, juntamente com a cadeia de valor WASH, incluindo a higiene. Além disso mostra se existe, e em que medida, uma correspondência entre as categorias propostas para as Contas WASH e as dos sistemas internacionais de classificação. As actividades de Gestão dos Recursos Hídricos directamente relevantes para o fornecimento de serviços de água e saneamento (S4 na Classificação TrackFin) não são explicitamente mencionados como categoria separada em CPC, ISIC e COFOG, razão pela qual não são apresentados como correspondentes. 45Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional A longo prazo, a comunidade internacional WASH deverá estudar se é necessária uma classificação dos serviços WASH revista e mais desagregada, para criar equivalências ainda mais próximas das necessidades analíticas e políticas do sector. Se este objectivo de longo prazo for perseguido, será preciso resolver as seguintes limitações do actual sistema de Classificação da TrackFin: • Não existe qualquer definição ou classificação internacionalmente acordada de serviços de higiene. A Secção NM 1.3 abaixo apresenta os fundamentos para a Classificação TrackFin proposta, mas também indica como ela deverá ser mais elaborada em exercícios subsequentes; e • A lista de serviços de apoio (normalmente fornecida pelos governos) é bastante limitada e precisa de ser mais desenvolvida no contexto das necessidades dos países. NM 1.3. Propostas para uma melhor classificação de serviços de higiene Como acima se afirmou, não existe actualmente qualquer definição internacionalmente acordada para higiene. Por outro lado, nenhum dos actuais sistemas de classificação internacionais identifica as actividades de higiene relacionadas com a água e o saneamento como uma categoria específica de produtos ou serviços. Para se rastrear o financiamento adequado para a higiene, é preciso desenvolver, adoptar e integrar classificações específicas para produtos de higiene, fornecedores de serviços e funções. Durante a fase piloto da TrackFin, os países identificaram a necessidade de uma categoria própria para as actividades de higiene. Na versão anterior do documento de orientação, a promoção da higiene tinha sido incluída no âmbito dos serviços de saneamento ou de apoio ao WASH. Por isso, é agora proposta a criação de uma definição para higiene e uma lista de actividades relacionadas com a higiene. Actuais definições de higiene: A OMS define higiene como “as condições e práticas que ajudam a manter a saúde e a prevenir a propagação de doenças”. No seu Quadro de Higiene, a WaterAid define higiene como “práticas pessoais e familiares, tais como lavagem das mãos, banhos e tratamento da água armazenada em casa, destinadas a preservar a limpeza e a saúde” (WaterAid, 2012). No entanto, esta última definição centra-se na higiene familiar, enquanto deveria abranger igualmente as práticas na comunidade e locais públicos, tais como escolas e unidades de saúde. O quadro de higiene da Water Aid identifica várias áreas de comportamento, relativamente à higiene, que têm um impacto significativo na transmissão de doenças relacionadas com a água e o saneamento. São elas: • Remoção segura dos excrementos humanos (incluindo, das crianças e bebés); • Protecção e uso das fontes de água (desde a fonte de água até ao transporte, armazenamento e ponto de uso); • Higiene pessoal (lavagem das mãos com água e sabão em momentos críticos, assim como do corpo, rosto e vestuário); • Higiene alimentar (cozinhar, lavar, guardar, evitar a contaminação cruzada); e • Higiene doméstica e ambiental (remoção dos resíduos sólidos e excrementos de animais, controlo das águas residuais e das águas pluviais, limpeza da casa e imediações). Por outro lado, outros quadros também incluem a higiene menstrual como parte da higiene pessoal. Algumas destas áreas estão fora do sector WASH, por exemplo, a higiene alimentar, a higiene animal e o tratamento dos resíduos sólidos. Algumas destas áreas já estão incluídas nos sistemas de classificação dos serviços de água e saneamento, tais como a remoção segura dos excrementos humanos e a protecção e uso das fontes de água. A metodologia TrackFin propõe, por isso, que se identifique claramente o âmbito das actividades de higiene e sua distribuição entre os sub-sectores. A lista de actividades propostas que se incluem na categoria “higiene” é a seguinte: • Programas de promoção da higiene pelo governo ou pelos fornecedores de serviços, no que diz respeito às famílias, comunidades e locais públicos, tais como escolas e clínicas: isto inclui intervenções com equipamentos e programas, incluindo campanhas sobre lavagem das mãos, promoção do saneamento e educação para a higiene, gestão da higiene menstrual, distribuição de produtos de higiene e distribuição de cloro; e • Actividades de higiene ao nível pessoal e familiar relacionadas com a água e o saneamento, incluindo lavagem das mãos, banhos, lavagem de roupa e lavagem de material/equipamento (sabão, tippy taps, casas de banho); cloro para tratamento da água no ponto de uso. Este item foi retirado da categoria “água” . Higiene alimentar, higiene animal e tratamento de resíduos sólidos estão excluídos desta categoria. Aperfeiçoar a definição de serviços de higiene requer mais estudos e consultas, conduzidos, de preferência, em colaboração com as instituições envolvidas na prestação destes serviços, tendo em vista adoptar e integrar uma definição e classificações internacionais. 46 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Nota Metodológica n.º 2: Classificação dos usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH Objectivos: Esta nota apresenta os actuais sistemas de classificação internacionalmente aceites para usos, actores e tipos de financiamento WASH que foram usados como pontos de referência para desenvolver o sistema TrackFin. As classificações dos usos, fornecedores de serviços e unidades financiadoras dos serviços WASH foram adaptadas da SEEA-Water, enquanto a classificação dos tipos de financiamento é uma adaptação dos 3T da OCDE (Tarifas, Taxas e Transferências). NM 2.1. Classificação dos usos, fornecedores/prestadores de serviços e unidades financiadoras dos serviços WASH Esta secção abrange as classificações usadas pela SEEA-Water, que se baseiam nas convenções estatísticas internacionalmente aceites e foram usadas como base para a classificação TrackFin dos usos, fornecedores de serviços e unidades financiadoras dos serviços WASH. Classificação de usuários dos serviços WASH: os actuais sistemas internacionais de classificação não se referem à uso dada à água, mas aos usuários da água. É o caso da SEEA-Water, que classifica os usuários da água com base no sistema de classificação ISIC (para mais informações, ver a Tabela 6. Semelhanças entre as classificações CPC, ISIC e COFOG ao longo da cadeia de valor da água e saneamento A Tabela 7 abaixo resume o modo como os usuários dos serviços WASH são classificados na metodologia SEEA-Water. Categorias de usuários dos serviços de água no sistema SEEA-Water Explicação e equivalência das categorias Fornecedores especializados - consumo intermédio • Fornecedores de água ISIC 36 • Fornecedores de serviços de saneamento ISIC 37 Os fornecedores de ISIC 36 e ISIC 37 são identificados como usuários, apenas se eles próprios consumirem os serviços de água e saneamento que produzem Outros fornecedores (ISIC 1-3, 5-33,41-43, 35, 38, 39, 45-99) – consumo intermédio Inclui fornecedores envolvidos noutros tipos de actividade que consumam água e saneamento para fins industriais ou comerciais Famílias Uso doméstico • Governo em geral – pode ser desagregado em governo central e local Uso institucional Outros Usuários internacionais; para abastecimento de água e saneamento, isto não é directamente relevante. Tabela 7. Classificação dos usuários dos serviços de água no sistema SEEA-Water Classificação de prestadores de serviços WASH: o sistema SEEA-Water classifica os prestadores em “categorias ISIC relevantes, independentemente do tipo de propriedade, tipo de organização legal e modo de operação. Mesmo quando as actividades de tratamento e abastecimento de água (ISIC 36) e saneamento (ISIC 37) são realizadas pelos governos, elas são classificadas, tanto quanto possível, na divisão específica (ISIC 36 e 37)”. Também são apresentados, em tabelas separadas, os serviços de água e saneamento auto-fornecidos pelas famílias e os serviços de consumo colectivo relacionados com a água e fornecidos pelo governo. A Tabela 8 abaixo apresenta as diferentes categorias de prestaodores/fornecedores de serviços de água usados no sistema SEEA-Water. Categorias de fornecedores de serviços de água Fornecedores especializados: • Fornecedores de água ISIC 36 • Fornecedores de serviços de saneamento ISIC 37 Outros fornecedores (ISIC 1-3, 5-33,41-43, 35, 38, 39, 45-99) Famílias (como fornecedores para uso próprio) Governo em geral (como produtor de serviços de consumo colectivo relacionados com a água) • Podem ser desagregados em governo central e local Tabela 8. Classificação dos prestadores/fornecedores de serviços de água no sistema SEEA-Water 47Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Classificação das unidades financiadoras WASH: para identificar as fontes de financiamento, SEEA-Water refere-se a “sectores de financiamento”. São as entidades que suportam os custos reais e são caracterizadas pelo tipo de propriedade, que inclui: Governo Geral, potencialmente desagregado em governo central e local; Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as famílias; Corporações; Famílias; Outros. Estes sectores financeiros são apresentados na Tabela 9. Classificação dos sectores financiadores da água no sistema SEEA-Water abaixo apresentado1. Categorias de sectores financiadores Governo • Pode ser desagregado em governo central e local Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as famílias Corporações • Fornecedores especializados: (Fornecedores de água ISIC 36; Fornecedores de serviços de saneamento ISIC 37) • Outros fornecedores (ISIC 1-3, 5-33,41-43, 35, 38, 39, 45-99) Famílias Outros Tabela 9. Classificação dos sectores financiadores de água no sistema SEEA-Water Do mesmo modo, as unidades financiadoras das Contas WASH são classificadas por tipo de sectores institucionais, o que facilita uma melhor resposta às questões políticas sobre as origens e a canalização dos fundos recebidos pelos fornecedores de serviços. NM 2.2. Classificação dos tipos de financiamento WASH Esta secção apresenta os dois actuais sistemas de classificação que identificam os tipos de financiamento: a classificação 3T da OCDE, que se refere aos tipos de financiamento como “fontes de financiamento” e SEEA-Water. O sistema 3T da OCDE foi usado como a principal base para a classificação TrackFin de tipos de financiamento. Fontes de financiamento do sector WASH de acordo com a OCDE: os 3T Desde o relatório Camdessus sobre o financiamento da água (Winpenny, 2003), o sector da água tem-se referido às três principais fontes de financiamento do sector da água como os “3T”, isto é, tarifas, taxas e transferências, a que se devem acrescentar as fontes de financiamento reembolsável. Estas fontes de financiamento podem ser combinadas para cobrir os custos do fornecimento de serviços de água, como a OCDE resume na Figura 9 abaixo (OECD, 2010). Figura 9. Fontes de financiamento do sector WASH Fonte: (OECD, 2010), Innovative financing mechanisms for the water sector Fundos privados Fundos públicos FINANÇAS DOS PRESTADORES DE SERVIÇOS DE ÁGUA CUSTOS Custos de funcionamento Custos de manutenção Custos de Investimento (reabilitação e novos) Lacunas no financiamento RECEITA Tarifas Taxas Transferências FUNDOS REEMBOLSÁVEIS Títulos Obrigações Empréstimos comerciais Condições favoráveis (incl. elemento de subvenção) Reembolsos Preencher as lacunas no financiamento FUNDOS REEMBOLSÁVEIS COM BASE NO MERCADO 1 No Anexo B, apresenta-se informação adicional sobre o modo como estes dados são usados nas contas SEEA-Water. 48 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS A OCDE define estas fontes de financiamento do seguinte modo: • Tarifas são os valores pagos pelos usuários aos fornecedores, geralmente, para obter os acesso e uso dos serviços WASH. Os usuários, geralmente, fazem pagamentos aos fornecedores de serviços para acesso e uso desses serviços. Quando os serviços são auto-fornecidos, por exemplo, se uma família construir e usar a sua própria latrina doméstica, o capital investido pela família sob a forma de dinheiro, material ou tempo - “trabalho voluntário” – é também considerado em “tarifas”. • Taxas refere-se a fundos originários de taxas domésticas que são canalizadas para o sector através de transferências de qualquer nível dos governos – nacional , regional ou local. Esses fundos são, normalmente, fornecidos como subsídios para investimento de capital ou operações. Os subsídios “escondidos” podem incluir redução de taxas, empréstimos favoráveis (i.e., a uma taxa de juro subsidiada) ou serviços subsidiados, como a electricidade. • Transferências refere-se a fundos de doadores internacionais e fundações de beneficência (incluindo ONG, organizações de cooperação descentralizada ou da sociedade civil local), normalmente originárias de outros países. Podem assumir a forma de subvenções, garantias ou empréstimos em condições favoráveis (i.e., através do elemento de subsídio incluído num empréstimo com condições favoráveis, na forma de uma taxa de juro subsidiada ou período de tolerância). Os investimentos no sector WASH tendem a ser capital-intensivos e “irregulares” por natureza, caracterizando-se por investimentos relativamente grandes, com uma longa duração dos activos. Por isso, raramente é possível financiar todos os investimentos necessários antecipadamente. Se não for possível angariar financiamento adicional, quer reduzindo os custos, quer aumentando os 3T, é prática normal que as lacunas de financiamento sejam supridas com uma combinação de tipos de financiamento reembolsável, que poderão incluir os seguintes:1 • Empréstimos bancários, incluindo financiamento comercial, microfinanciamento e empréstimos em condições especiais. Estes últimos são empréstimos de doadores que incluem um subsídio ou elemento de transferência sob a forma de taxa de juro abaixo da taxa de mercado ou um período de tolerância; • Capital disponibilizado pelos investidores na expectativa de que serão reembolsados e de que poderão ganhar uma taxa de retorno sobre o capital investido. Nas empresas em actividade, o capital pode ser disponibilizado por períodos de tempo muito longos e, portanto, poderá nunca ser reembolsado. Uma forma oculta de subsídio público (ou transferência) poderá consistir em fazer um investimento de capital, sem expectativa de reembolso ou retorno; e • Outros instrumentos financeiros, como obrigações, pelas quais um título de dívida é vendido no mercado a um grande grupo de investidores em obrigações. Os emissores das obrigações podem ser municípios - “obrigações municipais” – ou empresas públicas ou privadas - “obrigações de empresas.” Avaliação da relevância da tipologia 3T da OCDE para as Contas WASH A tipologia 3T da OCDE é relevante para as Contas WASH na medida em que caracteriza os fluxos de financiamento de acordo com a sua origem e natureza (por exemplo, distinguindo entre receita dos serviços e subsídios externos). Esta terminologia tornou-se muito conhecida e aceite no sector. O seu valor reside na comunicação em termos simples de alguns conceitos-chave do financiamento do sector WASH, tais como compreender que a recuperação total dos custos a partir das tarifas não deve ser o único objectivo e que uma alternativa aceitável é a recuperação sustentável dos custos a partir de uma combinação dos 3T. No entanto, esta tipologia suscita algumas preocupações: • Algumas partes interessadas do sector expressaram a sua preocupação por esta tipologia ser reconhecida principalmente por organizações internacionais e organizações de apoio externas, tais como doadores ou ONG. A sua apropriação por actores dos países em desenvolvimento está ainda em curso; e • A terminologia pode ser confusa no contexto de alguns países em desenvolvimento. Como as Contas WASH se destinam a ser usadas por tomadores de decisão políticos, as classificações adoptadas precisam ser simples e facilmente compreendidas, sem permitir interpretações erradas. 1 Relativamente aos grandes fornecedores de serviços, de capital intensivo, os empréstimos individuais podem ser reembolsados, mas o nível da dívida total não pode baixar, porque os empréstimos são “prolongados” ou renovados, para manter o mesmo saldo entre o financiamento externo e o capital próprio. 49Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Existem ainda outras preocupações que se levantam acerca da terminologia 3T, incluindo os seguintes pontos: • O termo tarifa é entendido na linguagem comum como a tarifa paga pelos usuários aos serviços. No entanto, a tipologia da OCDE inclui nesta categoria os pagamentos feitos pelas famílias para o auto-abastecimento. Estes dois tipos de financiamento são substancialmente diferentes, com fontes de dados diferentes. Por conseguinte, os dois tipos de financiamento devem ser, se possível, claramente separados. • No item transferências, a tipologia da OCDE inclui “fundos de doadores internacionais e fundações beneficentes (incluindo ONG, organizações de cooperação descentralizada ou da sociedade civil local) que, normalmente, são originárias de outros países”. Em vários países, contudo, tais como a Índia ou muitos países da América Latina, o termo transferência refere-se, frequentemente, ao orçamento do governo central afectado as autoridades locais em cenários descentralizados. Esta é uma parte daquilo a que a terminologia da OCDE se refere como taxas, embora este termo seja relativamente vago e possa ser mal interpretado nos países em desenvolvimento. Dadas as diferentes interpretações que podem surgir em torno da terminologia da OCDE, ela foi ajustada, para constituir a base para a classificação de tipos de financiamento da TrackFin. Estes equivalem àquilo que a OCDE designa de “fontes de financiamento.” Tipos de financiamento do sector WASH, de acordo com a SEEA-Water: unidades e sectores financiadores A SEEA-Water não considera os tipos de financiamento como tais. Mas os sectores financiadores identificados pela SEEA-Water (definidos na Tabela 9. Classificação dos sectores financiadores da água no sistema SEEA-Water) compreendem categorias de tipos de financiamento não explicitamente considerados pela terminologia 3T da OCDE. Estes incluem transferências de instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem às famílias (e que podem ser em dinheiro em espécie, podendo muitas ser originárias de fontes domésticas voluntárias, em oposição apenas a transferências internacionais). As transferências internacionais do resto do mundo, que podem não ser descritas como Ajuda Pública ao Desenvolvimento (tais como as transferências de doadores não OCDE, incluindo os BRICS (Brasil, Rússia, Índia, China, África do Sul), poderão também ser incluídas. Classificação de tipos de financiamento da TrackFin A classificação TrackFin dos tipos de financiamento está, de modo geral, alinhada com a terminologia 3T, mas permite uma desagregação adicional e combina com a terminologia SEEA-Water. Está apresentada na Tabela 10. Classificação TrackFin dos tipos de financiamento WASH abaixo, mostrando em que pontos equivale às classificações 3T da OCDE e SEEA-Water. 50 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Tipos de financiamento TrackFin Definição Alinhamento com a tipologia de fontes de financiamento da OCDE Alinhamento com as categorias de sectores financiadores SEEA- Water FT1 Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos Pagamentos feitos pelos usuários aos fornecedores de serviços para obterem e usarem esses serviços. TARIFAS Parte do financiamento via “Empresas” FT2 Despesa dos usuários com o auto- abastecimento Financiamento fornecido pelos usuários para investir em um serviço ou prestar o próprio serviço. Estes usuários pagam um pré-investimento para obterem acesso ao serviço (por exemplo, um poço, um sistema de água particular ou uma latrina privada). Eles então cobrem os próprios custos de operação e manutenção. Isso pode ser na forma de dinheiro, equipamento ou tempo, mas apenas os pagamentos em dinheiro estão incluídos nas Contas WASH. Esta categoria pode ser desagregada em duas sub-categorias: FT2.1 Despesas do usuário doméstico com o auto-abastecimento, FT2.2 Despesas do usuário não doméstico com o auto-abastecimento. Famílias e “Empresas” FT3 Transferências públicas domésticas Transferências públicas para as agências WASH de organismos do governo central ou local. Trata-se, muitas vezes, de subsídios oriundos de impostos ou outras fontes de receita governamental. Incluem subvenções, mas excluem empréstimos em condições favoráveis que estejam incluídos em FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. TAXAS Governos FT4 Transferências públicas internacionais Doações ou subvenções voluntárias de doadores públicos externos e agências multilaterais. Os empréstimos em condições favoráveis estão excluídos e integralmente cobertos em FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. TRANSFERÊNCIAS Outros/Resto do mundo FT5 Contribuições voluntárias Doações ou subvenções voluntárias de doadores não governamentais internacionais e nacionais, incluindo fundações de beneficência, organizações não governamentais (ONGs), organizações da sociedade civil e indivíduos (remessas de valores). Os empréstimos em condições especiais estão excluídos e inteiramente cobertos em FT6 - Financiamento reembolsável. Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as famílias FT6 Financiamento reembolsável Financiamento oriundo de fontes privadas ou públicas e que requerem reembolso. Exemplos são empréstimos (incluindo empréstimos favoráveis e garantias), investimentos de capital ou outros instrumentos financeiros, como títulos. Este categoria pode ser dividida em duas subcategorias: FT6.1 Financiamento em condições favoráveis reembolsável, e FT6.2 Financiamento normal reembolsável. FINANCIAMENTO REEMBOLSÁVEL Parte do financiamento via “Empresas” Tabela 10. Classificação TrackFin dos tipos de financiamento WASH 51Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Nota Metodológica n.º 3: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa e metodologias alternativas Objectivos: Esta nota fornece orientações sobre as metodologias necessárias para rastrear os tipos de financiamento (i.e., receitas do sector) e custos numa base comparável. Defende que se deve usar uma abordagem de fluxo de caixa, sempre que possível. Realça também um possível desenvolvimento a mais longo prazo, que implicará usar uma abordagem económica à estimativa dos fluxos financeiros. NM 3.1. Fundamentos para estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa A filosofia subjacente à Abordagem dos Fluxos Financeiros é efectuar o registo dos fluxos financeiros numa base anual, isto é, os fluxos de caixa reais para cobrir os custos que entram e saem do sector. Em teoria, os fluxos financeiros calculados através da Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento (para estimar as receitas do sector) e a Abordagem Baseada em Custos (para estimar as despesas do sector) deverão equilibrar-se, como representado na Figura 10 (Despesas e Receitas a Calcular para Abordagem dos Fluxos Financeiros) abaixo. RECEITACUSTOS C4 – Reembolso do financiamento C4 – Custos financeiros (juros, dividendos) C6 – Impostos e taxas C5 – Custos de apoio C1 & C3 – Despesas de investimento (novo e reabilitação) C2 – Despesas de operação e manutenção FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável (empréstimos, títulos FT5 – Contribuições voluntárias FT4 – Transferências públicas internacionais FT3 – Transferências públicas domésticas FT1 & FT2 – Tarifas e despesas do usuário com o auto-abastecimento Figura 10. Custos e receitas a calcular para Abordagem dos Fluxos Financeiros Na prática, contudo, as diferenças na contabilização dos fluxos financeiros poderão introduzir ligeiras diferenças entre os fluxos financeiros que usam estes dois métodos de cálculo. Os fluxos financeiros referentes aos custos e às receitas não ocorrem necessariamente em simultâneo e o momento em que são registados é significativo. A forma como os fluxos financeiros são calculados depende dos métodos de contabilização usados pelos diferentes actores de onde os dados são recolhidos, isto é, se é usado o método de fluxo de caixa ou o método de contabilidade de exercício, como se descreve mais detalhadamente na Caixa 14 abaixo. Caixa 14. Metodologias de contabilidade e demonstrações financeiras As transacções financeiras podem ser registadas através de dois métodos contabilísticos: • A contabilidade dos fluxos financeiros regista os fluxos de caixa recebidos e desembolsados, quando se fazem (ou recebem) os pagamentos; • A contabilidade de exercício regista uma transacção, quando um valor económico é criado, transferido ou extinto. Isso significa que um evento económico é registado no momento da transacção e não quando o pagamento é feito (ou recebido). No caso das tarifas da rede de serviços de abastecimento de água, o método de fluxo de caixa regista-as com base nas contas cobradas, isto é, o montante pago pelos usuários aos fornecedores de serviços no período do exercício. Pelo contrário, o método de contabilidade de exercício regista as tarifas com base nas receitas calculadas quando as facturas são enviadas aos usuários, isto é, as tarifas em dívida e não as tarifas realmente pagas. As três principais demonstrações financeiras preparadas pela maior parte das empresas acima de uma determinada dimensão, calculam as transacções financeiras de maneira diferente: • A demonstração de fluxos de caixa regista os fluxos de caixa que entram e saem da conta bancária de uma empresa, durante um certo período de tempo. Baseia-se no método de contabilidade do fluxo de caixa. • A demonstração de receitas e despesas (ou a conta de ganhos e perdas) regista as receitas criadoras de riqueza e os encargos destruidores de riqueza de uma empresa durante um certo período de tempo. Baseia-se no método de contabilidade de exercício. • O balanço retrata o valor dos activos e passivos de uma empresa num determinado ponto no tempo. 52 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Os dados obtidos nos diferentes tipos de partes interessadas com diferentes sistemas de contabilidade podem ser calculados na base da tesouraria ou na base da contabilidade do exercício. Por exemplo, é provável que os governos ou doadores que desembolsam fundos para o sector usem a abordagem dos fluxos de caixa e registem esses fundos quando o pagamento é feito, enquanto os fornecedores de serviços acima de uma determinada dimensão usarão métodos de contabilidade do exercício. Poderá também ser menos provável que publiquem demonstrações de fluxos de caixa ou que existam compilações de demonstrações de fluxos de caixa ao nível do sector. Usar o método da contabilidade de exercício, conforme recomenda o Sistema de Contas da Saúde e em sintonia com o Sistema de Contas Nacionais, retratará com mais rigor o financiamento do sector, uma vez que as transacções serão registadas quando resultam em criação de riqueza. No entanto, os desafios de compilar Contas WASH a nível nacional, com base na contabilidade de exercício são, provavelmente, os mesmos que os encontrados no sector da saúde, nomeadamente não sendo possível entrar nos detalhes de cada demonstração financeira recolhida junto dos fornecedores de serviços. Na caixa abaixo, apresentam-se informações mais detalhados. Desafios dos métodos de contabilidade usados no Sistema de Contas da Saúde O Manual das SHA aponta para as dificuldades metodológicas associadas ao uso de um método de contabilidade do exercício. “Este Manual do Sistema de Contas da Saúde recomenda o método da contabilidade de exercício, em que as despesas são atribuídas ao período de tempo durante o qual a actividade se realizou, de preferência ao método de fluxo de caixa, em que as despesas são registadas quando a transacção que pagou a actividade se realizou. No entanto, reconhece-se que a contabilidade de caixa ainda pode ser aplicada em alguns países ou em algumas partes do sistema de saúde. Os contabilistas da saúde poderão encontrar uma variedade de práticas de contabilidade nas suas fontes de dados. Uma boa prática deve envolver, na medida do possível, a conversão de tudo para uma base de exercício”. Fonte: Sistema de Contas da Saúde (OCDE, 2011:111). Como os objectivos da TrackFin são rastrear os fluxos financeiros, e dada a importância do financiamento dos governos e dos doadores para o sector, recomenda-se, sempre que possível, a abordagem do fluxo de caixa. As tarifas devem, portanto, ser acompanhadas com base no dinheiro realmente recebido (não facturado) dos usuários pelos serviços fornecidos. Quando existirem demonstrações de fluxos de caixa dos serviços, devem usar-se os fluxos de caixa. No entanto, se estes não estiverem facilmente disponíveis, pode usar-se também a informação das demonstrações de Receitas e Despesas. O financiamento reembolsável deve ser justificado no momento e no valor em que o fluxo de caixa é recebido pelos fornecedores de serviços, presumindo que ele é usado no mesmo ano. Os reembolsos e os custos de capital devem igualmente ser registados como despesa. Outras orientações sobre o tratamento dos empréstimos são apresentadas na Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento. A Caixa 15 abaixo apresenta um resumo das vantagens e desvantagens de usar uma abordagem de fluxo de caixa para estimar os fluxos financeiros. Caixa 15. Vantagens e desvantagens de usar a abordagem dos fluxos de caixa para estimar os fluxos financeiros Vantagens • Mais fáceis de compilar, porque muitas fontes de dados registam a despesa com base nos fluxos de caixa • Menor risco de misturar diferentes métodos de contabilidade • Mostra a despesa e a receita reais nesse ano, tendo em conta a despesa que não foi paga e a receita não cobrada • Mostra os fluxos de despesa de capital (que não apareceriam usando o método de exercício) Desvantagens • Mostra o financiamento reembolsável recebido e, por isso, não mostra se a receita “real” do sector é suficiente para cobrir a despesa NM 3.2. Usar uma abordagem económica como possível alternativa Uma vez que se baseia na contabilidade do fluxo financeiro, a abordagem de fluxos financeiros proposta para estimar esses fluxos não fornece informação sobre se o sector é solvente, isto é, se as receitas não reembolsáveis (receitas reais) são suficientes para recuperar todos os custos, incluindo custos de manutenção de capital, necessários para manter os activos fixos a funcionar. Esta abordagem, portanto, não revela se o sector é financeiramente sustentável a longo prazo ou não. Para resolver estas preocupações, a regulação económica baseia-se numa abordagem económica, com base na contabilidade de exercício, para estimar as necessidades de financiamento dos fornecedores de serviços. Aplicar 53Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional esta abordagem ao nível do sector seria uma forma interessante de avaliar a sustentabilidade financeira do sector no seu todo. A Caixa 16 abaixo indica o modo como esta abordagem económica poderá funcionar. Caixa 16. Uma abordagem económica possível para estimar os fluxos financeiros no sector WASH Pode usar-se uma abordagem económica para estimar a receita necessária para recuperar todos os custos do ciclo de vida do fornecimento de serviços. Esta abordagem económica captura os custos de operação e manutenção, as grandes despesas de manutenção de capital e os custos financeiros e taxas, mas exclui as despesas líquidas de capital e inclui apenas a depreciação dos activos. Ela mostrará se, a longo prazo, o sector está a gerar receitas suficientes para cobrir os custos de todo o ciclo de vida do financiamento reembolsável. Uma abordagem económica estima as necessidades de financiamento do sector com base nos custos projectados, incluindo o seguinte: • Custos correntes de operação e manutenção • Custos de manutenção de capital (para despesas de manutenção de capital). Uma medida muito grosseira destes custos de manutenção de capital poderá ser a depreciação, uma vez que esta pode ser vista como “o que é preciso pôr de lado para substituir investimentos passados”. No entanto, se o valor da depreciação pode reflectir adequadamente o que é preciso gastar em manutenção de capital depende muito dos métodos de avaliação dos activos. Na maioria dos casos, quando a depreciação é estabelecida com base nos valores históricos dos activos, é provável que os montantes correspondentes da depreciação sejam insuficientes para cobrir as necessidades reais de manutenção de capital. Um regulador, como a Ofwat (O regulador económico da indústria privatizada da água, na Inglaterra e no País de Gales), procurou resolver isto introduzindo custos específicos de manutenção do capital ao estimar as necessidades de receitas dos serviços (a cobrir pelas tarifas). Pode, no entanto, ser difícil e controverso atribuir esses valores, que, geralmente, não são estimados na maioria dos sectores da água. • Retorno esperado sobre a base de activos (estimado aplicando um Custo de Capital Médio Ponderado (WACC) à base de activos projectada, que inclui novos instrumentos projectados). Isto constitui uma base sólida para a orçamentação e fixação de tarifas, uma vez que permite atenuar as futuras necessidades de receitas. Estimar desta forma a necessidade de receitas pode ser comparável à receita real para o sector (das tarifas, contribuições não tarifárias dos usuários ou transferências não reembolsáveis), para avaliar se o sector é financiado de forma sustentável ou não. RECEITAREQUISITO DE RECEITA Custos financeiros líquidos (juros, dividendos) Taxas Depreciação e amortização de activos fixos Despesas de manutenção de grande capital Despesas de operação e despesas de manutenção Contribuições voluntárias Transferências públicas internacionais Transferências públicas domésticas Tarifas e despesas do usuário com o auto- abastecimento Figura 11. Custos e tipos de financiamento registados pela abordagem económica Nesta fase, não é recomendável usar a abordagem económica. Isso acrescentaria ainda maior complexidade e elementos aos requisitos para estimar receitas que, provavelmente, seriam muito difíceis de reunir. Além disso, como esta abordagem tem de ser aplicada a nível dos fornecedores de serviços, não é certo que as despesas possam ser simplesmente adicionadas conjuntamente a todos os fornecedores de serviços, para criar um retrato do sector. Como os fornecedores de serviços podem ser organizações públicas, privadas, empresariais ou governamentais, ou até mesmo as comunidades, poderá não ser possível estimar todas as despesas com base na contabilidade de exercício. Um outro desafio metodológico é a estimativa das grandes despesas de manutenção de capital e da depreciação dos activos fixos, que terá de ser feita numa duração ideal dos activos e na estimativa do seu valor actual, usando os padrões IFRS (Normas Internacionais de Relato Financeiro). Um modelo simplificado para estimar as grandes despesas de manutenção de capital poderá ser desenvolvido com base na actual abordagem Ofwat. 54 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Nota Metodológica n.º 4: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento Objectivos: Esta notaa fornece orientações sobre a atracção de fluxos financeiros no sector WASH, usando a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento. Baseia-se na experiência do Sistema de Contas da Saúde para estimar os tipos de financiamento. A Nota indica quais poderão ser as potenciais fontes de informação e dados para cada tipo de financiamento, identificando os desafios e as possíveis soluções para cada caso. NM 4.1. Colectar dados por tipos de financiamento Como se explica no principal documento de orientação, existem numerosos tipos de financiamento que podem ser utilizados para financiar o sector. Identificar a informação sobre cada tipo pode ser feito de várias formas, como se apresenta na Tabela 11 abaixo. O método mais apropriado para colectar dados sobre os tipos de financiamento tem de ser decidido de país a país, conforme a disponibilidade de dados. Na Tabela 11 apresentam-se orientações adicionais sobre colecta de informação para cada tipo de financiamento. Categorias de tipos de financiamento Fontes de dados e métodos de colecta Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos (FT1) • Quando possível, usar as fontes existentes, tais como a IBNET, reguladores nacionais ou associações de fornecedores de serviços e exercícios de planificação financeira estratégica, a nível nacional • Para os principais fornecedores de serviços, obter dados sobre o volume de negócios por serviços WASH; nos países descentralizados, organizar um pesquisa aos fornecedores oficiais de serviços • Organizar um inventário e pesquisa a outros fornecedores de serviços (incluindo fornecedores informais de pequena escala), para avaliar a sua receita tarifária global Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento (FT2) • Para as famílias: – Consultar os dados de pesquisas às famílias sobre a cobertura de serviços WASH – Organizar pesquisas ad hoc às famílias, para avaliar os seus investimentos no auto-abastecimento de água ou saneamento • Para outros tipos de usuários, pode ser difícil obter dados. As autoridades das bacias hidrográficas ou as agências de protecção ambiental podem colectar dados sobre auto-abastecimento das indústrias e devem ser consultadas. Transferências públicas domésticas (FT3) • Consultar as contas financeiras dos governos nacionais e locais. Estas podem ser consolidadas no principal sistema público de informação financeira que regista a despesa pública ou podem ser mantidas no Ministério das Finanças. • Consultar os dados sobre a despesa real dos governos nacionais e locais colectados pelos Institutos Nacionais de Estatística (INE) • Recolher relatórios de despesa dos principais programas governamentais WASH • Para os ministérios centrais e agências públicas: criar questionários específicos para colectar dados primários sobre as transferências recebidas e fornecidas • Para organismos públicos descentralizados (tais como os governos locais): criar um questionário específico para colectar dados primários, pelo menos, de uma amostra • Para os principais fornecedores de serviços: criar um questionário específico para recolher dados primários de uma amostra sobre as transferências recebidas. Transferências públicas internacionais (FT4) • Obter dados da base de dados CAD da OCDE • Colectar dados sobre as transferências recebidas das contas financeiras dos governos nacionais e locais e dos principais fornecedores de serviços • Colectar dados sobre as transferências enviadas, criando questionários específicos para colectar dados primários de doadores multilaterais e bilaterais Transferências voluntárias (FT5) • Colectar dados sobre as transferências recebidas das contas financeiras dos governos nacionais e locais • Colectar dados sobre as transferências recebidas, criando questionários específicos para recolher dados primários de uma amostra de ONG e outras organizações beneficentes Financiamento reembolsável (FT6) • Consultar os pesquisas do sector bancário comercial • Colectar os dados sobre financiamento reembolsável obtidos através de questionários específicos para se conhecerem os dados primários dos principais financiadores (agências governamentais e bancos de desenvolvimento, doadores multilaterais e bilaterais) • Colectar os dados sobre financiamento reembolsável recebido, criando questionários específicos para se conhecerem os dados primários dos principais financiadores (principais fornecedores de serviços) Tabela 11. Colecta de dados sobre os tipos de financiamento 55Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional FT1: Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos A informação sobre as tarifas pagas aos fornecedores oficiais de serviços WASH existe a um nível desagregado (i.e., ao nível de cada fornecedor de serviços), mas obter essa informação requer, normalmente, um exame cuidadoso das contas financeiras dos fornecedores de serviços e das listas tarifárias. Seguindo a abordagem dos fluxos financeiros (ver Nota Metodológica n.º 3: Estimar os fluxos financeiros com base nos fluxos de caixa e metodologias alternativas), as tarifas reais pagas pelos usuários e cobradas pelos fornecedores de serviços devem ser acompanhadas, incluindo os subsídios e os impostos sobre os produtos. Esta abordagem difere da usada no SCN1, que recomenda que se calcule o “produto” ou montante total das vendas, transportes ou volume de negócios segundo os métodos de contabilidade de exercício (referidos como abordagem económica no Documento de orientação). Pode ser expressa em termos de preços do produtor ou preços de base. As diferenças devem-se a subsídios e impostos sobre os produtos. Os preços de base incluem subsídios aos produtos e excluem os impostos sobre os produtos. Os preços do produtor excluem subsídios aos produtos e incluem impostos sobre os produtos. Alguns países ou organizações colecteram dados sobre as tarifas médias em uma determinada àrea geogràfica2, enquanto outras organizações colectem e apresentam dados sobre estruturas de tarifas a nível de país. No entanto, poucos ou nenhum país colecta sistemática e regularmente dados sobre o montante total das receitas geradas através das tarifas pagas pelos usuários pelos serviços fornecidos. A metodologia TrackFin requer a colecta de dados deste tipo, tanto agregados como desagregados: • Informação agregada sobre as receitas provenientes das tarifas: Trata-se do agregado de todas as receitas geradas por todos os tipos de serviços a nível dos fornecedores de serviços, com base naquilo que, normalmente, se designa por “volume de negócios das vendas de serviços de água/saneamento”. É extraído das contas de ganhos e perdas dos fornecedores de serviços, de preferência a partir das bases de dados existentes, no caso de múltiplos fornecedores. • Informação desagregada das receitas das tarifas: Na maioria dos casos, a informação desagregada sobre a distribuição das receitas das tarifas, entre os vários serviços (água, saneamento e outros serviços), entre os vários tipos de usuários (famílias, comércio, indústrias ou instituições) ou entre várias regiões, pode ser obtida a partir de dados comerciais. Isso exige uma visita específica ou o envio de um questionário a cada fornecedor de serviços, a não ser que a informação já tenha sido introduzida numa base de dados. Quando o fornecimento de serviços WASH está altamente descentralizado, poderá haver um grande número de fornecedores de serviços. Os fornecedores informais podem representar uma grande fatia do mercado. Para ultrapassar essas eventuais dificuldades, a equipa das Contas WASH pode procurar obter os dados junto de: • Reguladores económicos nacionais do sector da água (por exemplo, Conselho Nacional da Zâmbia para o Abastecimento de Água e Saneamento, Commisão reguladora de serviços públicos em Gana ou Conselho de regulametação dos serviços de água no Quénia); • Associações nacionais de serviços de utilidade pública, tais como a Associação Brasileira das Concessionárias Privadas de Serviços Públicos de Água e Esgoto no Brasil; • Pesquisas e bases de dados mundiais que reúnem informação sobre tarifas, tais como a plataforma de referência da IBNET, gerida pelo Banco Mundial, que inclui uma base de dados sobre tarifas da àgua desenvolvida em 2011; e • Exercícios de planificação financeiro estratégico para o sector, algumas vezes levados a cabo sob os auspícios de organizações internacionais, como a OCDE ou o Banco Mundial3. 1 SNA (2008), na Secção 2 – Balanços e indicadores monetários, capítulo 4 2 Um exemplo são os dados da OCDE de conjunto de cidades e países de todo o mundo (OECD, 2009. Managing Water for All - An OECD perspective on pricing and financing. Paris: OECD Publications.) 3 A seguinte publicação da OCDE apresenta uma panorama dos instrumentos que podem ser usados para melhorar a gestão financeira no sector, incluindo instrumentos de planificação financeiro estratégico. 56 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Caixa 17. Dados dos reguladores nacionais sobre as tarifas do fornecimento de serviços Os dados sobre as estruturas tarifárias podem se consultados junto do regulador nacional da água e saneamento. Por exemplo, o Ofwat. Todos os anos, o Ofwat monitora e aprova os preços da água e do saneamento da companhia, para verificar se os limites de preços estabelecidos são respeitados. Os resultados são publicados anualmente e estão disponíveis online. Os limites de preços são estabelecidos pelo regulador de cinco em cinco anos, avaliando em detalhe os modelos empresariais e financeiros dos operadores. Para realizar a análise dos preços, utilizam modelos financeiros que recolhem todos os fluxos financeiros, incluindo as receitas das tarifas e outras fontes, e fontes de financiamento reembolsável. O regulador integra nos limites de preços e, portanto, nas tarifas cobradas aos clientes, o custo do serviço da dívida e do capital, estimando o valor dos activos fixos da regulação. Toda esta informação é disponibilizada online, excepto informação que seja considerada comercialmente sensível. Para criar Contas WASH, os tipos de financiamento devem ser definidos de acordo com a uso. Para uso de serviços, as receitas das tarifas devem ser verificadas por tipos de usuários, diferenciando, pelo menos, entre os usuários domésticos e não domésticos. Se o total das receitas apenas estiver disponível nas demonstrações financeiras dos fornecedores de serviços, a equipa das Contas WASH deve recolher dados adicionais sobre a tarifa média cobrada a cada categoria de usuário e o volume consumido por cada tipo de usuário, com o fim de afectar as receitas às suas unidades financiadoras. Ao registar os dados, esta categoria pode ser desagregada em subcategorias, tais como: FT1.1 Tarifas domésticas pelos serviços fornecidos e FT1.2 Tarifas não domésticas pelos serviços fornecidos. Como acima de refere, os pesquisas sobre tarifas poderão não estimar as receitas totais das tarifas, sendo mais provável que incluam dados sobre as tarifas médias ou estruturas tarifárias. A equipa das Contas WASH deverá, por isso, processar esses dados, usando conjuntos de dados complementares sobre o número de clientes e seu respectivo consumo. No entanto, isso pode tornar-se num exercício complexo, quando as tarifas são estruturadas em torno de blocos de consumo, caso em que podem ser necessárias algumas aproximações. No caso dos fornecedores de serviços informais, não é provável que a informação sobre as suas receitas com as tarifas esteja prontamente disponível. Quando os fornecedores informais servem uma fatia substancial do mercado, devem realizar-se pesquisas baseados num número representativo (e dos seus clientes), para se obterem dados sobre as receitas das tarifas que recebem. As tarifas que eles cobram são, normalmente, mais altas dos que a dos operadores formais, mas os volumes consumidos são inevitavelmente mais baixos e, por isso, deve recolher-se informação sobre tarifas, assim como volumes consumidos, para se obter uma amostra representativa. A extrapolação dos dados resultantes deve basear-se no número médio (e dimensão) dos fornecedores de serviços informais, mas deve excluir as famílias, que estão cobertas pelo FT2: Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento. O esforço adicional de se recolher informação sobre as tarifas pagas aos fornecedores informais apenas se justifica nos países onde esta despesa é significativa. FT2: Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento O segundo tipo de financiamento que provém directamente dos usuários é referido como despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento1. Este tipo de financiamento abrange principalmente o investimento em soluções de auto-abastecimento de água (poços privados ou comunitários, pequenos sistemas privados de produção de água, depósitos de água) e de saneamento a nível das famílias. Se possível, a categoria “Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento” deve ser desagregada em, pelo menos, duas sub-categorias: FT2.1 Despesas do usuário doméstico com o auto-abastecimento e FT2.1 Despesas do usuário não doméstico com o auto-abastecimento, para se distinguir claramente entre as despesas das famílias e as dos usuários não domésticos. Potencial desafio: distinguir entre as despesas familiares com o auto-abastecimento e as despesas não domésticas com o auto-abastecimento • Para ser completa, esta categoria deverá inclui todas as despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento, inclusive os investimentos e os custos de operação e manutenção assumidos pelos usuários não domésticos, tais como indústrias ou instituições, com o seu próprio abastecimento de água. Estas despesas podem incluir a construção de pequenos sistemas para a água necessária nos processos industriais ou para distribuição de água potável nos seus locais de produção. Algumas indústrias, como a mineira, podem ser grandes investidores. Se estes usuários não distribuírem a sua água como um serviço aos clientes, a despesa deve ser registada como auto-abastecimento. • Poderá ser difícil localizar as despesas não domésticas com o auto-abastecimento, visto que existe muito pouca informação publicamente disponível. Alguma informação pode ser encontrada em pesquisas administradas às indústrias por agências de bacias hidrográficas ou por agências de protecção ambiental que emitam licenças para captação de água. 1 Note-se que, na terminologia 3T da OCDE, estas despesas estão incluídas em “tarifas”. Elas estão separadas na classificação das Contas WASH, porque representam fluxos financeiros muito diferentes, que têm de ser reconhecidos por direito próprio e porque a metodologia usada para os estimar é diferente. 57Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional É importante rastrear este tipo de financiamento pois ele pode representar uma fatia significativa do investimento na água e saneamento, não apenas por parte dos usuários (particularmente, as famílias), mas também pelo país no seu todo. No entanto, normalmente ele não é acompanhado, em grande medida porque é difícil fazê-lo. Este assunto é tratado mais adiante. A estimativa das despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento reside na intersecção do Tipo de financiamento e Abordagens baseadas em custos, visto que capta não só o financiamento dos usuários como unidades financiadoras, mas também as despesas dos usuários como fornecedores de serviços. Há duas categorias de custos relevantes para as auto-despesas dos usuários: (C1) custos de investimento e (C2) custos de operação e manutenção (ver a classificação dos custos na Nota Metodológica n.º 5: Estimativa dos custos do fornecimento de serviços com a Abordagem Baseada em Custos). É provável que os métodos de colecta de dados para cada um deles seja diferente. Ao procurar avaliar as despesas específicas das famílias, a equipa das Contas WASH deverá identificar que metodologia poderá produzir os melhores resultados com base na disponibilidade de dados. Na maioria dos países, é improvável que existam ou estejam prontamente disponíveis estimativas das despesas familiares com o auto- abastecimento. Alguns pesquisas às famílias podem incluir questões sobre despesas WASH familiares, mas estas centrar-se-ão, normalmente, nas despesas de operação mensais. Nem sempre estabelecerão a diferença entre abastecimento servido e auto-abastecimento e, por isso, incluiriam tanto as tarifas como as despesas das famílias com o auto-abastecimento. Para resolver esta questão, a despesa média das famílias rurais pode ser usadas como referência. As famílias rurais não têm, normalmente, acesso ao abastecimento de água canalizada, embora isso varie muito de país para país. Não são uma fonte de dados suficientemente fiável para permitir estimar as despesas familiares com o auto-abastecimento, como se descreve na caixa abaixo. Este ponto de vista foi expresso pela equipa das Contas WASH em conversações com os INE no Brasil e em Marrocos. Estes INE concordaram em vir a rever as questões relacionadas com as WASH nos seus futuros pesquisas às famílias. Para derivar estimativas de despesas na ausência de dados fiáveis, é, portanto, necessário confiar nos dados dos pesquisas existentes ou realizar pesquisas ad hoc. Os métodos de colecta de dados para C1 e C2 serão diferentes, como abaixo se refere. A despesa média pode ser estimada para os principais tipos de actividade, por exemplo, numa latrina (por tipo de latrina), uma fonte de água (furo) ou reservatório de água. A metodologia e pressupostos usados devem ser devidamente documentados num anexo ao relatório final das Contas WASH. Embora as famílias possam atribuir recursos para o auto-abastecimento, tanto em dinheiro em espécie, apenas as despesas monetárias deverão ser incluídas nas Contas WASH. Isso para garantir a comparabilidade internacional das estimativas. É válido tanto para investimentos como para despesas de operação e manutenção e está em conformidade com as actuais orientações do Sistema de Contas Nacionais. As últimas também contribuem para o Sistema de Contas da Saúde, conforme se apresenta em detalhes na caixa abaixo. Aprender com o sector da saúde: estimar os custos do auto-fornecimento Embora sejam estimados os custos reais do auto-abastecimento das famílias (tais como, os custos de investimento ou operação), o trabalho voluntário executado pelas famílias para construir latrinas não deve ser incluído, para estar em conformidade com o Sistema de Contas Nacionais, que não inclui contribuições não monetárias. Isto está igualmente em conformidade com a prática do Sistema de Contas da Saúde. O valor dessas actividades em espécie para o auto-abastecimento pode ainda ser estimado e apresentado como ponto de referência, mas não pode ser apresentado como parte da despesa total para comparação das despesas WASH com outros agregados económicos, nem para comparações internacionais. Estimativa do investimento das famílias com o auto-abastecimento: na ausência de dados fiáveis dos pesquisas, o investimento familiar pode ser estimado combinando as mudanças estimadas nas taxas de cobertura doméstica da água e saneamento e as estimativas dos custos médios do investimento no auto-abastecimento (por exemplo, o custo médio de investir numa latrina familiar). No mínimo, as pesquisas deverão fornecer o número de famílias com acesso a serviços WASH melhorados e não melhorados. O aumento anual deste número permite o cálculo dos investimentos familiares nos serviços WASH, embora seja provável que permaneçam alguns desafios. Quando os dados da cobertura são actualizados regularmente, é possível rastrear o investimento das famílias ao longo do tempo. Por exemplo, o JMP publica, actualmente, números relativos à cobertura de dois em dois anos, com base nos dados dos pesquisas nacionais às famílias, tais como a Pesquisa Demográfica e de Saudé de USAID 58 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS (DHS), MICS, World Health Survey (WHS), Pesquisa do Banco Mondial para a Medição dos Padrões de Vida (LSMS), e recenseamentos da população e da habitação. Estes realizam-se de dois em dois ou cinco em cinco anos e, em alguns casos, poderão realizar-se com maior frequência. Em muitos países, contudo, não é recolhida anualmente informação fiável sobre a cobertura e, por isso, não será possível rastrear a despesa anual das famílias com o auto- abastecimento. Isso origina os desafios metodológicos salientados na caixa abaixo. Potencial desafio: usar os dados da cobertura para estimar as despesas familiares com o auto-abastecimento • Se os dados da cobertura não forem actualizados anualmente, as despesas familiares com o auto-abastecimento poderão ser estimadas a partir das estimativas de cobertura para duas datas disponíveis e da estimativa das tendências do aumento da cobertura entre essas duas datas, para derivar as tendências anuais. Se a informação mais fidedigna for o recenseamento, as datas poderão ser separadas por cinco, 10 ou 15 anos. • Se não houver qualquer aumento dos dados da cobertura nacional (como aconteceu em Gana) ou se a tendência geral da cobertura através de soluções de auto-abastecimento for negativa (como aconteceu no Brasil), deve ser identificado um nível mais desagregado dos dados da cobertura. Isso acontece porque a tendência geral negativa pode mascarar um aumento (e, portanto, investimento) em áreas ou regiões específicas. Quando a tendência geral da cobertura for constante em termos percentuais, alguns investimentos podem também realizar-se devido ao crescimento demográfico, à medida que aumenta o número de pessoas com acesso a melhores serviços ou porque as famílias estão a melhorar as suas instalações. Usar a tendência da cobertura não permite estimar o investimento nas melhorias entre o nível de serviços e as substituições. As estimativas da cobertura devem ser combinadas com informação sobre o investimento médio das famílias e as despesas de operação e manutenção por tipo de serviços, com base nos pesquisas às famílias existentes ou na informação relacionada com os projectos. Para melhorar o rigor, e se as estimativas da cobertura forem suficientemente detalhadas, estas estimativas de despesas deverão reflectir o tipo de investimento feito pelas famílias e para quais serviços (por exemplo, o tipo de latrina). A Caixa 18 abaixo apresenta outros exemplos de desafios metodológicos que surgiram em relação com esta questão em Gana e no Brasil, e como foram abordados (ou poderão ser). Caixa 18. Estimar o investimento familiar no auto-abastecimento (custos C1 para P5): Exemplos do exercício-piloto Em Gana, não foi possível estimar o investimento familiar em novas instalações de saneamento rural. De facto, a percentagem de pessoas com acesso a melhores serviços de saneamento nas zonas rurais permaneceu em 8%, de acordo com os números JMP para 2010 e 2012. Por isso, não foi possível estimar o número de novas famílias com acesso ao saneamento, embora tenha havido um aumento nominal. Houve também um aumento no saneamento partilhado, de 42% para 44% no mesmo período, e é muito provável que uma grande percentagem dele tenha sido paga pelas famílias. Nesse caso, uma das soluções é estimar o investimento médio por família rural com acesso a uma nova latrina melhorada e um investimento médio por família rural com acesso a uma latrina melhorada partilhada. Isso pode fazer-se através de uma estimativa de baixo para cima que exige o orçamento dos componentes da latrina, material e obras necessárias (custos monetários e não monetários) e o número médio de pessoas que usam a latrina. O número real de novas pessoas com acesso ao saneamento deve, depois, ser estimado com base no número total de pessoas e no seu aumento. Por exemplo, o número de famílias rurais com acesso a melhores serviços de saneamento todos os anos, entre 2010 e 2012, foi igual a (8% x número de famílias rurais em 2012 -8% x número de famílias rurais em 2010)/(2012-2010). Isso equivale a 8000 famílias por ano. O mesmo método pode ser aplicado às famílias com acesso a saneamento partilhado. Em Brasil, muito embora estivessem disponíveis dados sobre o número de instalações de saneamento, a tendência do investimento não pôde ser estimada, porque a variação geral da percentagem de pessoas que usam serviços WASH auto-fornecidos é negativa. Isso acontece porque há mais famílias que fecham as latrinas para mudar para os fornecedores de rede do que famílias que constroem novas latrinas. O aumento do número de instalações ocorreu apenas em alguns municípios, onde a rede não cresceu tão rapidamente como a população ou em zonas rurais. No entanto, esse número é negligenciável, comparado com o investimento global no sector. Fonte: Relatório final sobre as Contas WASH, Brasil, 2014. Relatório final sobre as Contas WASH, Gana, 2014. Á luz dos desafios metodológicos acima mencionados, estimar estas despesas presta-se mais à Abordagem de Stocks de Activos Fixos do que à Abordagem de Fluxos Financeiros, como se refere na Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos. Com base nos números existentes sobre a cobertura, esta abordagem permite estimar o valor dos stocks totais de activos em que as famílias investiram. Para ser mais simples, pode ser preferível avaliar este stock de activos ao valor da substituição, visto que estimar um valor histórico exigiria informação sobre a data da construção. Não é provável que ela esteja disponível, a não ser que se realizem pesquisas específicos para esse fim. 59Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional As despesas de operação e manutenção devem também ser estimadas. As caixas abaixo mostram exemplos sobre o modo como foram estimados os custos de operação e manutenção para as despesas familiares com o auto- abastecimento, fornecendo uma indicação útil sobre o modo como isso pode ser feito na primeira ronda do exercício. Estas estimativas podem ser melhoradas usando os métodos acima descritos. Caixa 19. Estimar os custos das famílias com o operação e a manutenção (custos C2 para P5) do auto-abastecimento: Exemplos do Brasil e Marrocos No Brasil, as despesas familiares com o operação e a manutenção do auto-abastecimento de água e saneamento foram estimadas usando o número de famílias auto-abastecidas, segundo o censo do IBGE1, e a despesa média por família com a água e o saneamento obtida a partir do seu Pesquisas de Orçamentos Familiares - POF do IBGE2 (2009). Assumiu-se que as despesas registadas pelas famílias eram despesas correntes e não de investimento. Uma vez que as despesas de operação e manutenção pelas famílias urbanas inclui tarifas pagas a fornecedores formais, a despesa média de operação e manutenção das famílias rurais foi considerada como a referência e aplicada a todas as famílias auto-abastecidas, incluindo as urbanas. Para melhorar esta estimativa, no próximo exercício, recomendou-se que se incluíssem perguntas mais detalhadas sobre as despesas familiares com o auto-abastecimento no questionário do pesquisa do IBGE sobre orçamento familiar, incluindo a separação das despesas correntes das despesas de investimento, assim como as despesas pelas famílias servidas e auto-abastecidas. Em Marrocos, apenas foi possível estimar as despesas das famílias com o operação e manutenção do auto-abastecimento. Relativamente ao saneamento, a despesa estimada por família foi fornecida pelo censo de 2007 do Inquérito da percepção familiar de nivel de vida du Haut Commisariat au Plan (ENNVM HCP), tanto para as zonas rurais como urbanas. A despesa total não foi estimada em relação ao número de famílias auto-abastecidas (i.e., as famílias sem acesso à rede de saneamento), mas baseada no número de famílias auto-abastecidas que comunicaram fazer pagamentos em dinheiro em espécie para o operação dos seus serviços WASH. Este grupo representava 20,6% da população urbana auto-abastecida e 8,6% da população rural auto-abastecida. A despesa por família foi estimada em 1336 dirham marroquino por ano para as famílias rurais e 921 dirham marroquino por ano para as famílias urbanas. A despesa familiar com o auto-abastecimento de água foi estimado apenas para as famílias rurais não servidas pela rede, uma vez que 100% da população urbana é servida pela rede ou por fontanários. A despesa média por família foi estimada em 600 dirham marroquino por ano. Foi estimado que 100% das famílias auto-abastecidas faziam pagamentos em dinheiro em espécie. Fonte: Relatório final sobre as Contas WASH, Brasil, 2014:32,35. Relatório final sobre as Contas WASH, Marrocos, 2014:35 Se não estiverem disponíveis os números da despesa média com os investimentos e o operação e manutenção para os diferentes tipos de serviços, devem fazer-se pesquisas ad hoc às famílias, para avaliar o seu nível de investimento. O uso de telemóveis pode facilitar muito as pesquisas deste tipo, podendo também reduzir os custos da colecta de dados e o risco de erro. Já foram amplamente usados para recolher informação sobre os pontos de água (com a designação de “mapeamento de fontes de água”), incluindo informação sobre a localização geográfica, custos de investimento associados e funcionalidade de bombas manuais em zona rural. Este tipo de informação, particularmente em relação aos custos de investimento, é fundamental para completar lacunas de dados no investimento familiar em auto-abastecimento. O consórcio de investigação SHARE do Reino Unido, desenvolveu um protótipo de Localizador de Investimento no Saneamento–uma aplicação para telemóvel concebida especialmente para conduzir este tipo de pesquisa3. FT3: Transferências públicas domésticas Transferências públicas domésticas são fundos públicos transferidos por organismos governamentais (a nível central ou descentralizado) para os actores do sector WASH. Esses fundos são, normalmente, atribuídos como subsídios para investimentos de capital ou operações. Esta categoria inclui apenas subvenções “puras” e exclui o financiamento reembolsável e os empréstimos em condições favoráveis, que estão incluídos em FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. Os subsídios explícitos (subvenções) são uma área prioritária para rastrear o exercício. É também importante reconhecer que pode haver tipos de subsídios “escondidos”. Estes podem incluir taxas reduzidas ou serviços subsidiados, por exemplo, na electricidade. Como estes subsídios escondidos podem ser muito difíceis de identificar e avaliar em termos financeiros, seria suficiente mencionar a existência de subsídios escondidos em vez de procurar quantificá-los para a primeira ronda das Contas WASH. Tentar quantificar os subsídios escondidos pode ser feito em fases mais adiantadas do desenvolvimento metodológico. 1 Censo de 2010 e PNAD 2011 e 2012. 2 Inquérito sobre os Orçamentos Familiares de 2009 - POF. 3 A informação sobre o Localizador de Investimentos em Saneamento (SIT) está disponível no website SHARE (www.shareresearch.org) aqui: http://www.shareresearch.org/Resource/Details/sit_note_1. 60 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Os dados sobre transferências públicas canalizadas para o sector WASH devem ser colectados junto de várias partes interessadas e fontes, incluindo os governos nacionais e locais ou outras unidades financiadoras públicas. Estas últimas podem incluir conjuntos de financiamento comuns, se for adoptada uma abordagem transectorial ao financiamento agrupado. Isto pode basear-se no mapeamento dos fluxos financeiros do sector realizado no Passo 2.2. Em alguns casos, os dados agregados a nível nacional podem ser encontrados em instrumentos criados para rastrear e planificar recursos financeiros. Podem também ser encontrados nos sistemas de notificação dos orçamentos programáticos. Por exemplo, a Campanha de Saneamento Total na Índia tinha um sólido sistema de notificação, tanto para os fluxos financeiros públicos como para as realizações. Esses instrumentos podem ser usados, até certo ponto, embora possam ser necessárias verificações pontuais independentes. Ver também o exemplo do Brasil na Caixa 10, Secção 2.3.3. FT4: Transferências públicas internacionais Esta categoria inclui apenas doações voluntárias de doadores públicos externos e agências multilaterais. Estes fundos podem ser atribuídos sob a forma de subvenções ou garantias. Outras formas de financiamento reembolsável de doadores internacionais, tais como empréstimos em condições favoráveis, são excluídas desta categoria e são apresentadas em FT6 - Financiamento reembolsável. Os dados sobre transferências públicas internacionais podem ser procurados nas seguintes fontes: • Bases de dados estatísticos sobre o Desenvolvimento Internacional da OCDE : estas bases de dados identificam a maioria das transferências sob a forma de Ajuda Pública ao Desenvolvimento (APD) de países doadores e organizações internacionais (cooperação bilateral e multilateral). Esta é a melhor fonte de dados sobre transferências públicas internacionais e oferece a possibilidade de rastrear as subvenções e os empréstimos em condições favoráveis separadamente. No entanto, existem algumas ressalvas. Em primeiro lugar, os dados nem sempre equivalem a dados mais detalhados obtidos a nível nacional. É provavelmente necessário algum grau de triangulação. Em segundo lugar, só depois de 2010 a base de dados da OCDE/CAD começou a diferenciar as despesas com a água das despesas com o saneamento e actualmente não está disponível a desagregação entre os serviços. Finalmente, a base de dados apenas cobre transferências públicas internacionais dos membros do CAD. Esta compreende 29 países desenvolvidos e acompanha o financiamento de doadores emergentes, tais como os Emiratos Árabes Unidos, Kuwait e Turquia, em separado. Actualmente, não inclui importantes fluxos de ajuda não OCDE, tais como os da China, Estados Árabes ou Índia. • Contas financeiras dos governos centrais e locais: podem ser usadas para complementar e refinar os dados das bases de dados da OCDE, a nível nacional. No caso de informação contraditória, contudo, é essencial declarar que fonte recebeu prioridade (a qual dependerá da fiabilidade). O Ministério das Finanças deve ter relatórios agregados sobre transferências de doadores, mas poderá não diferenciar entre subvenções e empréstimos em condições favoráveis. • Contas financeiras dos doadores públicos e agências multilaterais: poderá ser necessário enviar um questionário a todos os principais doadores para recolher informação mais detalhada sobre as transferências públicas internacionais. Poderá tratar-se de informação sobre o seu uso (para que sector, serviços, fornecedores de serviços) e a sua natureza (subvenções ou empréstimos em condições favoráveis). Potencial desafio: recolher dados sobre a APD e a questão das concessões A base de dados da OCDE acompanha a APD dos países doadores e organizações internacionais, de acordo com a seguinte definição: “Fluxos financeiros do CAD aos países e territórios, que são: • fornecidos por agências oficiais, incluindo governos estatais e locais ou pelas suas agências executivas; e • cada transacção dos quais: a) é administrada com a promoção do desenvolvimento económico e bem-estar dos países em desenvolvimento como seu principal objectivo; e b) é de carácter favorável e transmite um elemento de subvenção de, pelo menos, 25%, calculado a uma taxa de desconto de 10% (excepto juros capitalizados incluídos no reescalonamento dos empréstimos APD que são registados como APD, independentemente do elemento de subvenção do reescalonamento.)” Para alocar a despesa entre FT4 - Transferências públicas internacionais e FT6 -Financiamento reembolsável é, portanto, necessário distinguir os empréstimos reembolsáveis do puro financiamento em condições preferenciais (100% do elemento da subvenção). Os detalhes sobre a condicionalidade dos fluxos financeiros podem ser encontrados nas bases de dados da OCDE e corroborados com a informação a nível nacional. Fonte: http://www.oecd.org/dac/38429349.pdf. 61Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional FT5: Transferências voluntárias As doações voluntárias podem ser provenientes de doadores não governamentais internacionais e nacionais, incluindo fundações beneficentes, organizações não governamentais (ONGs), organizações da sociedade civil e indivíduos (remessas). Apenas as doações que são 100% subvenções puras estão incluídas nesta categoria. Todas as formas de financiamento reembolsável (incluindo empréstimos em condições favoráveis e garantias) estão incluídas na categoria FT6 - Financiamento reembolsável. Em muitos países em desenvolvimento, as organizações voluntárias contribuem frequentemente para o financiamento do sector da água e do saneamento, tanto em dinheiro em espécie (por exemplo, cavando um poço ou fornecendo equipamento). Essas transferências, muitas vezes, não são registadas de modo fidedigno e, por isso, não é muito clara a sua contribuição real para o financiamento do sector. Para obter dados sobre as transferências voluntárias, a equipa das Contas WASH poderá consultar o seguinte: • Contas financeiras dos governos nacionais e locais: alguns governos começaram a recolher informação sobre as transferências voluntárias para o sector da água e do saneamento, com o objectivo de garantirem uma melhor coordenação desses fluxos financeiros. É o que acontece actualmente, por exemplo, no Bangladesh, onde o financiamento das ONGs é registado no orçamento do sector público, simplificando assim grandemente a tarefa de recolher informação financeira sobre as contribuições. Este tipo de iniciativa, se tiver sucesso, poderá ser replicada noutros países, para melhorar a coordenação e facilitar a tarefa de obter e registar informação sobre esses fluxos. • Pesquisas de ONGs e outras organizações beneficentes relativamente aos seus investimentos: dada a actual falta de transparência sobre os gastos da WASH pelo sector voluntário, algumas ONGs internacionais tomaram a iniciativa de registar as suas doações de forma mais fiável. A Washfunders é um exemplo. Outras iniciativas, tais como a desenvolvida pela Interaction, a maior coligação de ONGs baseadas nos EUA, procuram mapear os projectos financiados pelas ONGs a nível de país (ver o exemplo do Haiti). No entanto, esta informação não é especificamente recolhida para a água e saneamento e está, actualmente, apenas disponível para um número muito pequeno de países. FT6: Financiamento reembolsável Esta categoria inclui todos os tipos de financiamento reembolsável, incluindo empréstimos em condições favoráveis ou garantias. A informação sobre o financiamento reembolsável para o sector é muito limitada, mas pode encontrar-se alguma nas bases de dados existentes: • A base de dados OCDE-CRS (Sistema de Notificação de Credores) contém informação sobre empréstimos em condições favoráveis; • A Internacional Financing Review reúne dados sobre empréstimos comerciais ou obrigações; e • A base de dados World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure regista o montante de investimento de capital aplicado por operadores privados no início de um contrato de parceria público-privada. Isso é habitualmente usado para rastrear o investimento privado em infra-estruturas. Embora os operadores privados, normalmente, não tragam “novo” financiamento ao sector, visto que não são propriamente tipos de financiamento, podem temporariamente preencher as lacunas no financiamento. Se possível, esta categoria deverá ser subdividida em duas sub-categorias, FT6.1 – Financiamento em condições favoráveis reembolsável e FT6.2 – Financiamento normal reembolsável, visto que os dois tipos são de natureza muito diferente. As respectivas abordagens são apresentadas abaixo. Potencial desafio: separar o financiamento reembolsável em condições favoráveis do financiamento normal A atribuição de fluxos de financiamento reembolsável entre estas duas sub-categorias pode ser feita de duas formas: • Os fluxos podem ser caracterizados como favoráveis ou normais, de acordo com o estatuto de propriedade do financiador. Um fluxo reembolsável oriundo de um organismo do sector público pode caracterizar-se como favorável, ao passo que um fluxo reembolsável de um organismo do sector privado pode ser designado de normal. No entanto, alguns organismos do sector público podem, eles próprios, envolver-se na concessão de empréstimos a taxas de mercado e, por isso, este método de classificação é muito imperfeito. • Para se obter uma estimativa mais precisa destes fluxos, podem obter-se dados sobre as condições de empréstimo para créditos específicos, quando existem dúvidas sobre a categoria em que estes se incluem. Os empréstimos em condições favoráveis incluem um elemento de subvenção na forma de uma taxa de juros subsidiada ou um período de tolerância. A definição da OCDE para condições favoráveis pode ser usada para integrar os fluxos nas sub-categorias FT6.1 e FT6.2. O financiamento reembolsável em condições favoráveis inclui os fluxos reembolsáveis que comportam um elemento de subvenção de, pelo menos, 25%, calculado a uma taxa de desconto de 10% (excepto para os juros capitalizados incluídos no reescalonamento dos empréstimos da APD, que são registados como favoráveis, independentemente do elemento de subvenção do reescalonamento.) Fonte: http://www.oecd.org/dac/38429349.pdf. 62 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS A equipa das Contas WASH pode, no entanto, precisar complementar esta informação com pesquisas ad hoc, para compreender melhor a extensão em que os bancos de desenvolvimento e os bancos comerciais financiam actualmente o sector de água e saneamento e através de que tipo de instrumento (por exemplo, empréstimos comerciais, obrigações, emissão de títulos ou garantias). A Caixa 20 abaixo apresenta exemplos do tipo de dados disponíveis nos países-piloto, para estimar os empréstimos. Os três países conseguiram, até certo ponto, incluir empréstimos, conforme a disponibilidade de dados. Atribuir financiamento de acordo com o tipo e a uso dos serviços foi mais problemático ou, em alguns casos, mesmo impossível. Caixa 20. Estimar os empréstimos: Exemplos dos estudos dos países No Brasil, os dados sobre o financiamento reembolsável atribuído pelo governo aos fornecedores de serviços foram colectados nas bases dados dos bancos públicos e dos regimes de financiamento que são as principais fontes de empréstimos reembolsáveis – nomeadamente a Caixa Económica Federal (CAIXA) e o Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Económico e Social (BNDES) – dois bancos públicos. Os dados sobre o financiamento reembolsável recebido de organismos multilaterais e bilaterais foram obtidos nas demonstrações financeiras e empresas municipais, assim como em empresas privadas que operam no sector. Estes dados podem ser parcialmente atribuídos a tipos de serviços, fornecedores, regiões e por tipo de custo, mas não por tipo de uso. A atribuição por serviços foi feita de acordo com a quota relativa de investimento por serviços disponíveis no sector do SNIS. Só foram considerados os fluxos de caixa desembolsados para os mutuários finais dos fundos. Futuramente, as lacunas de dados sobre o financiamento reembolsável poderão ser colmatadas recolhendo melhores dados junto dos fornecedores de serviços, através do SNIS. Em Marrocos, os dados sobre empréstimos foram colectados através das demonstrações financeiras dos fornecedores de serviços. Não foi possível fazer a verificação cruzada dos dados com a informação dos credores (bancos comerciais nacionais ou instituições financeiras internacionais, multilaterais ou bilaterais), por não existir nenhuma base de dados consolidada. Por conseguinte, não foi possível separar os empréstimos favoráveis dos empréstimos comerciais. Apenas os desembolsos para os mutuários (fornecedores de serviços) tinham sido incluídos (excluindo os encargos financeiros, visto não ter sido possível identificá-los separadamente nas demonstrações financeiras). No futuro, isso pode ser feito colectando dados detalhados junto dos principais credores. Em Gana, a informação sobre os empréstimos concedidos por doadores ao governo foi obtida no Ministério das Finanças. A informação sobre empréstimos ao principal serviço de utilidade pública, Gana Water Company Limited (GWCL), é apresentada nas suas demonstrações financeiras. Foi considerado improvável que outros fornecedores de serviços tivessem recebido empréstimos para abastecimento de água ou saneamento, mas essa informação é difícil de verificar. Seria necessário fazer presquisas a todos os fornecedores privados através da Associação dos Serviços Privados (PUSPA). Fonte: Relatório final das Contas WASH, Brasil, 2014:34. Relatório final das Contas WASH, Gana, 2014:46. Relatório final das Contas WASH, Marrocos, 2014.. Não é simples reflectir os fluxos financeiros que são, por definição, reembolsáveis nas Contas WASH. O financiamento reembolsável é de natureza diferente dos outros fluxos financeiros, porque não constitui receita, como tal, para o sector; é apenas um meio de preencher a lacuna nos fluxos de caixa com o requisito de reembolso subsequente. Os usuários, normalmente, têm de absorver o custo do financiamento reembolsável através de tarifas, a não ser que recebam um subsídio para cancelar parte da dívida. Se uma grande parte da receita do sector derivar do financiamento reembolsável, isso prova que o sector está a receber “empréstimos” sobre receitas futuras. O custo desses empréstimos terá de acabar por ser coberto por aumentos de tarifas ou aumentos das transferências. No entanto, a finalidade das Contas WASH é mostrar como e até que ponto o financiamento reembolsável é usado como instrumento para financiar o sector. Por isso, é monitorado como um tipo de financiamento diferente. Como se explica na Secção 2.3.3 do documento de orientação, o objectivo da Abordagem dos Fluxos de Caixa é rastrear os fluxos de financiamento ao sector. Os empréstimos são, portanto, reflectidos nas contas como tipos de financiamento no momento em que são recebidos ou gastos pelos mutuários, embora a receita real a pagar-lhes apenas seja recebida mais tarde. O reembolso dos empréstimos e custos de capital deve ser registado como despesa no ano em que a despesa é feita. Devido às diferenças de tempo entre a entrada de um empréstimo nas contas, o momento da despesa para a qual o empréstimo é concedido e o reembolso do empréstimo, é muito provável que a despesa e a receita não correspondam. A recepção dos empréstimos deve ser, normalmente, registada no ano em que a despesa é feita; como a maior parte dos empréstimos são gastos logo que são desembolsados, na maioria dos casos, isso não colocará muitos problemas. Esta abordagem difere ligeiramente do Sistema de Contas da Saúde, que adopta a abordagem económica das Contas Nacionais (ver Secção 2.3.3). A caixa abaixo indica o modo como o Sistema de Contas da Saúde faz o tratamento dos empréstimos. 63Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Lições do sector da saúde: tratamento dos empréstimos no Sistema de Contas da Saúde Os empréstimos aumentam os fundos disponíveis a um fornecedor ou agente financiador (equivalente a unidades financiadoras nas Contas WASH). Nas Contas da Saúde, os agentes financiadores são definidos como unidades que canalizam o financiamento para o sector, agrupando fundos de diferentes fontes e redistribuindo-os aos fornecedores de serviços. Os empréstimos não estão incluídos directamente nas Contas da Saúde, porque afectam o balanço (activos e passivos) do agente financiador. O que aparece nas SHA é o dinheiro que o agente financiador liberta para o sistema de cuidados de saúde. Como a maioria dos empréstimos são gastos logo que são desembolsados, a distinção importa mais para fins de atribuir os fundos a um tipo de financiamento do que para o nível de despesa da saúde. Os reembolsos dos empréstimos não aparecem nas Contas da Saúde, porque representam uma mudança de activos, mais do que uma despesa corrente de saúde. Com efeito, trata-se de fundos que já estavam registados nas Contas da Saúde, quando o desembolso foi gasto. Por outro lado, justifica-se incluir os pagamentos de juros feitos sobre a dívida pendente como parte dos gastos com a saúde, desde que a dívida esteja directamente relacionada com a actividade do agente financiador na área da saúde. A maioria dos sistemas de contabilidade separa os empréstimos e o reembolso dos empréstimos de outras transacções e, por isso, este tratamento não é difícil de implementar na prática. Nos sistemas que não fazem essa separação, os contabilistas da saúde devem estar atentos às rubricas orçamentais que indicam a injecção de novo capital ou o reembolso de empréstimos ou a amortização de outra dívida e eliminar essas entradas do total para o agente financiador. Na perspectiva das políticas públicas, é importante mostrar o efeito de novos empréstimos ou de reembolsos de empréstimos num determinado agente financiador ou classe de agentes financiadores. Isso pode fazer-se numa tabela de exposição. Este tipo de exposição pode informar os tomadores de decisão políticos sem os desviar da apresentação do actual estado de capacidade do sistema de cuidados de saúde para prestar cuidados. Exposição X: Alternações na posição financeira does agentes financeiros Total Governo Privados Despesa nacional total com a saúde Menos: aumento líquido da dívida relacionada com a saúde Novos empréstimos para a saúde De organzações/entidades externas Governos Agências de desenvolvimento Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as familias Outros De credores domesticos Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as familias Outros Menos: reembolso dos empréstimos A organzações/entidades externas Governos Agências de desenvolvimento Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as familias Outros A credores domesticos Instituições sem fins lucrativos que servem as familias Outros Igual a: Despesas de recursos próprios Menos: Retiradas de capital próprio Igual a: Despesas do rendimento corrente Exemplo de uma tablea de exposição mostrando as alterações dívida relacionada com o sistema de saúde. 64 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS NM 4.2. Potenciais desafios e modo de os abordar NM 4.2.1 Disponibilidade de dados Na generalidade, a disponibilidade de dados sobre tipos de financiamento (e certos tipos de financiamento em particular) pode constituir um problema. Quando isto acontece, é importante ser transparente acerca das questões enfrentadas e representá-las graficamente. Isto pode servir como um sinal para os fornecedores de dados produzirem, se possível, mais informação. A Caixa 21 seguinte resume os desafios da disponibilidade de dados que surgiram em Gana, e os métodos usados para os ultrapassar. Caixa 21. Disponibilidade de dados em Gana Esta tabela resume os tipos de financiamento incluídos e excluídos no estudo do Gana e a fiabilidade dos dados (reais ou estimados). Dados disponíveis Estimativa de dados parcialmente disponíveis Estimativa Sem dados coletidos Tipos de financiamento Disponibilidade de dados Desafios da disponibilidade de dados Métodos usados para ultrapassar esse desafio Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos Dados disponíveis só para a água urbana dos serviços nacionais WASH pelo fornecedor Gana Water Company Limited (GWCL), e só em agregados. Despesas dos usuários com o auto-abastecimento Os dados de 2013/2014 do Pesquisa Nível de Vida no Gana (GLSS) não estavam disponíveis no momento do estudo. Estimativas feitas pelo pesquisa GLSS 2005/2006 com base na despesa média das famílias. Transferências públicas domésticas (governo central) Dados das transferências do Ministério das Finanças para agências do sector não obtidos, mas dados disponíveis sobre receitas das agências. Transferências públicas domésticas (autoridades locais) Transferência total do Ministério das Finanças para DACF para distribuir às MMDAs. Estimou-se que 15% das transferências foram para água, saneamento e serviços de apoio. Transferências públicas internacionais (subvenções de doadores públicos ou multilaterais) Dados dos parceiros do desenvolvimento disponíveis do Ministério das Finanças, mas só em agregados. Transferências de contribuições voluntárias Dados não disponíveis Financiamento reembolsável (empréstimos) Dados dos parceiros do desenvolvimento disponíveis do Ministério das Finanças, mas só em agregados. NM 4.2.2 Alocação de tipos de financiamento por unidades financiadoras, usos e serviços WASH A alocação o de tipos de financiamento a diferentes unidades financiadoras e serviços poderá ser problemática. Por exemplo, as transferências públicas domésticas não são sistematicamente direcionadas a diferentes tipos de serviços, particularmente quando o financiamento da água e saneamento faz parte de transferências globais do governo central para os municípios. Os registos de transferências públicas não especificam, normalmente, as quantias gastas em actividades WASH, nem as desagregam entre subsectores. Para ultrapassar este desafio, poderá ser necessário definir as chaves da repartição financeira, de forma a reconstruir a parte do fluxo de financiamento afectado a serviços WASH. Estas chaves da repartição podem divergir em precisão, consoante o nível de informação disponível. Um dos possíveis métodos é estimar os custos relativos aos diferentes usos ou diferentes serviços, com base na Abordagem Baseada em Custos, descrita na Secção 2.3 do Documento de Orientação e Nota Metodológica n.º 5: Estimar os custos do fornecimento de serviços com uma Abordagem Baseada em Custos, e usar estes para calcular as chaves da repartição. 65Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Os números da despesa de alocação para classificação são um processo recorrente. É precisa uma abordagem em dois sentidos entre os resultados das duas abordagens para completar as alocações. A seguinte caixa apresenta um exemplo ilustrativo da forma de usar chaves da repartição. Caixa 22. Exemplo: Como usar chaves da repartição para afectar as despesas entre as categorias Quando as quantias não são claramente especificadas, poderá ser mais fácil afectar tipos de financiamento aos serviços e usos através de chaves da repartição, usando dados de despesa obtidos dos fornecedores de serviços. Segue-se um exemplo hipotético: O Ministério da Água deu um subsídio a um serviço público que fornece serviços de água e saneamento. Não é possível averiguar a partir dos registos do MA para que foram usados esses subsídios. Os dados baseados em custos colectados do fornecedor de serviços tiveram de ser reconciliados com este fluxo financeiro e usados para afectar os fundos do MA aos subsectores. Esta alocação pode basear-se em dados reais ou em estimativas: • Se o serviço guardar os registos do uso dos subsídios recebidos (tal é bastante improvável mas presume-se que sim para efeitos deste exemplo), o subsídio poderá ser afectado a subsectores com base no seu uso real. • Se não for possível afectar a despesa deste subsídio específico a um subsector, poderá ser feita uma estimativa. Neste caso, o mesmo rácio poderá ser aplicado tanto ao financiamento recebido através deste subsídio como à direcionamento do financiamento total deste fornecedor de serviços. As setas na figura que se segue mostram, em última análise, o que terá de ser feito com cada fluxo de financiamento. Neste caso, uma autoridade nacional (FU1) forneceu financiamento de US$ 100 ao sector através de dois tipos de fornecedores de serviços (P1 - Organismos governamentais, e P2 - Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede de distribuição). Foram fornecidos US$ 40 a P1 e US$ 60 a P2. Então, o P1 desembolsou US$ 25 para serviços de água (S1) e US$ 15 para serviços de saneamento (S2). O P2 desembolsou a totalidade de US$ 60 para financiar os serviços de saneamento. A equipa das Contas WASH irá recolher dois tipos de dados: • Da Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento: a alocação do financiamento da FU1 para o P1 e P2 (registada na tabela WA 7 FUxP das Contas WASH); e • Da Abordagem Baseada em Custos: a alocação do financiamento do P1 e P2 para S1 e S2 (registada na tabela WA 3 SxP das Contas WASH). Os dois tipos de informação terão de ser depois reconciliados para direcionar o financiamento do FU1 para o S1 e S2 (e registado na tabela WA 6 SxFU das Contas WASH). Globalmente, do financiamento FU1, US$ 25 vão para os serviços de água (S1) e US$ 75 para o saneamento (S2). Figura 12. Exemplo de uma alocação de fluxo de financiamento ás categorias de prestadores e serviços A informação financeira por uso poderá ser estimada tanto pelo tipo de financiamento como por Abordagens baseadas em custos: • a nível de tipos de financiamento: saber que quantia do financiamento provém dos diferentes tipos de uso e usuários; e • a nível de despesa: saber que quantia é gasta pelos fornecedores de serviços para cada tipo de uso. A caixa seguinte dá uma orientação detalhada da forma de estimar ambos os fluxos de acordo com o tipo de uso. FU1 $60 P1 P2 S1 S2 FT1 $100 $60$40 $25 $15 66 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Caixa 23. Estimar fluxos pelos usos: Tipos de financiamento (receitas) e despesa por tipo de uso Na Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento, quando não há dados directamente disponíveis, a alocação do financiamento por tipo de uso poderá fazer-se através de estimativas, usando uma percentagem da receita recolhida de cada tipo de usuário, por exemplo, de acordo com a tarifa. Isto pode ser calculado a partir da receita média por tipo de uso e número de ligações para esta categoria. Esta abordagem exige a existência de informação operacional detalhada por tipo de usuários e de uso. Não é provável que haja dados disponíveis sobre auto-abastecimento de usuários não domésticos. Na Abordagem Baseada em Custos, a despesa para cada tipo de uso poderá ser estimada a partir da percentagem do volume de água consumido por cada categoria de utilizador. No Brasil, apenas foi possível estimar a despesa por tipo de uso doméstico servido (U1). Os dados sobre outros tipos de uso servido (i.e. não doméstico: industrial, comercial e institucional) foram agregados, não tendo sido possível provar a obtenção de parâmetros que possibilitem a desagregação. Na Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento, a receita a partir dos usuários domésticos servidos foi estimada usando a média da receita por ligação doméstica e pelo número de ligações domésticas. Na Abordagem Baseada em Custos, a despesa a partir do uso doméstico servido foi estimada usando o volume de água consumido pelas famílias. Isto revelou que 88% dos recursos foram gastos em serviços nesta categoria. O auto-abastecimento representa 2,2% da despesa. Os restantes usos não domésticos servidos (institucional, industrial, comercial) representam 9,8% da despesa. Foi impossível fazer mais desagregação. Com base num exemplo de contas dos fornecedores de serviços, estimou-se que o uso comercial servido representou a maioria da despesa remanescente. No Brasil, a legislação e os instrumentos de gestão dos recursos hídricos não incluem a categoria de auto-abastecimento para fins comercial e industriais. Estas categorias são vulgarmente monitoradas por gestores de serviços e não estão incluídas nas políticas públicas. São monitoradas apenas no contexto da gestão integrada dos recursos hídricos ou, no caso dos esgotos, das políticas ambientais e no sistema de gestão ambiental. NM 4.2.2 Evitar a dupla contagem e verificar como os fluxos financeiros são canalizados em todo o sector É essencial evitar a dupla contagem ao usar a Abordagem de Tipo de Financiamento, especialmente se os recursos forem canalizados através de várias unidades financiadoras diferentes. Como se explica na Caixa “Desafio”, da Secção 2.2.2, o financiamento poderá ser atribuído por um doador internacional a um governo nacional e depois ser canalizado pelo governo nacional para as autoridades locais, antes de ser finalmente desembolsado a um fornecedor de serviços. Neste caso, é importante não contar duas vezes o fluxo financeiro, i.e. na fonte (a nível de doador ou de governo nacional como unidade financiadora), e no ponto em que os fundos são desembolsados aos fornecedores de serviços (a nível de unidade financiadora através da qual os fundos são canalizados, e que, neste caso, seria as autoridades locais). Para efeitos de cálculo da despesa global no sector WASH, os fluxos financeiros deverão ser calculados a nível da unidade financiadora, através da qual entraram no sector. Um dos princípios chave é que um fluxo apenas deverá ser registado como um tipo de financiamento. O financiamento do doador canalizado para as autoridades locais através do governo nacional, por exemplo, deverá sempre ser registado como FT4 - Transferências públicas internacionais. É também por essa razão que FT1 – Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos - é considerado originário da FU1 – Usuários (i.e. unidade financiadora que injectou receitas no sector) em vez da FU5 - Fornecedores de serviços de rede. Ao aplicar consistentemente esta regra, dever-se-á garantir que não haja contagens duplas na despesa global. Sendo este o caso, o único financiamento injectado pela FU5 – Fornecedores de serviços de rede, deveriam ser os lucros reinvestidos ou investimentos em participações, que deverão ser na generalidade registados como FT6 – Financiamento reembolsável. 67Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional No entanto, os fluxos financeiros também precisam ser registados de outras formas, de modo a facilitar a investigação de várias questões políticas chave. Estas deveriam incluir a investigação acerca de que fundos são usados e como são canalizados através do sector. Cada fluxo financeiro deverá, portanto, ser “codificado” com mais detalhe, para verificar se foi: • Directamente desembolsado aos fornecedores de serviços • Canalizado através de outra unidade financiadora • Recebido de outra unidade financiadora e desembolsado a fornecedores de serviços. Trata-se de uma área em que a disponibilidade da colecta de dados e o seu software para análise fazem uma significativa diferença. A verificação de que despesa total foi gasta deverá geralmente ser conseguida através da Abordagem Baseada em Custos, e não Abordagem por Tipo de Financiamento. A informação sobre o modo de canalização dos fundos, por outro lado, precisará ser calculada a partir dos dados sobre o tipo de financiamento, devendo fazer-se uma cuidadosa codificação do modo como o fluxo financeiro saiu da unidade financiadora em que entrou no sistema, para a unidade financiadora que tomou a decisão do desembolso e, finalmente, chegou a um fornecedor de serviços. A resposta a questões deste tipo requer a monitoria de muitas transacções simultâneas, e não poderá ser efectuada na prática para todas as transacções e unidades financiadoras no sector. Em vez disso, recomenda-se que a equipa das Contas WASH seleccione essas unidades financiadoras para as quais é essencial saber onde foi originado o financiamento e através de que canais ele foi atribuído. Estas questões políticas são provavelmente mais essenciais para os governos locais, e é fundamental compreender que financiamento eles receberam e através de que meios. Um exame mais detalhado do financiamento das autoridades locais pode mostrar que ele recebe FT4 através do governo nacional (FU1) e não directamente do doador (FU7). A seguinte caixa apresenta soluções para analisar unidades financiadoras específicas. Caixa 24. Como evitar a dupla contagem de fluxos financeiros? Situação: Um doador oferece apoio orçamental geral ao Ministério das Finanças (MF). Estes fundos são depois canalizados via MF através dos governos locais, os quais os desembolsam para os fornecedores de serviços. Para efeitos deste exemplo, os fundos são desembolsados a uma ONG para financiar a promoção da higiene e a um empresas fornecedoras sem rede de distribuição de saneamento. A Figura 13 abaixo ilustra esta situação. Figura 13. Exemplo ilustrativo Prestadores de serviços (P2) ONGs (P4) Usuários não domésticosFamílias “servidas” Autoridades nacionais (FU2) Doadores bilaterais e multilaterais (FU8) Taxa de saneamento Transferências públicas internacionais (FT4) Transferências públicas domésticas (FT3) Transferências públicas domésticas (FT3) Tarifas (FT1) Auto-financiamento (Financiamento gerado internamente por impostos sobre a propriade, tributação das empresas, etc.) Autoridades locais (FU4) 68 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Como pode esta situação reflectir-se no quadro das Contas WASH? • O doador, o MF e o governo local são unidades financiadoras. Mais especificamente, o MF e a agência são unidades financiadoras que actuam como canais de financiamento. A ONG (P4) e as empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede (P2) são os fornecedores de serviços. • Os fundos entre o doador e o MF deverão ser marcados como “canalizados”. Os fundos entre o MF e os governos locais deverão ser marcados como “canalizados”. Os fundos entre os governos locais e os fornecedores de serviços serão marcados como “recebidos e desembolsados”. • O fluxo é uma transferência pública internacional (FT4) pois, em última análise, ele é oriundo de um doador internacional. O que deverá ser apresentado? Há dois elementos importantes: • O panorama geral: o financiamento é recebido de doadores internacionais como transferências públicas internacionais. • O panorama detalhado: este financiamento é canalizado via MF a um autoridade locais, que toma a decisão sobre a despesa. Como poderão ser apresentados os resultados? • Para produzir Contas WASH compiladas a nível de sector e mostrar o panorama geral: – É acima aplicado o princípio recomendado. Os fluxos são acompanhados ao nível da unidade financiadora sempre que os fundos entram no sector. Neste caso, o financiamento deverá ser registado a nível do doador. Os fundos deverão assim ser registados como FT4 (transferências públicas internacionais) oriundos de um FU7 (doador bilateral e multilateral). É, contudo, necessária mais informação acerca do nível das autoridades locais e dos fornecedores de serviços, para afectar os fundos aos diferentes tipos de fornecedor, serviços, custos e uso. – As tabelas FTxP e FTxS mostram que a transferência internacional do doador é desembolsada para as ONG e fornecedores empresariais para serviços de saneamento e higiene. – A tabela FUxP mostra que os doadores bilaterais e multilaterais fornecem financiamento a P2 e P4. • A um grau de análise mais profundo, para mostrar detalhes de unidades financiadoras que canalizam o financiamento e que tomam a decisão: – Seria útil fornecer mais detalhes acerca do financiamento e da despesa d as autoridades locais. Para esta unidade financiadora especificamente, as Contas WASH podem mostrar que as transferências públicas internacionais recebidas dos doadores são canalizadas via MF. Os governos locais também têm fontes de auto-financiamento de recursos gerados internamente, por exemplo, impostos locais. 69Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Nota Metodológica n.º 5: Estimar os custos do fornecimento de serviços usando a Abordagem Baseada em Custos Objectivos: Esta nota responde às classificações de custos existentes no sector WASH que foram a base da criação da nota da Classificação TrackFin. Ela fornece ainda orientações metodológicas para estimar os custos de serviços WASH, usando a Abordagem Baseada em Custos. Recomenda que, no mínimo, se faça a distinção entre a despesa de capital e a despesa de operação e manutenção e, potencialmente, a despesa de manutenção de grande capital. Os custos de apoio para desenvolvimento de políticas e programas deverão ser também acompanhados separadamente, se possível, embora isto se possa tornar difícil a um nível agregado. NM 5.1. Classificação dos custos Para fins de comparação de dados entre os países, dever-se-ão usar as mesmas categorias de custos e metodologias habitualmente aceites para estimar e classificar os custos. NM 5.1.1. Actuais classificações de custos no sector WASH A nível internacional, não existe nenhuma classificação de custos normalizada que seja usada no sector WASH, tanto urbano como rural. No subsector urbano, os reguladores a nível nacional definem especificamente os itens dos custos. É exemplo disso o Ofwat em Inglaterra e Gales, onde se definiram categorias de custos de modo a se estabelecerem preços uniformes para todas as companhias de água e saneamento. Os exercícios internacionais de utilidade pública de referência, como a IBNET instalada no Banco Mundial, procura aferir os custos operacionais (definidos como custos da unidade de funcionamento por metro cúbico de água produzida ou vendida), mas não procuram referenciar os custos de investimento. Como afirma a IBNET: “Há tendência para uma larga divergência de um ano para outro, devido à dispersão dos investimentos”. Em resultado disso, o IBNET toolkit sugere a medição da intensidade do capital de um serviço público, com base no valor bruto do activo fixo servido (um indicador de stocks de activos fixos) per capita1. No entanto, eles também afirmam que: “Infelizmente, muitas vezes as informações disponíveis sobre o valor dos activos são limitadas e até que seja dada mais ênfase a este item, os valores derivados deverão ser tratados com cuidado” (ver Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos para mais informação acerca do modo de calcular o valor dos activos). O projecto WASHCost, conduzido pelo IRC dos Países Baixos, definiu uma tipologia de custos para o sector rural e periurbano que pretende abranger os custos de todo o ciclo de vida do investimento em serviços WASH2. A definição dos custos elaborada pela WASHcost foi inspirada pelas categorias de custos normalmente usadas nos serviços urbanos de água e saneamento, sendo depois alargadas aos sectores rurais de água e saneamento. Esta classificação identifica geralmente itens de valor negligenciável que não foram adequadamente orçamentados, como a despesa de manutenção de capital ou despesa com o apoio directo (ou indirecto). Por exemplo, a metodologia identifica explicitamente custos de apoio e assistência, ou seja, a despesa com um leque de actividades necessárias para garantir que esses serviços são efectivamente prestados3. Essas actividades de apoio são extremamente alargadas e de âmbito variado: elas estendem-se de custos de gestão do sector, a nível de Ministério (custos com o pessoal para planificação, orçamentação, interacção com doadores internacionais, monitoria e avaliação, e assistência técnica), até custos de actividades de formação de capacidades ou de educação para a higiene, a nível local. A distinção entre custos de “hardware” (investimentos e estudos associados) e custos de apoio e ê (actividades associadas de apoio “suave”) tornou-se um padrão no sector WASH e tem sido usada, por exemplo, em recentes análises da relação qualidade/preço dos investimentos do Departamento para Desenvolvimento Internacional do Reino Unido (DFID) WASH na água das zonas rurais (Para mais informação, ver www.vfm-wash.org). No entanto, a classificação dos custos deste tipo no sub-sector de água das zonas rurais tende a ser mais usada no planificação e orçamentação de projectos do que para monitorar os custos a nível nacional. De facto, algumas das categorias de custos na classificação WASHcost (como despesa de manutenção de capital, custo de capital ou despesa do apoio directo e indirecto) não são devidamente monitoradas na maioria dos países actualmente. A maioria dos programas liderados pelos governos ou por ONGs, não têm normalmente em conta os custos de apoio associados com a despesa de capital separadamente, ou com a despesa do apoio directo e indirecto. 1 http://www.ib-net.org/en/texts.php?folder_id=117&mat_id=97&L=1&S=3&ss=4 2 http://www.ircwash.org/washcost 3 Trémolet, Kolsky & Perez (2010) também justificaram explicitamente os custos de apoio ao derivar os custos de proporciaonar saneamento do meio a nível das famílias. 70 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Esta análise das actuais classificações de custos no sector WASH esclareceu a necessidade de uma Classificação TrackFin, que pudesse ser aplicada tanto no sector urbano da água como no rural, mas que se mantivesse em linha com as informações actualmente disponíveis sobre custos a nível nacional na maioria dos países. Esta classificação é apresentada em seguida. NM 5.1.2. Classificação TrackFin dos custos A Classificação TrackFin dos custos é apresentada na Tabela 12 abaixo. Os termos custos e despesa são usados indiferentemente no Documento de Orientação. Custo é geralmente usado em relação a serviços de utilidade pública, enquanto que despesa refere-se aos governos ou famílias. Tipo de custos Definição C1 Custos de investimento, incluindo "hardware" e apoio associado Custos iniciais de capital de instalação de novos serviços, incluindo “hardware” como canalização, instalações sanitárias, bombas e apoio ou assistência isolados associados como estudos de concepção/execução ou respectiva capacitação e consulta. C2 Custos de operação e manutenção Manutenção de rotina e custos de operação para manter os serviços operacionais (salários, combustível ou outras compras regulares). Os custos de operação são uma despesa corrente envolvida na prestação de bens e serviços WASH: trabalho, combustível, químicos, material e compra de água bruta. Os custos de manutenção são a despesa de rotina necessária para manter o sistema a funcionar com o desempenho previsto, mas não inclui grandes reparações ou renovações, que não sejam consideradas correntes. C3 Custos de manutenção de grande capital Custos elevados ocasionais de manutenção para renovação, substituição e reabilitação de um sistema para além dos custos de reparações ou renovações. Estas despesas essenciais são necessárias antes que ocorram falhas no sistema e precisam ser planificadas e orçamentadas para esse efeito. Se estes custos não puderem ser separados da despesa de capital (C1), eles deverão ser incluídos nesta categoria e identificados claramente como tal. C4 Custos financeiros Estes incluem reembolsos de capital e custos de capital, incluindo custos com empréstimos (juros do crédito) e custos de capital (se forem pagos dividendos aos accionistas). C5 Custos de apoio ou de assistência Inclui as despesas de apoio directo e indirecto: • Apoio directo inclui a despesa com as actividades de apoio pré e pós-construção, dirigida às partes interessadas do nível local, como formação para a comunidade ou operadores do sector privado e usuários singulares ou grupos de usuários. • Apoio indirecto inclui o custo de planificação e de formulação de políticas a nível governamental, incluindo o reforço das competências e capacidades dos profissionais e técnicos. Estes custos têm um impacto directo a longo prazo sobre a sustentabilidade dos projectos. C6 Impostos e taxas Inclui taxas e contribuições fiscais cobradas pelos fornecedores de serviços, como: • Taxas ou impostos sobre a produção ((Imposto sobre o Rendimento das Pessoas Colectivas aplicável sobre os lucros, contribuição predial, taxa de arrendamento para aluguer de activos fixos, impostos pela ocupação de locais públicos ou relacionados com funcionários). • Taxas de consumo relacionadas com (ou reservadas) ao sector, como direitos, contribuições ou deveres pelo uso da água ou a descarga de águas residuais em massas de água. • Outros encargos sobre a produção cobrados para fins reservados, como a contribuição social. Tabela 12. Classificação TrackFin dos custos Esta classificação distingue entre a despesa de capital (incluindo grandes custos de manutenção) e custos operacionais e de pequena manutenção. Em termos ideais, esta informação deveria ser recolhida junto de cada um dos fornecedores de serviços. NM 5.2. Potenciais fontes de dados sobre custos As potenciais fontes de dados sobre custos variam consoante as agências que contraem os custos. Tabela 13. Colecta de dados sobre os custos do fornecimento de serviços enumera potenciais fontes de custos por tipo de fornecedor de serviços. 71Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Categorias de prestadores de serviços Fontes de dados e métodos de colecta P1 Organismos governamentais • Contas da despesa pública apresentada aos parlamentos nacionais • Orçamento nacional • Orçamento anual para cada unidade financiadora relevante • Se necessário, informação complementar para calcular a repartição dos custos (como o número de funcionários por departamento ou a percentagem do seu tempo dedicada a um sub-sector). P2 Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede • Demonstrações financeiras anuais dos fornecedores de serviços (balanços e demonstrações de resultados) • Informação complementar para calcular, se necessário, a repartição dos custos: – Número de funcionários por departamento, percentagem do seu tempo dedicada a certos serviços – Número de clientes por serviços, custo unitário de produção, custo médio do investimento por tipo de investimento – Programa de investimento (por categoria de despesas de investimento) – Relatórios dos custos baseados nas actividades – Quaisquer estudos recentes sobre tarifas realizados para estimar custos de produção, historicamente e no futuro. P3 Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição • Pesquisa a uma amostra de pequenos fornecedores independentes para determinar os seus custos totais de produção. P4 ONGs e Organizações de Base Comunitária (OBCs) • Demonstrações financeiras anuais • Orçamentação detalhada / referências de custos para alguns projectos representativos P5 Usuários auto-fornecidos • Pesquisa às famílias • Orçamentação detalhada / referências de custos para investimentos familiares normais. Tabela 13. Colecta de dados sobre os custos do fornecimento de serviços Algumas das questões de metodologia relativas à estimativa destes custos podem ser antecipadas. Apresentam-se em seguida algumas orientações. C1: Custos de investimento Os fluxos anuais de despesa de capital (e manutenção de grande capital) podem ser normalmente estimados quer a partir das declarações de fluxos de caixa de prestadores/fornecedores de serviços quer dos balanços. A base de activos incluída no balanço passa de um ano para o seguinte, com base em novos investimentos (também designados como “formação de capital bruto” no Sistema de Contas Nacionais), que se irão reflectir como um aumento nos activos e depreciação dos activos existentes (também designados como “consumo de capital fixo” no SCN). Qualquer alteração no valor de base dos activos terá de ser distribuída entre C1 e C3 - Manutenção do Grande Capital, procedendo à triangulação deste resultado com a informação obtida da declaração do fluxo de caixa em C1. Com base no balanço, é assim possível estimar quanto investiu anualmente o fornecedor de serviços. Quando são oferecidos diferentes tipos de serviços (como água e saneamento), a alocação de custos pelos serviços exigirá dados sobre o seu recente programa de investimento planificado. A alocação poderá fazer-se com base no investimento real (particularmente se os próprios serviços públicos tiverem feito algumas alocações), ou através de rácios estimados— por exemplo 40% de investimento para água, 60% para saneamento — se não for esse o caso. A finalidade ao longo do tempo é reflectir tanto quanto possível a alocação. A respectiva despesa de apoio ou de assistência, se se tratar de uma despesa única, realizada especificamente para apoiar este investimento de hardware (como apoiar estudos de concepção ou planificação), deverá ser incluída no total dos custos do investimento. Precauções: há diversas razões para que o fluxo do investimento de capital não seja um indicador sólido de uma real tendência no investimento, como será debatido em mais detalhar na Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar stocks de activos fixos. Assim, a estimativa de fluxos de investimento de capital poderá precisar de ser complementada pela estimativa dos stocks de activos fixos. C2: Custos de operação e manutenção Os custos de operação e custos menores de manutenção poderão ser obtidos a partir da demostração de fluxos de caixa dos prestadores/fornecedores de serviços. No caso de fornecimento conjunto de serviços de água e de saneamento, é necessário alocar os custos aos diferentes serviços. Se o serviço não o tiver já feito com base nos custos reais, deverá usar-se uma chave de alocação. Tal requer mais informação, incluindo sobre os factores dos custos individuais como a electricidade, químicos e peças, bem como o número de funcionários por serviço. 72 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS O uso da parte da receita por serviço como uma chave de alocação, não será provavelmente útil, podendo introduzir distorções. Como as subvenções cruzadas entre a água e o saneamento são comuns, as receitas das tarifas do saneamento poderão, efectivamente, ser muito inferiores aos custos reais gerados pelos serviços. Ao aplicar uma Abordagem Baseada em Custos, será necessário analisar os custos para se chegar ao custo verdadeiro de cada um dos serviços. Isto exige confiança nos recentes estudos de tarifas ou pré-informação para se ter uma total compreensão da parte relativa dos custos de operação que podem ser alocados aos diferentes serviços. Este processo poderá ser demorado e apenas ser possível para uma pequena amostra de serviços de utilidade pública. C3: Custos de manutenção de grande capital A despesa de manutenção de grande capital é o custo de renovação, substituição, reabilitação, remodelação ou restauração de activos, para garantir a continuidade dos serviços ao nível de desempenho inicialmente prestado. A manutenção do capital ocorre normalmente mais vezes do que a pequena manutenção classificada na C2, mas é consideravelmente mais dispendiosa. Exemplos incluem a substituição de componentes; limpeza e reabertyra de furos e tanques de armazenamento; e reparação de canalizações. A despesa de manutenção de grande capital pode ser normalmente estimada do mesmo modo que a C1 - custos de investimento — ou seja, a partir das demonstrações de fundos de caixa dos fornecedores de serviços como dos respectivos balanços. Em algumas demonstrações de fundos de caixa, os fornecedores de serviços podem não registar separadamente a C3 - manutenção de grande capital e a C2 - custos de operação e manutenção. Será então necessário comparar os balanços anuais para estimar como a base de activos evoluiu ao longo do tempo. Qualquer alteração no valor deverá então ser distribuída entre a C1 e a C3, procedendo à triangulação deste resultado com a informação obtida das demonstrações de fundos de caixa da C1. C4: Custos financeiros Os custos financeiros, estimados a partir das contas financeiras, incluem habitualmente três elementos principais: • Reembolsos de capital, ou o capital em dívida, associado ao investimento de capital; • Custo de capital, ou custo do reembolso dos juros da dívida associado ao investimento de capital. É este o custo de alugar bens de capital, podendo normalmente ser identificado separadamente nas contas financeiras; e • Reembolso do capital social, pago como dividendos às partes interessadas (ou outros benefícios) no caso de empresas sem fins lucrativos. Dadas as eventuais dificuldades em calcular o reembolso do capital social e o elemento benefício para empresas sem fins lucrativos, o Sistema de Contas da Saúde usa diferentes abordagens, como a seguir se demonstra. Aprender com o sector da saúde: distinguir entre fornecedores de serviços com fins lucrativos e sem fins lucrativos/governamentais Os Sistema de Contas Nacionais (e o Sistema de Contas da Saúde) fazem uma distinção entre a avaliação dos custos de fornecedores comerciais e não comerciais. No caso de fornecedores comerciais (com fins lucrativos), o valor dos bens e serviços que eles produzem é estimado em relação ao lucro que recebem com a venda dos seus bens. Isto faz-se através da compilação da informação sobre o montante total pago pelos bens e serviços no ponto de consumo. Os dados que valorizam a sua produção nas contas nacionais do país podem, por isso, ser consideradas por esses fornecedores como muito benéficas. No caso de fornecedores não comerciais (sem fins lucrativos ou governamentais), o valor é estimado em relação ao custo da produção, uma vez que esses bens e serviços não são necessariamente vendidos a um preço que reflicta o verdadeiro custo de produção. Os custos são normalmente calculados como despesa real da produção, como salários do pessoal (incluindo todos os benefícios) e materiais. Isto inclui despesas orçamentais com os salários, material e outras entradas. Pode ainda incluir bens e serviços — como electricidade gratuita — fornecida a esses serviços por outras agências governamentais. C5: Custos do apoio ou de assistência Os custos do apoio ou de assistência podem ser recolhidos ao nível agregado, por exemplo, a despesa do Ministério da Água ou outras instituições do sector. Alguns fornecedores de serviços especiais podem também incorrer nestes custos como parte de um programa específico. A despesa com o apoio indirecto, como para desenvolvimento de políticas, planificação do sector, orçamentação e questões relacionadas, pode ser estimada a nível nacional. A informação sobre estes custos pode ser obtida directamente das Contas Nacionais, que incluem categorias sobre serviços de apoio ao sector da água e do saneamento (ver Tabela 1, que integra a classificação recomendada dos serviços WASH). 73Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional No caso de custos de apoio directamente relacionados com o fornecimento de serviços especiais, poderá ser difícil desagregá-los de outros tipos de custos de investimento e de operação, ao abrigo das C1, C2 e C3. Se eles, por natureza, forem correntes, é provável que sejam incluídos ou em C2 - Custos de operação e de manutenção ou, se forem apenas custos isolados processados através de um projecto específico de investimento de capital, em C1 - Custos de investimento. A longo prazo, a evolução do sistema de notificação das despesas poderá facilitar a separação dos custos de apoio para investimentos e programas específicos, facilitando o seu acompanhamento como uma categoria de custos separada ou, pelo menos, um subconjunto da C5. Os custos do apoio podem também ser solicitados às ONG e outras entidades (incluindo governos) que apoiam o fornecimento de serviços, ou a nível dos fornecedores que usam as ONG para esse fim. No entanto, esses custos são normalmente difíceis de identificar. No caso das ONG, pode ser difícil aceder aos seus custos consolidados, pois elas raramente separam custos do hardware dos do apoio. A melhor abordagem será, por isso, fazer estimativas com base numa amostra representativa de ONG, e para um número representativo de programas. C6: Impostos e taxas Como define o SCN (SNA 2008:143), os impostos são obrigatórios, pagamentos sem contrapartida, em dinheiro ou em espécie, realizados pelos agentes económicos às entidades governamentais1. Existem dois tipos de impostos: 1. Impostos sobre produtos (D21): são impostos sobre bens ou serviços, resultantes da sua produção, venda, transferência, empréstimo ou entrega, e pagáveis por unidade de produto. Estes impostos incluem: • Imposto sobre o valor acrescentado (IVA) • Encargos e direitos excluindo o IVA • Impostos sobre a exportação • Impostos sobre produtos, excluindo o IVA. 2. Outros impostos sobre a produção (D29): estes impostos são pagos pela propriedade ou pelo uso da terra, edifícios ou outros activos, assim como pelo trabalho realizado no processo de produção. Para mais detalhes ver caixa seguinte:. Caixa 25. Outros impostos do SCN sobre a produção Outros impostos sobre a produção excluem os resultantes da participação na produção. Excluem impostos sobre os lucros ou outros rendimentos recebidos pela empresa e são reembolsáveis, independentemente da sua rentabilidade. Podem ser pagos sobre terrenos, activos fixos ou trabalho desenvolvido no processo de produção, ou sobre certas actividades ou transacções. Outros impostos sobre a produção podem incluir o seguinte: a. Impostos sobre os salários ou a força de trabalho; b. Impostos regulares sobre terrenos, edifícios e outras estruturas: Estes são pagáveis regularmente, normalmente todos os anos, pelo uso ou posse de terras, instalações e outras estruturas utilizadas pelas empresas na produção, sejam propriedade sua ou arrendadas (Manual de Estatisticas das Finanças Governamentais (GFSM) 2001, 1131; OCDE, 4100); c. Licenças comerciais e profissionais: impostos pagos pelas empresas para obter a licença de exercer um negócio ou profissão particular, como licenças de exploração de táxis ou casinos. Em algumas circunstâncias, as licenças para usar um recurso natural são consideradas não um imposto mas uma venda de um activo. Se, como condição para atribuir uma licença, o governo efectuar controlos sobre a adequação ou segurança das instalações das empresas, sobre a fiabilidade ou segurança do equipamento empregue, sobre a competência profissional do pessoal empregue ou a qualidade ou padrão dos bens ou serviços produzidos, os pagamentos não são sem contrapartida, devendo ser tratados como pagamentos de serviços prestados, a menos que as quantias cobradas pelas licenças sejam completamente inadequadas aos custos dos controlos efectuados pelos governos (GFSM 2001, 11452; OECD, 5210); d. Impostos sobre o uso de activos fixos ou outras actividades: Taxas aplicadas periodicamente sobre o uso de veículos, barcos, aviões ou outra maquinaria ou equipamento usado pelas empresas para fins de produção, sejam esses activos propriedade ou arrendados. Esses impostos são muitas vezes descritos como licenças e são normalmente quantias fixas que não dependem das taxas reais de uso (GFSM2001, 11451-11452 e 5.5.3; OCDE, 5200); e. Imposto de selo; f. Impostos sobre a poluição: Impostos aplicados pela emissão ou descarga de gases nocivos, líquidos ou outras substâncias perigosas no meio-ambiente. Não incluem o pagamento efectuado sobre a recolha e eliminação de lixo ou substâncias nocivas pelas autoridades públicas, que constitui consumo intermédio das empresas (GFSM2001, 11452; OCDE, 5200); g. Taxas sobre transações internacionais. Fonte: SNA 2088:148 Secção 7.97 1 São descritos como sem contrapartida porque o governo não fornece nada em troca ao agente económico que faz o pagamento, embora os governos possam usar os fundos oriundos dos impostos para fornecer bens ou serviços a outras unidades, quer à comunidade como um todo, quer a indivíduos. 74 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS O Sistema das Contas da Saúde identifica os impostos de modo semelhante, como se refere na caixa seguinte. A segunda categoria, “Outras rubricas de despesas” foi acrescentada para incluir encargos que não se incluem nos impostos sobre produção e produtos. Aprender com o sector da saúde: identificar impostos O Manual do Sistema de Contas da Saúde foca o consumo final dos bens e serviços de cuidados de saúde, com avaliação a preço de compra (i.e. incluindo impostos sobre produtos). A actual despesa agregada de saúde combina, num único número, o valor monetário do consumo final de todos os bens e serviços de cuidados de saúde pelos habitantes de um determinado país, durante um certo período. (Capítulo 13:105) Nas SHA 2011, os impostos pagos pelos fornecedores de serviços estão incluídos nos factores de classificação do fornecimento. Os impostos estão incluídos em FP.5 Outros itens de despesa com entradas. Este item inclui todos os custos financeiros, como pagamentos de juros pelos empréstimos, impostos, etc. Isto inclui: • FP.5.1 Impostos: Segundo a definição do SCN, os impostos são obrigatórios, sem contrapartidas, em dinheiro em espécie, pagos pelos agentes económicos a entidades governamentais. São considerados sem contrapartidas porque os governos não fazem qualquer retribuição ao agente económico que faz o pagamento, embora os governos possam usar os fundos angariados com os impostos para fornecerem bens ou serviços a outras entidades, quer colectivamente à comunidade em geral, quer individualmente. Item FP.5.1: Os impostos incluem taxas sobre a produção ou sobre produtos. Como o nome indica, os impostos sobre produtos são pagáveis por unidade de produto. Um imposto pode ser uma quantia fixa, dependendo da quantidade física do produto, ou pode ser uma percentagem do valor a que o produto é vendido. • FP.5.2 Outros itens de despesa: Incluem todas as transacções relacionadas com itens sem outra classificação. As transações aqui registadas incluem despesas com a propriedade, multas e sanções impostas pelo governo, taxas de juro e custos pelo uso de empréstimos, prémios e reclamações de seguros não de vida. A principal diferença em relação ao sector WASH é que os encargos (ou direitos) também devem ser incluídos. Vários impostos são pagos em bens e serviços WASH, variando de país para país. Os principais tipos de impostos cobrados são: a) dos usuários finais sobre a venda de bens e serviços WASH, e b) dos fornecedores de serviços. No primeiro caso, são classificados como um tipo de financiamento em Contas WASH e incluídos na tarifa paga. Só no segundo caso deverão ser incluídos na classificação de custos; estes serão registados como custos para fornecedores dos serviços WASH na Abordagem Baseada em Custos. Assume-se que os impostos sobre consumo intermédio (impostos sobre produtos) deveriam estar já incluídos em outras categorias de despesa. Os testes-piloto da metodologia demonstraram que é impossível distinguir impostos sobre produtos das principais despesas (ver a seguir a caixa sobre o Brasil). Os impostos identificados deverão assim incluir: • Impostos pagos pelos fornecedores de serviços sobre a produção: – Imposto sobre o Rendimento das Pessoas Colectivas (sobre os lucros, contribuição predial, taxa sobre empréstimos pelo aluguer de activos fixos, impostos pela ocupação de espaços públicos, remuneração de pessoal) – Impostos específicos pagos pelos fornecedores de serviços. Um exemplo poderá ser um imposto pela recolha de água ou um imposto sobre a poluição, pela descarga de águas residuais no ambiente. Estes são pagos ao estado ou a instituições públicas e são usados para determinadas finalidades, incluindo contribuições sociais. • Outros encargos de uso pagos por fornecedores de serviços: – Encargos por captação de água ou descarga de águas residuais pagas ao estado ou a autoridades públicas pela gestão dos recursos hídricos. A taxa de licença depende do volume de água recolhida e é cobrada aos usuários com base no volume de água consumida. Os impostos ou taxas específicos são muitas vezes cobrados aos usuários finais como item isolado nas suas contas. A caixa que se segue dá um exemplo do Brasil, que mostra a importância de identificar diferentes tipos de impostos, pois estes podem representar um custo significativo para o sector. 75Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Caixa 26. Exemplo do Brasil: A importância de rastrear os impostos No Brasil, a actual política de impostos afecta substancialmente o custo dos serviços WASH, sendo, por isso, crucial incluir os impostos ao calcular o custo total dos serviços. Os serviços são tributados mais de acordo com a natureza legal do fornecedor do que com a natureza dos serviços. O custo dos serviços não é, portanto, afectado do mesmo modo para todos os fornecedores, o que, por sua vez, afecta as tarifas dos usuários. Esta abordagem não tem em consideração que o WASH é um serviço público a que todos deveriam ter acesso. Os impostos aplicados deveriam, por isso, ser incluídos na análise, para se apreciar o seu efeito sobre os preços e a equidade e para os comparar com as transferências públicas domésticas. Isto irá aumentar a sensibilização para o influxo líquido dos subsídios públicos ao sector. Os serviços WASH são tributados quando são fornecidos por empresas privadas em regime de concessão, directamente por corporações públicas ou por consórcios entre os estados e os municípios. Estas empresas servem cerca de 80% dos usuários no país e os impostos podem representar até 15% do custo dos serviços WASH. Os impostos incluem encargos directamente aplicados aos usuários finais sobre o custo de serviços e são pagos ao governo, assim como os impostos sobre os lucros. Estas receitas são, na sua maioria, canalizadas para o governo federal. O governo federal redistribui-as depois pelos serviços públicos (incluindo WASH) sob a forma de transferências públicas domésticas (subvenções). O principal resultado foi que, no período 2010-2012, os impostos pagos ao governo pelos fornecedores de serviços WASH representaram uma média de 4,8% da despesa total com os serviços WASH, em comparação com as transferências públicas domésticas, que representaram 7% da receita total do financiamento ao sector. Isto mostra que o influxo líquido do subsídios públicos é, na realidade, inferior ao que parece. No entanto, aumentou entre 2010 e 2012, à medida que as transferências públicas domésticas para o sector aumentaram com o Plano Nacional Brasileiro para o Saneamento Básico (Plansab). 76 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Nota Metodológica n.º 6: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos Objectivos: Esta nota informa por que motivo é importante estimar os stocks de activos fixos para o sector, em paralelo com a estimativa de fluxos financeiros. Ela mostra como isso facilita as ligações com as actuais convenções de contabilidade, como o Sistema de Contas Nacionais, salientando os potenciais desafios metodológicos e sugerindo formas de os superar. NM 6.1. Por que motivo é importante estimar os stocks de activos fixos? Existem muitas limitações ao rastreamento dos fluxos financeiros, como a seguir se mostra: • A monitoria dos fluxos de investimento pode potencialmente gerar resultados erróneos, uma vez que eles, normalmente, variam de ano para ano. Por exemplo, se um país está a construir um grande activo à escala nacional, como uma barragem ou uma conduta, o valor nominal desse investimento para cada ano em que o património está a ser construído surgirá como um pico do investimento, seguido por níveis de investimento muito inferiores. A nível mundial, isto poderá ser interpretado como se o país tivesse abandonado a prioridade do investimento, depois desse grande activo estar construído. De facto, esse activo estaria a produzir benefícios e, desse modo, as necessidades de investimento seriam logicamente inferiores. • O registo do valor total de um investimento em determinado ano não permite reflectir as diferenças ao longo do tempo de vida dos investimentos. No exemplo acima apresentado, reflectir o valor total de um novo activo com um tempo de vida previsto de cerca de 50 anos, apenas no ano do investimento inicial, não retrata os benefícios que esse activo oferece durante um longo período de tempo. • Alguns investimentos significativos, como FT2: Despesas dos usuários auto-fornecidos, podem ser difíceis de monitorar, quando não há dados disponíveis sobre os fluxos anuais de investimento para este tipo de despesa. Poderá, no entanto, existir informação sobre a cobertura dos serviços em diferentes momentos. É provável que isto resulte mais dos pesquisas periódicas às famílias do que dos fluxos anuais de investimento. Para complementar a monitoria dos fluxos de investimento, poderá ser útil estimar o valor dos stocks de activos fixos existentes e seguir o modo como evoluem ao longo do tempo. Isto tem numerosas vantagens: • Permite rastrear todas as fontes de investimento numa base comparável, ultrapassando assim o problema de dados insuficientes sobre os fluxos anuais de investimento de capital para investidores significativos, como investimento familiar no saneamento do meio. Esta abordagem foi referida no relatório do Diagnóstico das Infraestruturas dos Países Africanos (AICD), elaborado pelo Banco Mundial, para estimar o investimento real no sector (Banerjee & Morella, 2011). Usando esta abordagem, concluiu-se que as famílias são os investidores mais significativos no sector WASH, na África Subsariana. • Permite ainda considerar o funcionamento dos activos. Seria possível, por exemplo, numa fase posterior do desenvolvimento do método, excluir o valor dos activos não operacionais, que poderá ser significativo. As estimativas indicam que até 40% das bombas manuais na África Subsariana deixam de funcionar num determinado momento (Sutton, 2005). • Pode fornecer uma base mais sólida para estimar futuros custos, particularmente os custos de atingir os ODS. Por exemplo, o exercício mundial da OMS sobre orçamentação, realizado pela primeira vez em 2004 e depois actualizado em 2012, baseia-se actualmente numa estimativa relativamente grosseira dos stocks totais de activos (Hutton, 2012). Esta combina os números de cobertura do JMP com as melhores estimativas disponíveis dos custos unitários, baseada na hierarquização dos serviços. Tomando o valor deste stock de activos, aplica-se um rácio para obter os custos projectados de operação e manutenção. No entanto, os valores unitários correctos dos custos nem sempre estão disponíveis a nível nacional e, por isso, essas estimativas deverão ser reforçadas através de uma estimativa mais fidedigna para os stocks de activos. • Está em sintonia com o Sistema de Contas Nacionais das Nações Unidas, a metodologia padrão usada pelos governos para compilar e controlar a informação sobre as actividades económicas. De acordo com a UNSD, o Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE) de cada país deveria estar já a compilar informação sobre os stocks de activos para todas as actividades económicas, incluindo a água e o saneamento. O valor total dos activos fixos é definido como “stocks de activos fixos” no SCN 2008 e vai evoluindo ao longo do tempo em sintonia com a formação bruta de capital fixo. 77Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional A Tabela 14 abaixo resume as definições do SCN, que podem ser usadas ou referidas nas Contas WASH. Definição Consumo de capital fixo Custo da redução do valor do stock de activos fixos do produtor, como resultado da deterioração física, danos previsíveis ou danos normais ou acidentais durante o período contabilístico. Corresponde a “depreciação” na terminologia da gestão empresarial. Deverá reflectir o uso do capital como um factor de produção. Inclui o uso de edifícios, equipamento e outros bens de capital, como veículos. Exclui as rendas pagas pelo uso de equipamento ou instalações e despesas, comissões, direitos, etc., pagáveis ao abrigo de acordos de licenciamento, já incluídos na compra de serviços. Formação bruta de capital fixo Valor total dos activos fixos que os fornecedores de serviços adquiriram durante o período contabilístico (menos o valor da alienação desses activos) e que é usado repetida ou continuamente durante mais de um ano na produção de serviços e bens. Isto corresponde a investimentos feitos nesse ano. Abertura de stocks de activos fixos Valor dos activos fixos no início do período (normalmente ano contabilístico). Fecho de stocks de activos fixos Fecho de stocks = abertura de stocks + Formação bruta de capital fixo – consumo de capital fixo + outras alterações no volume de activos + ganhos/perdas de detenção de activos Em que: • As outras alterações no volume dos activos são as que não se devem a transações, como mudanças de classificação, achados e catástrofes naturais; e • Os ganhos/perdas de detenção de activos são as alterações no preço dos activos. Fonte: Sistema de Contas Nacionais (2008). Tabela 14. Terminologia usada no SCN para avaliar as alterações nos stocks de activos fixos NM 6.2. Potenciais desafios metodológicos desta abordagem e meios de os superar Esta metodologia não foi explicitamente adoptada nos anteriores exercícios, que procuravam rastrear os fluxos financeiros para o sector WASH. Tal é duvidoso, uma vez que há muitas dificuldades metodológicas na adopção da Abordagem de Stocks de Activos Fixos, que exigem outras considerações. Estas incluem: • Por várias razões, frequentemente a informação existente sobre activos fixos é muito pobre no sector WASH. Poucas entidades elaboraram um registo abrangente e fiável. A propriedade de activos nem sempre é clara, havendo muitas vezes dúvidas sobre quem os pagou e quem é, efectivamente, o proprietário. Contudo, se esta metodologia fosse largamente adoptada, ela poderia fornecer mais incentivos aos fornecedores de serviços WASH, para melhorarem os registos dos activos e criarem um instrumento útil para uma melhor gestão dos activos. • A informação existente poderá nem sempre distinguir entre água normal e água residual. Alguns serviços públicos separam, habitualmente, a valorização dos seus activos entre água e águas residuais, mas isto não é de todo universal. Mais uma vez, a adopção de uma abordagem mais sistemática à valorização dos stocks de activos fixos poderia constituir um incentivo para os serviços separarem os valores relativos à água e às águas residuais nos seus balanços. • Mais importante ainda, para obter valores comparáveis de stocks de activos fixos, seria necessário chegar a acordo sobre uma metodologia comum para avaliar os activos em todo o sector. Há diversas metodologias para avaliar os activos, mas elas podem produzir valores muito diferentes, especialmente se a base de activos combinar activos que foram construídos em tempos diferentes. As metodologias alternativas para avaliar os stocks de activos fixos são apresentadas na caixa que se segue. Diferentes fornecedores de serviços poderão usar diferentes regras, até dentro do mesmo país. 78 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Caixa 27. Metodologias alternativas para valorizar stocks de activos fixos Avaliar os activos ao seu real valor contabilístico, ou como eles são registados no balanço dos fornecedores de serviços. É provável que este seja o modo mais simples para avaliar o activo, pelo menos inicialmente, uma vez que os valores podem ser retirados directamente dos balanços das empresas. O valor contabilístico baseia-se na despesa original, menos qualquer depreciação ocorrida desde que o activo foi comprado, mais a despesa de capital de manutenção ocorrida. No entanto, aplicando este método, pode incorrer-se em distorções, dado que os diferentes fornecedores de serviços podem usar diferentes convenções de valorização de activos nos seus balanços. Alguns poderão usar activos ao seu custo histórico (ajustado pela depreciação e, em certos casos, pela inflação), enquanto outros poderão ajustar esse valor com base no seu valor de reposição. Avaliar os activos ao seu custo histórico: Esta metodologia estima o custo no momento em que o activo foi construído, ajustado pela depreciação e inflação. No caso de muitos serviços públicos, os activos de água e saneamento foram adquiridos há muito tempo, embora ainda estejam a produzir benefícios. O seu valor histórico deverá, por isso, ser muito baixo, apesar de eles continuarem a fornecer serviços. Outros serviços públicos poderão optar por actualizar a valorização de activos nos seus livros de contabilidade. Avaliar os activos ao seu valor de reposição, também definido como o valor de Activos Equivalentes Modernos (MEA): Esta abordagem identifica o custo de substituição de determinado activo, pelo seu equivalente moderno ao custo actual, isto é, investir no activo equipado com a última tecnologia, mas fornecendo o mesmo nível de serviços. Isto gera números mais próximos dos actuais valores, mas ao realizar este tipo de “reavaliação” o exercício pode complicar-se, ser mais dispendioso e mais demorado. Por isso, ele raras vezes é utilizado, a menos que haja uma clara motivação para o fazer, como a entrada da participação do sector privado, que exigiria a avaliação da base de activos, antes de se fazer o contrato. Os métodos de avaliação de activos variam de país para país. Ofwat (2005) comparou métodos para avaliar as bases de capital em seis países diferentes, enquanto comparava os seus sistemas reguladores como um todo. Em Inglaterra e no País de Gales, os valores para o capital empregue baseiam-se num valor estimado no momento da privatização em 1989, ajustado pela subsequente depreciação e novo investimento. As empresas também reportam valores MEA: o custo estimado de activos de capacidade produtiva equivalente, para satisfazer os potenciais serviços remanescentes, menos a depreciação acumulada do actual custo. Algumas empresas australianas reportam custos actuais de substituição do mesmo modo que as empresas de Inglaterra e do País de Gales. Fonte: (Ofwat, 2005), “International comparison of water and sewerage service” Os Sistema de Contas Nacionais (2008) formulam ainda recomendações para avaliar os activos e reflecti-los nos balanços. Estes podem servir como uma útil referência, tendo em atenção as seguintes precauções: • Deverá obter-se a informação sobre o investimento inicial em determinado activo: para rastrear com êxito os tipos de financiamento do sector, é importante identificar os actores que financiaram a construção inicial. No caso dos serviços de água, por exemplo, os fundos de investimento podem ser oriundos de rendimentos gerados internamente, subsídios governamentais ou transferências internacionais. • Para o investimento familiar, devem ser formuladas algumas hipóteses: pode ser derivado o valor do stock de activos fixos em que as famílias investiram ao longo do tempo, com base no número de serviços existentes, multiplicados pelos custo unitário desses serviços, menos os subsídios governamentais1. Dada a habitual falta de informação acerca do momento em que os investimentos foram efectuados, isto equivale a avaliar os activos familiares com base na abordagem MEA. Para maior consistência, poderá ser preferível usar também a abordagem MEA para todos os outros tipos de activos, embora tal possa ser difícil de conseguir, se o método não for previamente aplicado. A Caixa 28 que se segue mostra como este método foi aplicado no Brasil. 1 Uma outra complicação é que nas contas nacionais, as famílias não são consideradas “investidores”; em vez disso, eles compram bens de consumo duradouros (que serão classificados como investimentos se forem comprados por um estabelecimento). Para as famílias, os bens de consumo duradouros são registados como consumidos no momento da compra. É, por isso, importante registar a compra de bens de consumo duradouros pelas famílias e estimar a esperança de vida do equipamento. O tratamento destes investimentos familiares necessitarão de ser debatidos e de acordo com os peritos de estatísticas e com o Sistema de Contas Nacionais. 79Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Caixa 28. Exemplo do Brasil: Estimar os stocks de activos fixos dos prestadores de serviços e das famílias A estimativa de stocks de activos fixos no Brasil foi possível graças à agregação, no SNIS, da informação financeira sobre investimentos em activos de fornecedores de serviços. Foi ainda necessário fazer um trabalho semelhante sobre os dados, que foram retirados de um leque variado de fornecedores de serviços e apresentados em diferentes formatos. Nem os stocks de activos foram avaliados da mesma forma. Devido às diferenças de métodos, foi possível estimar o stock de activos fixos para fornecedores de serviços oficiais. Esta informação foi registada nos seus balanços, que estão disponíveis no SNIS, apenas para fornecedores de serviços empresariais privados e não para fornecedores de serviços públicos, autoridades locais ou organizações públicas. O SNIS regista o valor do activo a preços históricos depreciados. Estes valores foram usados para estimar o stock de activos de todos os fornecedores oficiais ao seu valor histórico, o qual foi depois ajustado com o índice de preços do sector, para se ajustar à inflação anual. Este processo foi feito calculando a média de uma unidade dos stocks de activos fixos por ligação e por família. O stock total foi calculado como Activos Totais (-) Activos Acuais (-) a Activos a Longo Prazo. Outro desafio foi que, em 1995, a avaliação dos activos mudou de um método baseado no valor histórico dos activos para um método baseado no valor de aquisição dos activos. Portanto, o actual valor contabilístico médio dos activos adquiridos depois de 1995, teve de ser estimado usando o seu valor de compra. Apenas uma empresa estatal, Sabesp, de São Paulo, que se tornou pública muito recentemente, reavaliou os seus activos usando os seus valores de substituição. Esta metodologia poderá ser aplicada futuramente a outros fornecedores de serviços, uma vez que fornece um valor mais rigoroso dos stocks de activos. O stock de activos fixos para as famílias autoabastecidas foi calculado com base em custos unitários estimados do equipamento por família (fossas sépticas, depósitos e poços de água) e no número notificado de famílias autoabastecidas, a partir do recenseamento populacional. No entanto, não foi possível estimar stocks de activos de infraestruturas de gestão dos recursos hídricos dos municípios, cuja informação não é guardada no SNIS. Estas omissões podem representar cerca de 5% do total de stocks de activos existentes. Em conclusão, dadas as dificuldades metodológicas encontradas na estimativa de stocks de activos fixos, a equipa das Contas WASH irá precisar de testar a viabilidade de métodos alternativos e os potenciais erros ou desvios desses métodos. Os países que executam este exercício de avaliação dos stocks de activos deverão declarar claramente qual o método usado, e se esse foi consistentemente aplicado para todos os fornecedores de serviços ou tipos de activos. Apenas será possível fazê-lo na base de uma amostragem. A avaliação dos stocks de activos fixos poderá ser mais complexa à primeira tentativa, uma vez que será preciso determinar o valor inicial do activo, mas tornar-se-á comparativamente mais fácil em posteriores repetições. Isto exigirá a identificação dos activos existentes e do seu valor, para cada um dos fornecedores de serviços. Ajudará também a definir valores de referência para outros tipos de custos, como custos de capital de operação e manutenção. Estes custos poderão ser estimados como percentagem dos valores dos activos, se não se conseguir mais nenhuma estimativa fiável a um custo razoável. Um outro passo para o aperfeiçoamento desta metodologia poderá ser a adopção de uma Abordagem de Stocks de Activos Fixos total para o sector, monitorando não só os activos mas também os passivos (i.e., os empréstimos fornecidos para financiar esses activos), de modo a derivar um valor para o stock líquido de activos fixos. Isto é recomendado pelo Fundo Monetário Internacional (2001) no seu Manual de Estatística das Finanças Públicas1. 1 (International Monetary Fund Statistics Department, 2001) disponível em: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/gfs/manual/pdf/all.pdf 80 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Nota Metodológica n.º 7: Tabelas e indicadores das Contas WASH Objectivos: Esta nota estabelece as tabelas usadas para preparar as Contas WASH. No Passo 3 do Documento de Orientação, é apresentada uma lista resumida de todas as tabelas. Preparar estas tabelas permite uma visão completa do financiamento do sector WASH a ser criado para o uso das políticas. Esta Nota Metodológica contém a estrutura das tabelas, acompanhada de uma explicação de cada uma delas, podendo a lista de indicadores ser gerada a partir daí. NM 7.1 Como são construídas as tabelas das Contas WASH? As tabelas das Contas WASH apresentam informação acerca do consumo, produção e actividades de financiamento do sector WASH de um país. A notificação dos dados e a uniformização das estimativas, usando tabelas-padrão, facilita a comparação entre os países. As linhas e colunas das Contas WASH baseiam-se nas classificações apresentadas noutros pontos desta metodologia, incluindo: • Tabela 1. Classificação TrackFin dos serviços WASH ; • Tabela 2. Definições: usos dos serviços WASH, actores e tipos de financiamento do sector WASH; e • Tabela 12. Classificação TrackFin dos custos. Além disso, algumas das tabelas propostas incluem uma discriminação por região ou áreas de serviços, sendo algumas incluídas na tabela abaixo. Esta resume todos os tipos de classificação (e rótulos) usados na Contas WASH. Classificações Definição Serviços WASH (S) Serviços WASH e produtos disponibilizados por fornecedores de serviços WASH e consumidos por usuários. Ver Tabela 1 para mais dados acerca da classificação . Usos dos serviços WASH (U) Tipo de uso de bens e serviços WASH. Ver Tabela 2. Prestadores WASH (P) Actores envolvidos na produção e entrega de bens e serviços WASH. Ver Tabela 2. Unidades financiadoras (FU) Entidades institucionais que fornecem ou mobilizam financiamento ao sector para pagar serviços WASH. Podem alocar directamente os fundos aos fornecedores de serviços ou canalizá-los através de instituições intermediárias. Ver Tabela 2. Tipos de financiamento (FT) Fontes de financiamento anteriores à distribuição através de entidades financiadoras. Ver Tabela 2. Custos (C) Tipo de custos (ou tipo de despesa) suportados por fornecedores de serviços para o abastecimento de serviços WASH. Ver Tabela 12. Áreas de serviços (A) Urbana, rural ou central, de acordo com a definição do país. Use central quando nem urbana nem rural se aplicam porque as duas áreas se beneficiam, por exemplo, atividades de apoio do estado ou uma ONG, desempenhada por um ator centralizado ou descentralizado. Regiões geográficas (R) Regiões geográficas ou distritos definidos pelo país. Use central quando as atividades abrangerem todas as regiões. Tabela 15. Classificações usadas nas Contas WASH As tabelas das Contas WASH são construídas para rastrear os fluxos financeiros entre estas dimensões. As classificações poderão aplicar-se a custos individuais, produzindo tabelas de despesa para uma só dimensão (como por tipo de uso WASH, fornecedores de serviços ou tipo de financiamento). Poderá obter-se mais informação através de uma classificação cruzada, envolvendo duas ou mais dimensões. Podem criar-se muitas combinações de tabelas bi-dimensionais ou tri-dimensionais. A escolha de tabelas depende da sua relevância para o país e da possibilidade de as criar. Apresenta-se em seguida uma selecção de tabelas bi-dimensionais. Tabelas comuns recomendadas para as Contas WASH É fornecida abaixo uma explicação adicional de cada uma das tabelas propostas para as Contas WASH, e da informação que elas geram. Para facilitar a consulta e a comparação, a cada tabela é atribuído um número e um código, indicando o tipo de informação que ela contém. Convencionou-se que os títulos se referem primeiro à classificação da linha e depois à classificação da coluna. Por exemplo, a Tabela WA 1 (SxA), que apresenta a alocação de despesas pelos principais serviços WASH (S) e área de serviços (A), é designada por tabela SxA, aparecendo os serviços WASH (S) em linhas e as áreas de serviços (A) em colunas. 81Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Tabela CW 1 (SxA) - Despesa WASH por principais serviços WASH e área de serviços. Esta tabela mostra a despesa total para cada um dos principais tipos de serviços WASH, por área de serviços. Países podem decidir elaborar também uma tabela SxR para despesas com WASH por serviço principal e região geográfica definida. Principais serviços WASH (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Área TotalA1 Urbana A2 Rural A3 Central S1 Serviços de abastecimento de água S2 Serviços de saneamento S3 Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH S4 Gestão dos recursos hídricos referente aos serviços de água e saneamento S5 Serviços de higiene Total Tabela 16. CW 1 (SxA) Despesa WASH por principais serviços WASH e área de serviços Tabela CW 2 (SxU) - Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços e uso. Esta tabela mostra a despesa das unidades financiadoras com os vários tipos e uso dos serviços WASH. Esta tabela apresenta um resumo da procura de serviços WASH no país, identificando quem está a consumir e que tipo de serviços são consumidos. Isto faz-se mais por tipo de uso e não por usuário. Tabela 17. CW 2 (SxU) Despesa WASH por tipo de uso e serviços WASH Usos WASH (U) U1 U2 U3 U4 Principais serviços WASH (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Uso doméstico dos serviços prestados Uso doméstico de serviços auto- fornecido Uso não doméstico dos serviços prestados Uso não doméstico auto-fornecido Total S1 Serviços de abastecimento de água S2 Serviços de saneamento S3 Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH S4 Gestão dos recursos hídricos referente aos serviços de água e saneamento S5 Serviços de higiene Total Tabela CW 3 (SxP) - Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços e prestador/fornecedor. Esta tabela mostra a despesa dos prestadores de serviços com diferentes tipos de serviços WASH, esclarecendo “Quem fornece o quê?” Fornece ainda uma apresentação sumária do mercado de abastecimento WASH no país, identificando quem são os fornecedores e como os gastos do sector são canalizados através de diferentes fornecedores. Isto mostra a relativa importância de cada tipo de fornecedor no mercado. 82 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Tabela 18. CW 3 (SxP) Despesa WASH por tipo de prestador e serviços WASH Prestadores WASH P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Principais serviços WASH (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Organismos governamentais Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição ONGs e Organizações de Base Comunitária (OBCs) Usuários auto- fornecidos Total S1 Serviços de abastecimento de água S2 Serviços de saneamento S3 Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH S4 Gestão dos recursos hídricos referente aos serviços de água e saneamento S5 Serviços de higiene Total Tabela CW 4 (PxFT) - Despesa WASH por tipo de prestador e tipo de financiamento. Esta Tabela coloca a questão: “De onde vem o dinheiro?” apresentando as diferentes fontes de receita por tipo de financiamento para cada um dos prestaodores de serviços. Isso permite rastrear os fluxos de recursos dentro do sector WASH, através das colunas que mostram a origem do financiamento e as linhas que mostram os seu receptores e usuários. A tabela mostra ainda a importância relativa de cada tipo de fluxo de receitas para financiar cada tipo de actividades do prestador e no sector em geral. Tabela 19. CW 4 (PxFT) Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e prestador WASH Tipos de financiamento FT1 FT2 FT3 FT4 FT5 FT6 Prestadores WASH (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos Despesas dos usuários com o auto- abastecimento Transferências públicas domésticas Transferências públicas internacionais Contribuições voluntárias Financiamento reembolsável Total P1 Organismos governamentais P2 Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede P3 Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição P4 ONGs e OBCs P5 Usuários auto- fornecidos Total 83Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Tabela CW 5 (SxFT) - Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços e tipo de financiamento. Esta tabela mostra a via de financiamento para o fornecimento de serviços WASH, e coloca a questão: “Quem financia quem?” apresentando as diferentes fontes de receita (tipos de financiamento), para cada serviço. Os fluxos de recursos para o sector WASH poderão ser acompanhados nas colunas que mostram a origem dos fundos e nas linhas que mostram as actividades em que eles são gastos. Tabela 20. CW 5 (SxFT) Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e tipo de serviços WASH Tipos de financiamento FT1 FT2 FT3 FT4 FT5 FT6 Principais serviços WASH (millions of currency units) Tarifas pelos serviços fornecidos Despesas dos usuários com o auto- abastecimento Transferências públicas domésticas Transferências públicas internacionais Contribuições voluntárias Financiamento reembolsável Total S1 Serviços de abastecimento de água S2 Serviços de saneamento S3 Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH S4 Gestão dos recursos hídricos referente aos serviços de água e saneamento S5 Serviços de higiene Total 84 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Ta be la 21 . C W 6 (S xF U) D es pe sa W AS H po r u ni da de fi na nc ia do ra e se rv iço s W AS H Un id ad es fi na nc ia do ra s FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 Pr in cip ai s s er vi ço s W AS H (M ilh õe s d e un ida de s m on et ár ias ) Us uá rio s Au to rid ad es na cio na is Au to rid ad es re gio na is Au to rid ad es loc ais Em pr es as pr es ta do ra s d e se rv iço s p or re de Em pr es as pr es ta do ra s se m re de de dis tri bu içã o Re gu lad or es ec on óm ico s e da qu ali da de Do ad or es bil at er ais e m ult ila te ra is ON Gs e OB Cs Ba nc os e ins tit uiç õe s fin an ce ira s To ta l S1 Se rv iço s d e ab as te cim en to de ág ua S2 Se rv iço s d e sa ne am en to S3 Se rv iço s d e ap oio ao se cto r W AS H S4 Ge stã o d os re cu rso s híd ric os re fer en te ao s s er viç os de ág ua e sa ne am en to S5 Se rv iço s d e hig ien e To ta l Tabela CW 6 (SxFU) - Despesa WASH por serviços e unidade financiadora. Esta tabela mostra quanto é gasto por cada unidade financiadora e em que serviço. Descreve o modo como as unidades financiadoras afectam globalmente os seus recursos, colocando a questão: “Quem financia o quê?” 85Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Ta be la 22 . C W 7 (P xF U) D es pe sa W AS H po r p re st ad or e un id ad e fi na nc ia do ra Un id ad es fi na nc ia do ra s FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 Pr es ta do re s W AS H (M ilh õe s d e u nid ad es m on et ár ias ) Us uá rio s Au to rid ad es na cio na is Au to rid ad es re gio na is Au to rid ad es loc ais Em pr es as pr es ta do ra s d e se rv iço s p or re de Em pr es as pr es ta do ra s se m re de de dis tri bu içã o Re gu lad or es ec on óm ico s e da qu ali da de Do ad or es bil at er ais e m ult ila te ra is ON G e O BC Ba nc os e ins tit uiç õe s fin an ce ira s To ta l P1 Or ga nis m os go ve rn am en ta is P2 Em pr es as pr es ta do ra s d e se rv iço po r r ed e P3 Em pr es as pr es ta do ra s de se rv iço s se m re de de dis tri bu içã o P4 ON Gs e OB Cs P5 Us uá rio s a ut o- fo rn ec ido s T ot al Tabela CW 7 (PxFU) - Despesa WASH por prestador e unidade financiadora. Esta tabela mostra a quantia gasta por cada unidade financiadora e em que tipo de prestador de serviços. Sublinha a via de financiamento para o fornecimento de serviços WASH, colocando a questão: “Quem financia quem?” 86 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Ta be la 23 . C W 8 (F Tx FU ) D es pe sa W AS H po r t ip o d e fi na nc ia m en to e un id ad e fi na nc ia do ra Un id ad es fi na nc ia do ra s FU 1 FU 2 FU 3 FU 4 FU 5 FU 6 FU 7 FU 8 FU 9 FU 10 Ti po s d e fi na nc ia m en to W AS H (M ilh õe s d e u nid ad es m on et ár ias ) Us uá rio s Au to rid ad es na cio na is Au to rid ad es re gio na is Au to rid ad es loc ais Fo rn ec ed or es em pr es ar iai s d e re de Fo rn ec ed or es em pr es ar iai s d e nã o r ed e Re gu lad or es ec on óm ico s e da qu ali da de Do ad or es bil at er ais e m ult ila te ra is ON Gs e OB Cs Ba nc os e ins tit uiç õe s fin an ce ira s To ta l FT 1 Ta rif as pe los se rv iço s fo rn ec ido s FT 2 De sp es as do s u su ár ios co m o au to - ab as te cim en to FT 3 Tra ns fer ên cia s pú bli ca s do m és tic as FT 4 Tra ns fer ên cia s pú bli ca s int er na cio na is FT 5 Co nt rib uiç õe s vo lun tá ria s FT 6 Fin an cia m en to re em bo lsá ve l To ta l Tabela CW 8 (FTxFU) - Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e unidade financiadora. Esta tabela mostra os tipos de financiamento através dos quais as unidades financiadoras globais afectam recursos ao sector. 87Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Tabela 24. CW 9 (CxP) Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e prestador WASH Fornecedores WASH P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Tipo de custos (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Organismos governamentais Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição ONGs e OBCs Usuários auto- fornecidos Total C1 Custos de investimento, incluindo "hardware" e custos associados C2 Custos de operação e manutenção C3 Custos de manutenção de grande capital C4 Custos financeiros C5 Custos de apoio ou de assistência C6 Impostos e taxas Total Tabela CW 9 (CxP) - Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e prestador WASH. Esta tabela mostra como diferentes tipos de prestadores/fornecedores afectam os recursos para cobrir diferentes tipos de custos, colocando a questão: “Que tipos de custos são financiados e por quem?” Tabela 25. CW 10 (CxS) Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e serviços WASH Principais serviços WASH S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Tipo de custo (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Serviços de abastecimento de água Serviços de saneamento Serviços de apoio ao sector WASH Gestão dos recursos hídricos referente aos serviços de água e saneamento Serviços de higiene Total C1 Custos de investimento, incluindo "hardware" e custos associados C2 Custos de operação e manutenção C3 Custos de manutenção de grande capital C4 Custos financeiros C5 Custos de apoio ou de assistência C6 Impostos e taxas Total Tabela CW 10 (CxS) - Despesa WASH por tipo de custos e serviços WASH. Esta tabela mostra o tipo de custos em que são gastos recursos para prestar cada Serviço WASH. 88 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Tabela 26. CW 11 (ASxP) Stocks de activos fixos por tipo de prestador WASH Prestadores WASH P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Stocks de activos fixos (Milhões de unidades monetárias) Organismos governamentais Empresas prestadoras de serviço por rede Empresas prestadoras de serviços sem rede de distribuição ONGs e OBCs Usuários auto- fornecidos Total AS1 Fecho dos stocks de activos fixos Total Tabela CW 11 (ASxP) - Stocks de activos por tipo de prestador WASH. Esta tabela apresenta o stock de activos por cada tipo de prestador e permite a avaliação dos stocks de activos para o sector como um todo, reflectindo o que tem sido investido ao longo do tempo por cada tipo de prestador de serviços (incluindo auto-serviços domésticos). NM 7.2 O que são indicadores das Contas WASH? Os indicadores das Contas WASH são números essenciais da despesa do sector derivados directamente das Tabelas das Contas WASH. Estes indicadores destinam-se principalmente aos decisores políticos nacionais, mas servem também para facilitar a notificação internacional. Devido a dificuldades em comparar as unidades monetárias nacionais, recomenda-se o uso de rácios sempre que possível (como o rácio dos gastos WASH para o PIB), de forma a evitar distorcer o impacto das taxas de câmbio monetário. No entanto, certos indicadores, como a despesa total do sector WASH a nível nacional, e despesa total do WASH per capita, podem ser apresentados em unidades monetárias. A conversão da moeda local em dólares internacionais, usando as actuais taxas de câmbio ou uma taxa de câmbio PPP, exige ser considerada e documentada. A Tabela 27 abaixo, apresenta os principais indicadores que poderão ser elaborados em resposta às questões políticas do país. Base de referência e apresentação de indicadores no contexto Certos indicadores poderiam beneficiar da comparação com os níveis reais do PIB. Por exemplo, o número que representa a percentagem da Despesa do sector WASH como percentagem do PIB (Figura 9, no Relatório GLAAS 2010) não fornece uma indicação do montante relativo do PIB de um país para outro. Por isso, é preferível registar num gráfico a percentagem da Despesa WASH no eixo x e mostrar o PIB per capita no eixo y. Isto revela se há algum tipo de impacto do PIB nos gastos do sector WASH. 89Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Tabela (T) Indicador (I) que pode ser derivado Tabela CW 1 (SxA) - Despesa WASH por principais serviços e área de serviços Despesa total do sector WASH a nível nacional Despesa total do WASH no país como parte do PIB Despesa total do WASH per capita Despesa total do WASH como percentagem da despesa pública total Despesa total em água potável urbana e rural como percentagem da despesa total WASH Despesa total do saneamento urbano e rural como percentagem da despesa total WASH Tabela CW 2 (SxU) - Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços e uso Despesa total por tipo de uso dos serviços Tabela CW 3 (SxP) - Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços e prestador Despesa total por tipo de serviços WASH Despesa total por tipo de prestador WASH Tabela CW 4 (PxFT) - Despesa WASH por tipo de prestador e tipo de financiamento Despesa total por tipo de financiamento Tabela CW 5 (SxFT) - Despesa WASH por tipo de serviços e tipo de financiamento Despesa total das transferências públicas domésticas como percentagem do financiamento total WASH Despesa total das transferências públicas internacionais como percentagem do financiamento total WASH Despesa total do utilizador como percentagem do financiamento total WASH Tabela CW 6 (SxFU) - Despesa WASH por serviços e unidade financiadora Tabela CW 7 (PxFU) - Despesa WASH por prestador e unidade financiadora Tabela CW 8 (FTxFU) - Despesa WASH por tipo de financiamento e unidade financiadora Despesa total canalizada através das autoridades regionais e locais como percentagem da despesa pública WASH Tabela CW 9 (CxP) - Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e prestador Tabela CW 10 (CxS ) - Despesa WASH por tipo de custo e principais serviços Custo do investimento total como percentagem da despesa total WASH Custo total de operação e manutenção como percentagem da despesa total WASH Custo total da manutenção de grande capital como percentagem da despesa total WASH Custo do investimento como percentagem da despesa total em abastecimento de água Custo de operação e manutenção como percentagem da despesa total de água Custo da manutenção de grande capital como percentagem da despesa total de água Custo do investimento como percentagem da despesa total do saneamento Custo de operação e manutenção como percentagem da despesa total do saneamento Custo da manutenção de grande capital como percentagem da despesa total do saneamento Tabela CW 11 (ASxP) - Stocks de activos fixos por tipo de prestador WASH Total de stocks de activos fixos WASH per capita Tabela 27. Indicadores das Contas WASH 90 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Anexo A. Glossário Nota: Os termos em itálico são definidos em outra parte do glossário. Termo Definição Ajuda Pública ao Desenvolvimento (APD) Subvenções ou empréstimos a países e territórios da Lista CAD dos Receptores da APD (países em desenvolvimento) e a agências multilaterais. Poderão: (a) ser efectuadas pelo sector oficial; (b) ser promovidas como principal objectivo pelo desenvolvimento económico e bem-estar; (c) fornecer termos financeiros favoráveis (se for um empréstimo), com uma componente de financiamento de, pelo menos, 25%. A base de dados CAD da OCDE, actualmente, apenas acompanha os fluxos APD dos países membros da OCDE, mas está a procurar alargar a cobertura a outros doadores não OCDE. Compensação de recursos humanos (remuneração de funcionários e profissionais liberais) Remuneração total paga por uma empresa a um funcionário, em troca de trabalho executado durante o período contabilístico. Inclui remunerações e salários e todas as formas de benefícios sociais, pagamento por horas extra ou trabalho nocturno, bónus, abonos, assim como o valor de pagamentos em espécie, como o fornecimento de uniformes para o pessoal médico. Esta categoria inclui ainda a remuneração de profissionais liberais não assalariados (SNA 2008). Consumo de capital fixo Custo da redução do valor do stock de activos fixos do produtor, em resultado dadeterioração física, ou por se encontrarem obsoletos ou terem sofrido danos normais ou acidentais durante o período contabilístico. Isto corresponde a “depreciação” na terminologia da gestão empresarial. Deverá reflectir o uso de capital como um factor de produção. Inclui a uso de edifícios, equipamento e outros bens de capital como veículos. Exclui as rendas pagas pelo uso de equipamento ou edifícios e taxas, comissões e direitos, etc., a pagar através de acordos de licenciamento, que estão incluídos como compra de serviços (SNA 2008). Consumo intermédio (materiais e serviços usados) Valor total de bens e serviços usados para o fornecimento de bens e serviços (não produzidos internamente) comprados a outros fornecedores e outras indústrias da economia. Todos estes materiais e serviços se destinam a ser totalmente consumidos durante o período das actividades de produção (SNA 2008). Contribuições voluntárias Doçõess voluntários (ou subvenções) de doadores internacionais e nacionais não governamentais, incluindo de fundações de beneficência, Organizações Não Governamentais (ONG), organizações da sociedade civil e indivíduos singulares (remessas). Os empréstimos bonificados estão excluídos desta categoria e incluem-se totalmente no FT6 - Financiamento reembolsável. 91Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Custo de apoio ou de assistência Custo de actividades de apoio associadas com o desenvolvimento de infraestruturas, como a preparação de projectos, formação de capacidades, aprendizagem, mobilização comunitária e actividades para mudanças comportamentais. Inclui despesas de apoio directo e indirecto. A despesa de apoio directo (ExpDS) inclui a despesa, quer das pré- actividades quer das pós-actividades de apoio à construção, dirigidas às partes interessadas a nível local (por exemplo, formação para operadores comunitários ou do sector privado, grupos de usuários singulares ou grupos de usuários). A despesa de apoio indirecto (ExpIDS) inclui o custo do planificação e da formulação de políticas de nível governamental, incluindo o reforço de competências e capacidades dos profissionais e técnicos. Estes custos têm um impacto directo sobre projectos de sustentabilidade a longo prazo. Despesas de operação e de manutenção Custos de operação e de manutenção de rotina para manter os serviços operacionais (e.g. salários, combustíveis ou outras compras regulares). As despesas de operação são gastos correntes (regulares, contínuos) para garantir os bens e serviços WASH: trabalho, combustíveis, produtos químicos, materiais e compras de grandes volumes de água. A despesa de manutenção é a despesa de rotina necessária para manter os sistemas operacionais com o desempenho previsto, mas não inclui reparações ou renovações relevantes não considerados correntes. (WASHCost). Despesa do usuários em auto- abastecimento Financiamento fornecido pelos usuários para investirem ou fornecerem os serviços a si próprios. Os usuários autoabastecidos pagam previamente um investimento inicial (um furo, um sistema privado de produção de água, ou uma latrina privada) para acederem aos serviços e depois cobrem eles próprios os custos de operação e manutenção. Isto pode processar-se com dinheiro vivo, material ou tempo, mas apenas os pagamentos em dinheiro estão incluídos nas Contas WASH. Esta categoria pode ser mais desagregada em diversas subcategorias, como FT2.1 - Despesa do utilizador doméstico com o auto-abastecimento, ou FT2.2 - Despesa do utilizador não doméstico com o auto-abastecimento. Empréstimo comercial Empréstimo concedido por bancos comerciais ou agências financeiras de desenvolvimento a taxas comerciais, i.e., taxas de juro, que reflectem as condições do mercado. Empréstimo em condições especiais (ou "Empréstimo bonificado") Um empréstimo fornecido em termos favoráveis, que pode incluir uma taxa de juro mais baixa do que a taxa de mercado, o período mais longo de reembolso ou um prazo de tolerância. Factores de produção Factores de produção usados pelos fornecedores para produzirem os bens e serviços consumidos ou actividades realizadas no sistema. Aqui incluem-se: • custos de produção (consumo intermédio+ valor acrescentado bruto + compensação de recursos humanos + outros impostos menos subsídios de produção + consumo de capital fixo); • Formação bruta de capital fixo ; • Alterações nos stocks de activos (SNA 2008). 92 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Fecho de stocks de activos fixos Fecho de stocks = abertura de stocks + Formação bruta de capital fixo – consumo de capital fixo + outras alterações no volume de activos + ganhos/ perdas de detenção de activos Em que: • Outras alterações no volume dos activos não são devidas a transacções, como alterações de classificação, achados e catástrofes naturais. • Os ganhos/ perdas de detenção de activos são as alterações no preço dos activos. (SNA 2008). Financiamento Acto de fornecer financiamento. Financiamento reembolsável As fontes de financiamento de origem privada ou pública e que, em última análise, têm de ser reembolsadas, como os empréstimos (incluindo empréstimos bonificados e garantias), investimentos de capital ou outros instrumentos financeiros como obrigações. Aqui incluem-se o financiamento reembolsável bonificado e o financiamento reembolsável não bonificado. Formação bruta de capital fixo É o valor total dos activos fixos que os fornecedores de serviços adquiriram durante o período contabilístico (menos o valor da alienação de activos) e que é usado repetida ou continuamente por mais de um ano na produção de bens e serviços (SNA 2008). Garantias Contrato com uma terceira parte (C) para subscrever um compromisso financeiro assinado por duas partes (A e B). A garantia pode ser usada por um governo nacional para reduzir o risco de emissão de empréstimos e obrigações pelos seus órgãos sub-soberanos e pelas agências internacionais, para aumentarem a credibilidade no desenvolvimento das instituições nacionais e, desse modo, apoiarem projectos específicos. Impostos Incluem impostos e contribuições fiscais cobrados aos fornecedores de serviços: • Impostos sobre a produção: imposto empresarial sobre os lucros, imposto predial, taxa de arrendamento (“taxa profissional”) para arrendar activos fixos, imposto para ocupação de espaços públicos ou para remuneração de funcionários. • Taxa de consumo relativa (ou destinada) ao sector, como pagamento de direitos ou taxas pelo uso de água, ou descarga de águas residuais em massas de água. • Outros encargos sobre a produção cobrados para fins específicos, como a contribuição social. Instituições de microfinanças Refere-se a esquemas de concessão de crédito, poupanças, seguros, transferências bancárias e outros produtos financeiros a pequenas empresas, agricultores e outros mutuários de baixos rendimentos que não podem ter acesso a empréstimos bancários normais. Investimentos de capital Forma financeira em que o investidor adquire uma “participação no capital”, o que significa a compra de acções numa entidade. Isto permite-lhes partilharem o risco dessa entidade (através de flutuações no preço das acções) na perspectiva de partilharem os lucros (através dos pagamentos de dividendos). Quanto maior é o risco do investimento, maior é o nível esperado de retorno. Obrigação Método de empréstimo usado por empresas privadas, governos ou municípios, que consiste na emissão de títulos de rendimento fixo, reembolsáveis numa data específica. Certas obrigações governamentais não têm data fixa de resgate e podem ser vendidas ao preço corrente de mercado. Prestadores de serviços Actores envolvidos na produção e entrega de serviços WASH, incluindo instituições governamentais que fornecem apoio. 93Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Produto Interno Bruto O PIB deriva do conceito de valor acrescentado. O valor acrescentado bruto é a diferença entre produto e consumo intermédio. O PIB é a soma do valor acrescentado bruto de todas as unidades residentes de produção, mais a parte (eventualmente o total) de impostos sobre os produtos, menos os subsídios sobre os produtos, que não se incluem na valorização da produção. O PIB é também igual à soma do uso final de bens e serviços (todos os usos excepto o consumo intermédio) medidos aos preços dos compradores, menos o valor da importação de bens e serviços. Finalmente, o PIB é ainda igual à soma dos rendimentos primários distribuídos pelas unidades produtoras residentes (SNA 2008). Recursos financeiros Valor monetário dos fundos fornecidos para apoio a uma dada actividade. Subsídios Um subsídio é uma subvenção dada geralmente pelo governo a actores económicos de várias formas, como uma transferência em dinheiro, uma redução de impostos ou contribuições a preços baixos (como terrenos gratuitos). Um subsídio pode ser atribuído a actores económicos como um incentivo para fornecimento de bens e/ou serviços que beneficiam a sociedade. Subsídio pode também ser oferecido a famílias abaixo do limiar da pobreza para lhes permitir aceder a bens e serviços básicos. Os subsídios são muitas vezes atribuídos para apoiar projectos de infra-estruturas destinadas à prestação de serviços de utilidade públicae podem incluir “subsídios de hardware” (para reduzir os custos de investimento do capital inicial), “subsídios de operação” (para cobrir perdas ocorridas durante o operação dos serviços) ou subsídios de apoio ou de assistência (para cobrir os custos de apoio associados com o desenvolvimento de infraestruturas, como com a preparação de projectos, formação e promoção de capacidades). Uma forma escondida de subsídio público poderá consistir em fazer um investimento de capital, sem expectativas de reembolso ou retorno. Subvenção Forma de ajuda ao desenvolvimento sem obrigações de reembolso. As subvenções podem ser desvinculadas ou conter obrigações políticas e comerciais explícitas ou implícitas. As subvenções são normalmente fornecidas pelos IFI, governos, fundações e fundos específicos com diferentes políticas, procedimentos e produtos técnicos. Uma subvenção poderá ser associada a outros tipos de financiamento para produzir um pacote financeiro adequado para determinado projecto. Tarifas (na tipologia 3T da OCDE) Fundos pagos pelos usuários dos serviços WASH para obtenção desses serviços. Na tipologia 3T da OCDE, as tarifas incluem dois tipos de financiamento: • Tarifas por serviços prestados; • Despesas directas das famílias com o auto-abastecimento. A terminologia das Contas WASH propõe a separação destes dois tipos de fundos para evitar a confusão. Tarifas por serviços fornecidos (em Contas WASH) Pagamentos feitos pelos usuários (domésticos e não domésticos) aos fornecedores de serviços para acederem e usarem os serviços. Taxas (na tipologia 3T da OCDE) Fundos originados pelas taxas domésticas que são canalizados para o sector através de transferências de todos os níveis governamentais - nacional, regional ou local. Esses fundos seriam normalmente concedidos como subsídios para investimentos ou operações de capital. As formas “escondidas” de um subsídio pode incluir redução fiscal, empréstimos bonificados (i.e. a uma taxa de juros subsidiada) ou serviços subsidiados (como a electricidade). Tipos de financiamento Fluxos financeiros que circulam entre unidades financiadoras e fornecedores de serviços, caracterizados pela sua origem e natureza. 94 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Transferências (na tipologia 3T da OCDE) Fundos de doadores internacionais e de fundações internacionais de beneficência (incluindo ONG, cooperação descentralizada ou organizações locais da sociedade civil) que habitualmente provêm de outros países. Estes fundos podem ser atribuídos quer sob a forma de subvenções, empréstimos bonificados (i.e. através de subsídios que são incluídos num empréstimo bonificado, na forma de taxas de juro subsidiadas ou de períodos de tolerância) ou garantias. A terminologia das Contas WASH propõe a separação das transferências públicas internacionais das transferências voluntárias, para evitar confusão. Transferências públicas domésticas Transferências públicas das agências governamentais (governo central ou local) para os actores WASH. Trata-se muitas vezes de subsídios oriundos de impostos ou outras fontes de receita governamentais. Esta categoria inclui apenas subvenções e exclui empréstimos bonificados, que estão incluídos em FT6. Transferências públicas internacionais Donativos voluntários (ou subvenções) de doadores públicos e agências multilaterais oriundas de outros países. Os empréstimos bonificados são excluídos desta categoria e incluem-se totalmente no FT6 - Financiamento reembolsável. Unidades financiadoras Entidades institucionais que fornecem financiamento ao sector. Mobilizam financiamento para pagar fornecedores de serviços WASH. Podem afectar fundos directamente aos fornecedores de serviços ou canalizá-los através de outras unidades financiadoras. Valor acrescentado bruto Valor acrescentado bruto = produto – consumo intermédio O valor acrescentado bruto é uma medida da contribuição para o PIB feita por um produtor individual, indústria ou sector. É o valor do produto menos o valor dos bens e serviços, excluindo os activos fixos, consumidos como entradas por um processo de produção (consumo intermédio). Uma vez gerado o valor acrescentado, ele pode ser decomposto nos seus factores primários para gerar rendimentos, de acordo com a seguinte fórmula: Valor acrescentado (bruto) = excedente da operação (bruto) + compensação dos funcionários + impostos– subsídios (SNA 2008). Valor líquido acrescentado Valor líquido acrescentado = Valor bruto acrescentado - consumo de capital fixo = produto – consumo intermédio – consumo de capital fixo O valor líquido acrescentado obtém-se a partir do Valor bruto acrescentado menos o consumo de capital fixo que ocorre quando a redução no valor dos activos fixos usados na produção, durante o período contabilístico, resulta da deterioração física, activos obsoletos ou com danos normais ou acidentais (SNA 2008). 95Rastreio do financiamento do saneamento, higiene e água potável a nível nacional Anexo B. Bibliografia AMCOW, EUWI, UNDP. (2006). Getting Africa on track to meet the MDGs on water and sanitation - A status overview of sixteen African countries. AMCOW. Banerjee, S., & Morella, E. (2011). Africa’s Water and Sanitation Infrastructure – Access, Affordability, and Alternatives. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. Barnett, C., & al. (2001). The Application of National Health Accounts Framework to HIV/AIDS in Rwanda. Special Initiatives Report No. 31. Bethesda, MD: Partnerships for Health Reform Project, Abt Associates Inc. Camdessus, M. and Winpenny, J. (2003). Financing water for all. World Water Council, Secretariat of the 3rd World Water Forum and Global Water Partnership. De, S., & al. (2003). Has Improved Availability of Health Expenditure Data Contributed to Evidence-Based Policymaking? Country Experiences with National Health Accounts. Health Systems 20/20. (2011). Mali NHA policy Impact. Health Systems 20/20. Hernandez, P. (2012). Health Accounts: A review of 20 years of experience, Presentation for the 2012 Stockholm World Water Week. Hutton, G. (2012). Global costs and benefits of drinking-water supply and sanitation interventions to reach the MDG target and universal coverage. Geneva: WHO. International Monetary Fund Statistics Department. (2001). Government Finance Statistics Manual. IMF. Maeda, A., & al. (2012). Creating Evidence for Better Health Financing Decisions: A Strategic Guide for the Institutionalization of National Health Accounts. The World Bank. McIntyre, D., & al. (1995). Health Expenditure and Finance in South Africa. South Africa: Health Systems Trust and the World Bank. OECD, Eurostat, WHO. (2011). A System of Health Accounts. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Benefits of Investing in Water and Sanitation: An OECD perspective. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2010). Innovative financing mechanisms for the water sector. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2009). Managing Water for All – An OECD perspective on pricing and financing. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Meeting the Challenge of Financing Water and Sanitation: Tools and Approaches. Paris: OECD Publishing. Ofwat. (2005). International comparison of water and sewerage service. Ofwat. Partners for Health Reformplus. (2002). Using NHA to Inform the Policy Process- NHA Global Policy Brief. Bethesda, MD: Abt Associates Inc. SNA 2008. (2009). System of National Accounts 2008. New York: United Nations. Snehalatha, M., & al. (2011). Looking Beyond Capital Costs - Life Cycle Costing for Sustainable Service Delivery -A Study from Andhra Pradesh, India. Hyderabad: WASHCost (India) Project, Center for economics and social studies. Sutton, S. (2005). The sub-Saharan potential for household level water supply improvement. Rural Water Supply Network. The World Bank . (2010). Harnessing National Health Accounts to Strengthen Policymaking – Compendium of Case Studies. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Trémolet. (2012). Small-scale finance for water and sanitation. Stockholm: EU Water Initiative and Share. Trémolet, S., & Binder, D. (2010). Evaluating the effectiveness of public finance for household sanitation in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. 96 Iniciative TrackFin UN-Water GLAAS Trémolet, S., & Rama, M. (2012). Tracking national financial flows into sanitation, hygiene and drinking water. Geneva: WHO. United Nations Statistics Division. (2012). International recommendations for water statistics. New-York: United Nations Publications. United Nations Statistics Division. (2012). System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water. New-York: United Nations Publication. WaterAid. (2012). Hygiene framework. London, UK: WaterAid. WHO. (2012). UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) 2012 report. Geneva: WHO. WHO. (2014). UN-Water GLAAS TrackFin Initiative Tracking financing to sanitation, hygiene and drinking-water at national level. Geneva: WHO. Websites relevantes IBNET: https://www.ib-net.org/ National Health Accounts: http://www.who.int/nha/en/ SEEA-Water: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeaw/ SNIS (Brazil): http://www.snis.gov.br/ UN Statistics Division – International classifications registry: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regct.asp?Lg=1 VFM-WASH: www.vfm-wash.org WASH Cost: http://www.ircwash.org/washcost [ inside back cover ] Para informações adicionais: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/glaas/trackfin/en/ Contato: glaas@who.int 978 924 851 356 5