an independent national forum management water resources · an independent national forum to...

NESC REPORT 28

June 2014

Management of

Water Resources

An independent national forum to address socio-economic issues,

enhance national policy-making and dynamise the democratic process through

consultation, dialogue and consensus-building.

10th Floor, Victoria House, Cnr Barracks & St Louis Street, Port Louis MAURITIUSTel: (230) 213 0772 Fax: (230) 213 0765

E-mail: [email protected]: www.nesc.mu

covnes copy 7/10/14 1:17 PM

i

NESC REPORT 28

June 2014

Management of

Water Resources

water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page i

A brief on the National Economic and Social Council

The NESC Act 2001The National Economic and Social Council (NESC) was established in April 2002 following the enactment of theNESC Act 2001 in the National Assembly of the Republic of Mauritius.

MissionThe Act provides for the establishment of the National Economic and Social Council whose object is to fosterconsensus-building through dialogue among social partners, including civil society. The Council represents a forumfor a wider participation of civil society in the process of decision-making at national level and provides theopportunity to all segments of the society to participate in nation building.

Objects and FunctionsThe objects of the Council are primarily to:(i) promote dialogue as a means to achieving consensus for social integration to keep pace with economic

development; and

(ii) express its opinions and make appropriate recommendations to Government, for the promotion of socialintegration and national development.

The functions of the Council for the pursuit of its objects are to:

(i) undertake studies on socio-economic issues of national importance;

(ii) build consensus through a permanent and sustained social dialogue for a greater participation of civil society in thedemocratic process with the aim of ensuring that social harmony keeps pace with economic development;

(iii) formulate its opinions and make recommendations to Government regarding economic and social policies;

(iv) undertake such studies as it deems fit and give its opinions and recommendations;

(v) examine and express opinions on any proposed legislation; and

(vi) promote industrial relations at large to ensure social harmony.

The Act also provides for regular meetings and consultations between the Council and the President, the PrimeMinister and the Leader of the Opposition.

CommissionsUnder the provisions of the NESC Act, the Council is supported by three Commissions, each of which is chaired bya Commissioner appointed by the Council, consisting of 8 to 12 members. These are:

a. Commission on Economic Affairs;

b. Commission on Infrastructure, Physical Resources, Environment and Sustainable Development; and

c. Commission on Social Affairs and Human Resource Development.

The functions of the Commissions are to: -

(i) undertake such studies and prepare such statements, reports and recommendations as the Council may require;

(ii) recommend to the Council the undertaking of such studies as it considers necessary;

(iii) recommend to the Executive Committee the appointment and constitution of working groups for the purpose ofundertaking the studies and outline the objectives, broad terms of reference and means of functioning of suchworking groups;

(iv) make recommendations to the Executive Committee for the carrying out of any research, including therecruitment of any research assistant or the assignment of any consultancy to undertake any specific study thatmay be necessary; and

(v) advise the Council on any other matter referred to it by the Council.

ii

N a t i o n a l E c o n o m i c a n d S o c i a l C o u n c i l

water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page ii

Composition of the National Economic and Social Council

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Radhakrisna SADIEN, M.S.K

Workers’ organisationsMr Deepak BENYDIN

Mr Toolsyraj BENYDIN

Mr Lall DEWNATH

Mr Amba LUTCHOOMANEN

Mr Radhakrisna SADIEN, M.S.K

BusinessMr Mahmood CHEEROO, G.O.S.K

Mr Pradeep DURSUN

Mr Michel HARDY

Mr Jocelyn KWOK YIN SIONG YEN

Mr Shameer MOHUDDY

Government MinistriesMs Stenny EMILIEN

Mr Yanduth GAONJUR

Mrs Jeanne LAN HING PO

Mr Janaab Mohamadally MOWNAH

Mr Prakash NOWBUT

Mr Swaminathan RAGEN

Civil SocietyMr Daneshwar BABOOA

Mr Serge NG TAT CHUNG, M.S.K.

Mr Jacques Jonathan RAVAT

Mrs Lucheemee RAYAPOULLE

Mr Joyvani ROSE

Mr Rajiv ROY

Mr Nunkeswar RUHEE, M.S.K

Management of Water Resources | NESC Report 28 | 2014 iii

water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page iii

Composition of the Commission on Infrastructure, PhysicalResources, Environment and Sustainable Development

Mr Toolsyraj BENYDIN Commissioner

Mr Daneshwar BABOOA

Mr. Mahmood CHEEROO

Mr. Michel HARDY

Mr Jocelyn KWOK YIN SIONG YEN

Mrs Jeanne LAN HING PO

Mr Mohammad Shameer MOHUDDY

Mr Janaab Mohamadally MOWNAH

Mrs Lutcheemee RAYAPOULLE

NESC Secretariat

Dr Raj DALIAH Secretary-General

Mrs Daisy Rani BRIGEMOHANE Assistant Secretary-General

Mrs Reshma KALUTAY JHURRY Research Executive

Dr Neezla B. KUREEMBOKUS-JUSUB Research Executive

Ms Ashwini MUNISAMY Confidential Secretary

Mr Vikash Baboo SEEBOO Messenger/Driver

Ms Leckrani Gupta QUEDOU Trainee

Ms Deepika MOTAH Trainee

NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

10th Floor, Victoria House

Cnr Barracks & St Louis Streets

Port-Louis

Republic of Mauritius

Tel: (230) 2130772, Fax: (230) 2130765

E-mail: [email protected]

View this report on www.nesc.mu

iv


water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page iv

Contents

Executive Summary 2

Part 1 - Overview of water sector 3

1.1 Introduction 4

1.2 Institutions in the water sector 5

1.3 Overview of water resources 5

1.3.1 Rainfall: Impact of climate change and deforestation 5

1.3.2 Underground water and boreholes 6

1.3.3 Storage dams 7

1.3.4 Desalination 8

1.3.5 Water rights 8

1.4 Overview of water demand and supply 9

1.4.1 Consumption of domestic water 9

1.4.2 Potable water requirements 10

1.4.3 Quality of potable water 11

1.5 Conclusions 11

Part 2 - Observations and recommendations 13

2.1 Introduction 14

2.2 Non-revenue water and its implication on Distribution of water 14

2.2.1 Constituents of non-revenue water 15

2.2.2 Causes of physical losses (water leakages) at CWA 15

2.2.3 Implication of the physical losses 16

2.2.4 Attending to commercial losses 16

2.2.5 The case for cwa to resolutely address non-revenue water 17

2.2.6 Conclusion 17

2.3 Efficient and sustainable use of water 18

2.3.1 Satisfying the growing demand for potable water 18

2.3.2 Towards more efficient use of water 18

2.3.3 Rationale for being more efficient in use of water 19

2.3.4 Managing consumptive demand for water: policies 19

Management of Water Resources | NESC Report 28 | 2014 v

water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page v

2.3.4.1 Public awareness campaign 19

2.3.4.2 Water saving devices 20

2.3.4.3 Rain water harvesting 20

2.3.5 Conclusion to section 21

2.4 The economics of water distribution 21

2.4.1 Tariff structure and tariff increase 21

2.4.2 Costing and pricing of water by CWA 22

2.4.3 Affordability of water charges 23

2.4.4 Disposition to pay the water charges 24

2.4.5 Ability to pay water charges by vulnerable groups 25

2.4.6 CWA protection of vulnerable households 26

2.4.7 CWA cross subsidisation policy 27

2.4.8 Determining the water tariff structure and level 28

2.4.9 Waste water charges 29

2.4.10 Conclusion 29

2.5 Privatisation & private sector participation 30

2.5.1 Introduction 30

2.5.2 Issue of privatisation 30

2.5.3 Alternative to privatisation 30

2.5.4 Management contracts 31

2.5.5 Performance-based contracting 31

2.5.6 Special purpose vehicle 31

2.5.7 Conclusion 32

2.6 General conclusions 32

Acknowledgements 37

References 38

vi


water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page vi

List of Figures, Boxes and Tables

List of FiguresFigures and Tables Page

Figure 1: Utilisation of Rainwater in Mauritius 5

Figure 2: Mean Annual Amount of Rainfall, 2003-2012 6

Figure 3: Water Sales by Tariff of Subscriber 2013 10

List of BoxesBox1: Replacement and Rehabilitation of Defective Old Pipes 15

Box 2: Reducing NRW: Success Cases Abroad 17

Box 3: Water Situation in Rodrigues 34

List of TablesTable 1: Reservoirs and their Storage Capacity 7

Table 2: Proposed Dams in Mauritius 7

Table 3: Non-Revenue Water (Milion m3) 14

Table 4: Water Tariffs for Different User Groups 21

Table 5: Affordability to Pay Water Rates 24

Table 6: Breakdown of Household Expenditure 25

Table 7: Extent of Cross-subsidisation by Non-domestic Consumers 28

Table 8: Tariff for Domestic Households 29

Table 9: List of Participants at the Brainstorming Session of 3rd March 2014 36

Table 10: List of Participants at the Brainstorming Session of 9th April 2014 36

Table 11: List of Meetings and Working Sessions 36

Table 12: List of NESC Reports 41

Management of Water Resources | NESC Report 28 | 2014 1

Abbreviations

CWA – Central Water Authority

ICT – Information and Communication Technologies

NESC – National Economic and Social Council

NRW – Non Revenue Water

NGO – Non Governmental Organisation

MRC – Mauritius Research Council

RWH – Rain Water Harvesting

SPV – Special Purpose Vehicle

WRU – Water Resources UnitWHO – World Health Organisation

water nesc 7/10/14 2:32 PM Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The supply of domestic water to households has been one issue on which several stakeholders have urged theNESC to study. A main concern is that despite plentiful rainfall, households are not being supplied potable wateron a 24 hour -7 day basis. In conducting this study, NESC has had several consultations with the relevanceauthorities, consumer associations, professionals in the water sector and members of the civil society.

In overviewing the water sector, a first note is that at the current level of demand, with the growth of thepopulation, industries and the tourist industry, a do-nothing situation could lead the country to be in a waterscarcity situation in the coming decades.

One option to cater for the increased demand for water is to capture the water which otherwise runs off to thesea. In this context, the Bagatelle Dam is being constructed. A further dam in the South of the island is beingplanned. However, construction of dams, albeit important for the long term, needs heavy investments.

A more current problem being faced by the CWA, the utility responsible for supply of water in the country, is thatits distribution piping networks in the main populated areas are decades and centuries year old, and leaking.The problem is colossal: some 200 million litres of water is lost on a daily basis through the leaky pipes. TheNESC is concerned that at a time the country is professing sustainability through Maurice Ile Durable, thecountry can ill afford to allow wastage of such volume of treated water, which is processed at a cost by CWA. Inthe report, NESC has studied this issue at some length.

An issue, which has attracted attention, is the need to be more efficient in the use of water. At a consumptionrate of 165 litres of water per household per day, the CWA reckons that this rate is very high in comparison toother countries. Rather than the annual ritual of a campaign to save water during the summer, water-scarcityseason, NESC is more in favour of a sustainable rigorous campaign to change the consumption pattern ofhousehold in more efficient use of water.

In the report, the NESC has also examined the tariff system of the CWA. It finds that the current water chargeis well within the means of the average household. However, complication arises when the waste water feewhich is charged at a higher rate than the treated water is added on the water bill. Furthermore, the authoritiesand CWA recognise the right of low income families to have adequate amount of potable water. However, theCWA’s tariff system identifies some 100,000 households, who benefit from the “social tariff.” For its part,Statistics Mauritius identifies only some 34,000 poor households in the country. The NESC considers that CWAis losing significant revenue through a wrong targeting of its vulnerable household policy.

Though there is adequate water presently in the country to satisfy the current demand (except in case ofdroughts), this water is not reaching to households in a satisfactory manner. To address this issue, the heaviestchallenge faced by the CWA is the water which is lost through leaks and the water which it supplies but for whichit does not get the revenue. This is termed as non revenue water. For one reason or another, the issue of nonrevenue water, resulting in heavy cost borne by CWA and in foregone revenue, has not been addressedadequately. This had led to suggestions of privatisation of the CWA. The NESC considers the privatisation oreven management contracts might be a time consuming process because of its controversial issues. The NESCfeels that in the current juncture, the authorities could come up with a package of measures that would includewater saving campaigns, review of tariff structure of the CWA and, above, all invest in a programme toaggressively address non-revenue water.

The NESC here suggests that this programme be managed by a unit set up through the Special PurposeVehicle, to be specifically responsible to develop and implement a non-revenue water programme fromconception to execution.

2




OVERVIEWOF WATERSECTOR

Part 1


OVERVIEW OF WATER SECTOR

1.1 INTRODUCTION

While several consumers decry the inadequate supply of water to households, some 200 million litres of treated

drinking water are lost on a daily basis, mostly through leaky underground pipes. On a yearly basis, this loss

represents about four times the capacity of Mare aux Vacoas, the largest reservoir of the country. This colossal

and extravagant waste of such a valuable resource has been going on for years now.

The supply of water is the main context on which the report is set. At the Annual Summit of December 2013,

stakeholders and members of the civil society present urged the National Economic and Social Council (NESC)

to study the problems as to why households are not being supplied with potable water on a 24 hour-7 day basis,

despite plentiful rainfall.

In undertaking this study, NESC had organised two brainstorming sessions with stakeholders. The stakeholders

include NGOs, Consumer Associations, Trade Unions in the water sector, Officials of the Ministry of Energy and

Public Utilities, and Officials of the various public and private institutions in the water sector. In addition, there

was extensive working sessions with the management of the Central Water Authority (CWA). The NESC also

consulted households of the low-income group as well as households in water scarcity regions both in Mauritius

and in Rodrigues on their water plights.

The area of water resources is vast, from firstly sourcing water to storage, treatment and quality control. And

secondly, from supply and distribution to households and various economic sectors, amongst others. The NESC

has decided to focus this study on the management of water resources with particular emphasis on the supply

and distribution of potable water to households and its affordability. In brief, this study centres around four areas

that the NESC considers pertinent: the economics of the supply of water, the need for a strategy of sustainable

use of water, the vexed issue of Non-Revenue-Water (that is, water produced by the CWA for which it receives

no revenue) and the issue of privatisation of the CWA.

The structure of the report is as follows:

• Part 1 offers an overview of the water sector in the country.

• Part 2 looks at four issues related to the supply and distribution of potable water that are of direct and

indirect concern to households.

• The irksome issue of the colossal waste of treated water under the Non-Revenue-Water umbrella.

• The need for sustainable water use in the face of growing demand of potable water.

• The economics of the water supply, the costing, the tariff structure and the affordability of water and the

subsidisation issue.

• The issue of privatisation of the CWA and the participation of the private sector

All along the report, the NESC submits its observations and recommendations.

4



1.2 INSTITUTIONS IN THE WATER SECTOR

The apex body for the management of water resources in the country is the Ministry of Energy and Public

Utilities. The Ministry is responsible for policy making. There are four bodies responsible for harnessing, treating

and distribution of water:

• The Water Resources Unit is responsible for the assessment, development and conservation of water resources.

• The Central Water Authority is responsible mainly for the distribution of potable water.

• The Waste Water Management Authority is responsible for managing waste water.

• The Irrigation Authority, falling under the Ministry of Agro Industry and Natural Resources, is responsible for

irrigation purposes.

The authorities are considering having the last three water institutions integrated into a single water governing

body. It is contended that, with three bodies responsible for the sector of commercialisation of water, the

fragmented approach that ensues brings in complexities to and inefficiencies in water management.

1.3 OVERVIEW OF WATER RESOURCES

1.3.1 RAINFALL: IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND DEFORESTATION

Rain constitutes the main source of freshwater in the country. The country has an average annual

rainfall of about 2000 millimetres (69). The precipitation is strongly influenced by the topography of the

land. The central plateau receives the most rain with an average annual precipitation of about 4000 mm,

followed by the east coast (1300 mm) and the west coast (62).

This precipitation corresponds to an annual volume of freshwater of about 3700 million m3 (47).Of this

volume, about a third evaporates, a situation over which there is little control. The 70 percent volume

that is left is the potential that constitutes the water resources that are available for use. At present, of

this volume, half runs off to the sea. With the increasing conversion of natural vegetation to build up

areas and concrete, asphalt and such surfaces, there is a tendency towards more surface run-offs.

The utilisation of rainwater in the country is depicted in the diagram below.

Figure 1: Utilisation of Rainwater in Mauritius

Source: Mauritius Research Council and Water Resources Unit



Two tendencies regarding the rainfall over the island have been noted. Firstly, rainfall data examined tends to

show a general decreasing trend (69).

Figure 2: Mean Annual Amount of Rainfall, 2003-2012

Source: Statistics Mauritius, 2014

Secondly, it is reported that there is a changing rainfall pattern and intensity. This may be due to climate

related root causes as well as deforestation in the catchment area. The impact is that there is a shift in

the water catchment and recharge areas. It has further been stated that, of late, the precipitations have

occurred mostly in the Northern Plains and coastal regions rather than in the Central Plateau, including

Mare aux Vacoas, the main water catchment area in the country.

1.3.2 UNDERGROUND WATER AND BOREHOLES

Some 50% of water supply in the country is underground water which is extracted from aquifers through

boreholes. The rest is derived from surface sources- reservoirs (30%) and river off-take (20%)(9). There

are at present some 406 boreholes and an average of four to five new boreholes sites are being

developed every year. Private boreholes licences are delivered for industrial and agricultural purposes.

Currently, water is being harnessed through some 114 boreholes for domestic water supply,

136 boreholes for industrial use and 156 for irrigation, totalling 406 boreholes. A single borehole may

yield about 8000 m3 per day; the depth may go as high as 172 m (62).

The underground water is stored naturally in aquifers. Underground water coming from aquifers is not

limitless. Such aquifers are sensitive to over exploitations particularly during drought season. The yield

from boreholes and from tapping the aquifers goes down by about a fifth during the dry season. The

water table level goes drastically down. Rainfall is, therefore, vital to replenish the aquifers. As well, it

is reported that exploiting boreholes to the limit in coastal areas causes sea water to penetrate inside

the boreholes. A report by the Africa Economic Outlook1 considers that, at the current rate of demand,

Mauritius is reaching its potential in terms of underground water resources exploitation.

6



1.3.3 STORAGE DAMS

The topography of the country is such that the surface water runs off to the sea. Dams have been

constructed to capture and store the surface water. Table 1 below shows the capacity of reservoirs in

the country.

Table 1: Reservoirs and their Storage Capacity

Reservoirs Gross Capacity Mm3

Mare aux Vacoas 25.89

Midlands 25.50

Mare Longue 6.2

La Ferme 11.52

Piton du Milieu 2.99

La Nicoliere 5.26

Tamarind Falls 2.3

Eau Bleue 6.2

Diamamouve 4.4

Dagotiere 0.6

Valetta 2.0

Total Storage Capacity 92.86

Bagatelle (In construction) 14.2

Source: Water Resources Unit

With regards to the development of water up to the year 2040, the following dams have been identified

for construction:

Table 2: Proposed Dams in Mauritius

Storage Dams Regions to be served

Chamarel Dam South District Water Supply System

Calebasses Dam North District Water Supply System

Mon Vallon Dam Lower Mare Aux Vacoas & Port Louis

Source: Water Resources Unit

The Bagatelle Dam currently under construction will supply water to the regions of Port-Louis, Lower

Plaines Wilhems and parts of Black River. Situated near Cote-D’or village, the dam will have a capacity

of 14.2 million m3 of water with an annual yield of 25 million m3. The initial cost of the dam was

Rs 3.4 billion. However, due to some significant soil problems, the construction of the dam has suffered

a delay, a problem likely to significantly push up its cost of construction. To the dam structure, a

treatment plant would be necessary as well to convert the water stored into potable water. The

treatment plant along with piping system at the dam is estimated by the CWA to cost 1.7 billion rupees.



1.3.4 DESALINATION

Desalination refers to the process of removing salt from sea water or brackish water so as to obtain

fresh water. Most plants use the seawater reverse osmosis desalination system. It has often been

proposed as a solution to the water problem in the country. Desalination provides for a regular supply

of water as it is not influenced by seasonal changes.

It however, presents a number of challenges.

Firstly, it is highly onerous both in terms of capital outlay requirement and in terms of operating cost.

The dimensions and perspectives are different, depending on whether the plant is for small scale

production or for large scale production. The features below give a perspective of the costs involved.

• For a large scale production: A desalination plant set up in Singapore was opened in 2005 at a cost

of 200 million Singapore dollars (about 5 billion Mauritius rupees). The plant was for a daily capacity

of 135,000 m3. This volume is equivalent to roughly a third of the total demand for Mauritius. The cost

of the desalinated water was at about 0.78 Singapore dollar per m3 in 2005 (about Rs 20 per m3).

• For small scale production: A study by the Mauritius Research Council places the capital cost at about

Rs 25m for a small plant producing about 600 m3 daily. Operating cost is also high as it uses a lot of

energy. The cost of water depends on whether the plant is also geared towards the production of

energy. MRC estimated the cost of producing a meter cube of water in 2012 between Rs 29 to Rs 58

per m3. This compares with the 2012 CWA cost of production of its water at Rs 12 per m3.

Secondly, the seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant has its downside as it uses a vast amount

of electricity, thus hiking up the cost of the water produced. The operation of desalination plants is also

quite sophisticated, requiring high standard materials and equipment, regular maintenance, trained

professionals and safe working environments.

A third concern is the environment effects as such plants may not be ecologically friendly. The plants

produce large quantities of brine containing high level of salt and other minerals. The discharge of the

concentrated brine into the ocean water is to the detriment of marine ecosystems.

Desalination plants have been set up on a small scale in certain hotels and in Rodrigues. NESC feels

that desalination can only be regarded for small scale water supply and may not be a substitute but a

supplement to other more economical long term water supply strategies.

1.3.5 WATER RIGHTS

The issue of water rights has come prominently to the surface during the severe drought period of 2011.

When looking for alternative sources of water, water flows along canals and rivers represent a potential

source, but many of these are on private lands

Some 360 users of water, constituting mostly of planters and sugar estates, use at no cost, this water

flowing from rivers, canals and streams that pass by or over the private lands. The users claim that a

8



century old “Rivers and Canals Act of 1863” grants them the right to use this water freely. By virtue of

this Act, the legal authorities then granted to the users the right to use a percentage of such water

flowing, measured in meter cube per second. The water that flows in most rivers is gauged and

recorded by the Water Resources Unit through its hydrology unit and are thus available. Hence, the

quantum of water flowing is known.

There are some issues in relation to the water rights that emerge.

1. The very fact that there is a water right implicitly means that the water is owned by the state and is

in the public domain even though the river water may be passing through a private land.

2. Historically, since the last century, it has been the legal authorities which deliver the right to the

users. It would be more appropriate in modern times that such rights be delivered by a government

agency, the legal authorities not being perceived as awarding and arbitrating bodies.

3. Rights may have the connotation of permanency. Again, in modern times, it would be more

appropriate to deliver licenses or permits which have time limits.

4. Several estates, to which the rights had been given, are setting up new legal entities or sub

companies. Can the whole or part of the right be transferred?

5. The free use of water following the Act two centuries ago is implicit that it would be for irrigation and

agricultural use only. However, the free use of water through the water rights is reported to being

extended to commercial uses as well as golf courses, IRS or other estate development.

6. Government or any of its agencies is not receiving any money for the use of the water, despite part

of this water being used for commercial purposes as mentioned above. Notwithstanding the water

rights, should such water be continued to be provided free of charge?

7. It is as well argued that, in exercising the rights, the users are not causing any prejudice to anyone,

as the water being collected would be lost to the sea anyway. Moreover, if water which would

otherwise be lost to the sea is being used abundantly, then there are direct savings from the national

water supply grid.

This water rights issue is yet to be addressed, though Government has signalled that the issue is

receiving due attention.

1.4 OVERVIEW OF WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLY

1.4.1 CONSUMPTION OF DOMESTIC WATER

In 2013, the average consumption of domestic water per person in the country was 165 litres(9). As per

the CWA, the local consumption is much more than in other parts of the world. In Singapore, for



example, the per capita water use is 153 litres and, in European countries, it ranges between 120 and

150 litres. It is reported that, according to the United Nations, 20-50 litres of water suffice for each

person for the basic needs for drinking, cooking and washing.

The rather high consumption of drinking water in the country is generally explained by the fact that water

is also being used for non-drinking purposes like vehicle/floor/clothes washing, garden watering, toilet

flushing, ponds, etc.

Almost the entire population of the country has access to piped potable water. The Population Census

indicates that 98.7% of the population has access to piped potable water within their premises, with

85.5% having such water inside their house (62).

Whilst the domestic per capita usage stands at 165 litres per day, the national per capita consumption,

including industry, etc is 221 litres per day. Consumption of water increases by an average of 2.5% each

year (27).

The Chart below indicates the use of water by the different groups of subscribers of CWA.

Figure 3: Water Sales by Tariff of Subscriber 2013

Source: Statistics Mauritius, 2013

1.4.2 POTABLE WATER REQUIREMENTS

The potable water produced by the CWA does not all reach the domestic consumers. A substantial

amount is lost along the distribution networks due to leaky pipes. Therefore, the CWA must cater for

more potable water to be able to satisfy the actual demand of consumers.

Thus, the domestic water requirement is the water demand plus all the uncounted loss of water. The

current supply of domestic water by the CWA to satisfy the demand is about 600,000 m3 per day (9).

10



Requirements for water will rise with the increase in population, growing tourism industry, economic

growth and development.

A projection has been made for potable water requirement in 2040. It projects a per capita consumption

of 250 litres per day in year 2040, when the population is expected to increase to 1.6 million (21).

According to the United Nations Development Programme Human Development Report, the country is

already facing a water-stress situation and would suffer from water scarcity by 2020 (1).

1.4.3 QUALITY OF POTABLE WATER

CWA contends that the domestic water supply in the country is generally safe for consumption. Surface

raw water is treated at six treatment plants. Underground water is generally clean. It does not undergo

elaborate filtering and is only chlorinated before being introduced in the distribution network.

CWA monitors, through its laboratories, the quality of the treated water being supplied to ensure that it

complies with the World Health Organisation (WHO) standard specifications for drinking water.

However, despite the fact that the water is treated to drinking standards and is so certified before being

injected in the distribution system, the quality of the water may be affected on its way to the consumers.

Firstly, very often during rainy season, the water distributed is affected by the filtration systems

upstream getting overwhelmed. Secondly, and more importantly, the distribution network is outdated

and leaky in many places. There is a possibility that polluted water seeps in the cracked pipes during

period of cuts when no water flows in the pipes or when the water pressure is low.

1.5 CONCLUSIONSThis Section has briefly reviewed the water sector in the country. It sets the background for the study of the

supply and distribution of water on which the report is focussed.



12


Management of

Water Resources


OBSERVATIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS

Part 2



OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

According to the CWA, a household in Mauritius consumes at least 165 litres of potable water per day (9). CWA

contends that this rate is among the highest in the world and that such extravagance stems from the low tariff

of water in the country, which itself does not encourage parsimonious use of water.

CWA itself does not seem to be operating efficiently in terms of supply of water to the population. From the

600,000 m3 of water it supplies daily, some 200,000 m3 is lost through leakages in the pipes. To place this in

perspective, this amounts to a colossal figure of 200 million litres of water loss per day.

In this part of the report, NESC first examines the issue of treated water produced and supplied by CWA and for

which it does not receive revenues. Next, NESC comes out strongly on the issue of sustainable use of water.

This is not only in the context of Maurice Ile Durable but also to avert the country from being in a water stress

and water scarcity situation. Thirdly, NESC studies the issue of costing of water, the tariff structure, and CWA’s

policy towards the vulnerable households. Lastly, NESC examines the vexed issue of privatisation of the CWA

and the engagement of the private sector in the water sector.

2.2 NON-REVENUE WATER AND ITS IMPLICATION ONDISTRIBUTION OF WATER

CWA deploys several resources and incurs a significant cost to transform raw water into drinking water. It then

distributes this treated water to households and its other consumers through a distributed piping system.

However, a disquieting issue is that CWA does not receive revenues for more than half of the treated water it

produces and supplies. The treated water that is lost, wasted or stolen or used, for which CWA does not receive

the revenue, is termed as Non-Revenue Water. Non-Revenue Water (NRW) is thus the difference between the

amount of water put into the distribution system and the amount of water billed to consumers.

For the year 2013, CWA produced 217 million m3 of drinking water of which it received revenues for only

96 million m3 (70). This purports that it did not receive revenue from 120 million m3 of the water. Thus, the Non-

Revenue-Water, NRW is calculated to be about 55%.

The increasing percentage of NRW over the years as indicated in the Table below is unsettling to NESC.

Table 3: Non-Revenue Water (Million m3)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009/2010

Treated Water Produced 174.4 175.8 182.45 183.4 193.62 196.6 202 208.94 223.4

Treated Water Consumed

/Sold 85.46 86.14 89.86 89.98 93.64 94.3 98.75 95.77 99.47

Non-Revenue Water 88.94 89.66 92.59 93.42 99.98 102.3 103.25 113.17 123.93

Non-Revenue Water as % of Water Produced 50.9 51 50.7 50.9 51.6 52 51.1 54.2 55.4

Source: Master Plan for Development of the Water Resources in Mauritius; 2012, V 1, p.40

14



2.2.1 CONSTITUENTS OF NON-REVENUE WATER

NRW is basically made up of three components:

• Physical losses which comprise physical loss of water from all parts of the system due to bursts

and leaks.

• Commercial losses caused mainly by defective meters, meters under-registering the used water,

non-reading of metres and theft of water in various forms.

• Unbilled authorised consumption which includes mainly water used for fire-fighting and for CWA’s

own use (e.g. water tankers).

According to the CWA, an average water loss is as follows:

Physical losses: 35-40 %

Commercial losses: 10-15%

2.2.2 CAUSES OF PHYSICAL LOSSES (WATER LEAKAGES) AT CWA

A main cause of the water leakages is the state of the piping distribution network in the island. In some

regions the pipes date back to more than 100 years. It has been mentioned in the Legislative Assembly that

a particular concern is that there are several hundreds of kilometres of pipes that are made of asbestos,

cement, cast iron and steel pipes that have long outlived their economic and technical life span.

Box 1: Replacement and Rehabilitation of Defective Old Pipes

Since the 1990s, CWA has a programme to replace and rehabilitate the defective pipes, but actions have

been timid. In the early 2000s, the NRW was 47%. In the CWA Corporate Plan 2004-2008, it was

claimed that “all factors contributing to non-revenue-water have been identified”(21). The Plan resolutely

aimed to reduce NRW to 25% and stressed that this would be done through renewal of distribution

network, renewal of nonworking domestic meters and implementing actions for leakage reduction. The

capital expenditure then was in the order of Rs 2 billion of which Rs 1 billion would have come from a

loan from the European Investment Bank. The target set for 2008 came and went. The plan was barely

implemented. During the period 2010- 2013, NRW has reached 55%.

1570 km of pipes had been identified in the early 2000s to be replaced. For the period 2004-2012,

only 415 km has been addressed (26%). A programme has now been set in place to replace the

supply pipelines in the worst affected areas in Upper and Lower Mare aux Vacoas. One billion rupees

is being invested in the programme which would also include tracking down of illegal connections.

CWA hopes to bring the percentage of pipes replaced from the 26% in 2012 to a cumulative 40% by

2014. and to reach 54% of the pipes by 2016.

As at 2013 there are 1155 km of pipes to be replaced. CWA reckons it costs Rs 10 million to replace

and rehabilitate one kilometre of pipe. The investment required is therefore more than 10 billion

rupees to replace the pipes. CWA states that a high percentage of the cost of replacing the pipes

goes into repairing the roads after the pipes are laid down following stringent conditions spelt out by

the authorities responsible for roads.

Source: CWA, 2014



The authorities are investing 1 billion rupees for 2014-15 to replace defective pipes. This investment,

albeit important, is still a far cry from the Rs 10 billion or so investment required to replace the inefficient

pipes. In the meantime, laid down pipes would need to be rehabilitated or continued to be maintained,

which would require further investment. It is considered that investment in replacing the pipes is also

somewhat being affected by the huge investment required in the investment in new water resources

projects, notably, the construction of the Bagatelle dam. NESC is sceptical of this approach as the water

from the Bagatelle dam meant as well for the Port Louis region will eventually be pumped in the leaking

piping networks of Port Louis and the vicious cycle would continue on.

2.2.3 IMPLICATION OF THE PHYSICAL LOSSES

At present, CWA produces some 600,000 m3 of treated water every day. By CWA’s own reckoning,

some 200,000 m3 of the water is lost through leaking pipes, mostly underground.

At a time when the country is professing efficiency and sustainability through the Maurice Ile Durable

concept, the country can ill afford to let some 200,000 m3 of water be wasted in the wilderness every

day. NESC Council is appalled .

A similar volume of water is lost even during periods of droughts. This is clearly a cause for dismay. At

such time of droughts, the authorities then make a national call for all citizens to be prudent in water

use, whilst the authorities themselves are oblivious to this huge wastage of water.

CWA processes raw water into treated water and distributes into the networks at a year 2012 cost of

Rs 12 per m3 (48). With 200,000 m3 of the treated water lost through the leaking pipes, this represents a

cost of Rs 2.4 million. And, this cost is on a daily basis. On an annual basis, this denotes an incurred

cost of some Rs 875 million, for which no revenue is obtained. Such is the cost for the physical losses

under NRW.

2.2.4 ATTENDING TO COMMERCIAL LOSSES

The CWA and the relevant authorities would argue that, with regard to the physical losses, it would

require heavy financial investment to replace the pipes. However, this argument is not applicable to that

other element of NRW losses relating to commercial losses. These commercial losses refer to some

100,000 m3 of treated potable water which are daily either stolen or not paid for and for which CWA does

not receive any revenue. These relate to unauthorised consumption, theft of water in various forms,

illegal connections, data-handling errors and all types of inaccuracies associated with the meters and

the metering system.

At an average revenue base of Rs 13 per m3 (48), the 100,000 m3 of water represents potential revenue

forgone of about Rs 1.3 million per day or some Rs 475 million annually. Granted that that this may be

a simplistic calculation, but it goes to show the enormous potential in terms of revenue that could accrue

to the CWA if the commercial losses were to be addressed. Several stakeholders consulted by the

NESC are of the view that, measures leading to the reduction of commercial losses are implementable

and achievable, and rue the CWA management for its lack of determination in this aspect.

16



NESC shares this view. This is particularly so as the reduction of commercial losses have a short

payback time in that any action taken brings immediate results in increased volume of water that is billed

and consequently instant increase in revenues.

2.2.5 THE CASE FOR CWA TO RESOLUTELY ADDRESS NON-REVENUE WATER

NESC has shown that NRW is having serious consequences. Not only do the physical losses represent

some 200 million litres of treated water lost per day but this is at an annual incurred cost of Rs. 875

million for the CWA. Equally, the commercial losses represent a revenue- forgone figure of some Rs.

475 million annually. Thus as a result of the NRW, CWA is incurring, year in year out, massive costs on

the one hand and, on the other, are foregoing huge revenue potentials. Both the cost incurred and the

revenue forgone are colossal figures.

NESC believes that this is a matter that neither the country nor CWA can afford to disregard. Water loss

management, leak detection and pipe replacement have not received the priority consideration they

should have had. NESC considers that addressing this issue would not only improve household water

coverage, but would also generate increased revenue for the CWA. It could also place less pressure on

the need for immediate investing in new production facilities and reservoirs and dams.

NESC feels that the country cannot afford such extravagant waste. NESC considers that the case for

resolutely addressing the NRW issue at CWA is compelling. Thus, NESC recommends a determined

and tenacious programme to address the NRW issue at CWA.

Box 2: REDUCING NRW - SUCCESS CASES ABROAD

Research at NESC has shown several cases of success stories abroad. Singapore, for example, a

country whose efficacy in dealing with national issues is much referred to, has reduced its NRW to 5%.

Globally NRW in developed countries is much lower than in developing countries. This could be

attributed to the use of technology and resources, access to funding and, above all, autonomy in

managerial actions of the water utilities. Germany and UK have low NRW at 7% and 5% respectively.

A study of NRW in several countries in 2006 has shown that, on average, the level of NRW is 15%

in developed countries and about 35% in developing countries (67).

Some big cities in developing countries have made a radical transformation in reducing their NRW. The

city of Phnom Penh in Cambodia has reduced its NRW level from 72% to 6%. Penang in Malaysia has

managed to reduce its NRW from 24% to 17%. Hai Phong in Vietnam has brought its NRW from 70%

to 10%. The city of Hubli-Dharwad in Karnataka, in India brought in a reduction in NRW from 50% to

7%. In Jamshedpur in India, the city managed a reduction in NRW from 36% to 10%

In almost all cases, with fewer leakages, these cities have been able to reduce their volume of

treated water produced and yet obtain more revenues. Furthermore, they have been able to increase

the hours of supply with almost all providing 24h water supply.

Several studies have established the causes of high NRW in developing countries. These causes

which are quite typical could also, in many ways, mirror the situation in Mauritius as well:



• Operating a distribution network with outdated infrastructure.

• Poor data management and record system

• Inadequate skills and technology

• Unsuitable tariff structure or revenue collection policy

• Poor operation and maintenance policy

• Weak technical and managerial capabilities

Besides these causes, other reasons stand out for the weak performance at tackling NRW issues:

• Chronic underfunding

• Absence of or insufficient operational autonomy of the water utility

• Developing new water resources receive priority over addressing NRW

• Absence of strong political will

Source: (Shah & Gottipati, 2011).

2.2.6 CONCLUSION

NESC finds the reasons for reducing NRW highly compelling and finds it testing to comprehend the

limited action of the authorities. NESC places this as a lack of determination on the part of the

authorities which may not fully appreciate the potential benefits of taking actions. NESC further believes

that addressing NRW should be an option to be aggressively considered along with expanding the

water supply through water projects. The expansion of water supply sources without addressing the

losses of water can only lead to a vicious cycle of waste and inefficiency.

2.3 EFFICIENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF WATER

2.3.1 SATISFYING THE GROWING DEMAND FOR POTABLE WATER

Demand for water is increasing by some 2.5% per year. It is further projected that daily per capita

consumption would increase from 165 litres to 250 litres by the year 2040.

As of now, the policy in the country with regard to potable water has been more bent towards “supply–side”

responses. The authorities have been trying to keep up with, and ahead of, the increasing demand for

potable water by developing new water projects. More bore holes have been searched for and developed;

soon after the Midlands dam has been built, it has been followed by the Bagatelle dam under construction.

There are plans of developing the Riviere des Anguilles (South) dam in the near future.

2.3.2 TOWARDS MORE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER

The NESC has pondered on this issue and feels that this unbridled search for new resources to satisfy

growing demand for water is not balanced with a strategy towards more efficient use of water. NESC

feels that rigidly managing the demand for water can lead to a postponement or even avoidance of the

need to develop new resources and building of dams which are very demanding in terms of financial

resources. This would also thus imply a more engaging policy towards managing water demand that

would allow more efficient use of water that is already available.

During the NESC consultations, several stakeholders concede that Mauritians in general have

developed a habit of profligate use of water. And this, even during periods of water scarcity, notably as

a result of droughts which have been recurrent and quite severe of late.

18



2.3.3 RATIONALE FOR BEING MORE EFFICIENT IN USE OF WATER

NESC considers that there are several good reasons as to why the population should be more efficient

in the use of water:

1. The average consumption of potable water at 165 litres per person per day in 2013 is already

reckoned by CWA to be one of the highest in the world(48). Now, with population growth, changing

lifestyles and the development in the country, notably in hotels/tourist industry, the total consumption

of water will increase.

2. The authorities must encourage a culture change for water conservation and a rational use of water

by the inhabitants. CWA argues that the tariff is so low that it does not stop heedless and wasteful

use of water(48). Generally at a low tariff level, water consumption becomes largely inelastic, removing

the incentive to use water wisely.

3. Climate change may be having possible effects. The implications are not clear yet but it may seem

to amplify the uncertainty in security of supply of water.

4. Water demand management and water conservation will inevitably cascade down other benefits,

notably social and particularly environmental ones.

NESC feels that the authorities should initiate policies, programmes and projects to maximise efficient

use of water and minimise wastage. Thus, NESC recommends that the authorities should move from a

purely supply- orientated approach to one of both supply and managing consumptive demand for water.

2.3.4 MANAGING CONSUMPTIVE DEMAND FOR WATER: POLICIES

As of now, there are no coherent policies towards water conservation, let alone for managing the

efficient use of water. Some isolated measures are announced during crisis situations involving water

scarcity. These are quickly forgotten once water becomes available through regular rainfall.

NESC feels that there should be sustainable policies in this area for the reasons given above. As a start,

the NESC recommends that, in the short term, managing the water consumption could be more

appropriately focussed on policies for more effective use of current water supply.

There are several initiatives that could be taken in this area. However, for the real changes to occur,

strong and proactive support from the authorities is needed.

2.3.4.1 PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN

At the laying of the first stone of the Bagatelle Dam in March 2012, the Prime Minister announced,

amongst other things, the undertaking of a vigorous campaign to save water. Such campaigns are

generally undertaken during periods when water is in short supply. People tend not to recollect such

campaigns as they did not strike the mind of the population.

A recurrent feature is that such campaigns are ceased after a drought or water scarcity period. Still then,

the population is confused as to what should be done and what should not be done in a water scarcity



situation. NESC feels that the local population is aware only of the basics of water conservation and that

this is not enough to bring about a paradigm shift towards changing consumption pattern and consumer

behaviour.

A rather modest campaign as part of a civic duty of the citizen to conserve water would not serve the

purpose sought. Rather, NESC recommends that public awareness campaign should be integrated into

the Maurice Île Durable programme. A robust and sustainable national public awareness and

sensitisation campaign in water conservation would significantly reduce water consumption and bring

about real water saving. The campaign should be able to stimulate interest concerning the need to

efficiently use water. The reduction in per capita use of water and the saving should be tangible and

eventually quantified.

NESC further recommends this campaign to incorporate a special drive towards children. The teaching

of water conservation to children creates a sense of “caring for things of nature” among children. It has

the additional value that parents at home are as well indirectly taught through their children.

2.3.4.2 WATER SAVING DEVICES

The campaign to use water wisely can also be accompanied by awareness among the population of the

use of water saving devices.

A faucet aerator, for example, is a simple screw in device easily fixed to kitchen taps. While a typical

kitchen faucet tap uses 11 to 15 litres of water per minute, the faucet aerator reduces this volume to

some 6 litres per minute. Several countries have used the faucet aerator in their campaign for water

conservation. Notably, Barbados has distributed 30,000 aerators freely. Israel has ensured that some

1.2 million households are fitted with such aerators. Saudi Arabia which has distributed 6 million such

kits free of charge to households and private buildings has experienced a 30% reduction in household

water consumption(2). In Singapore, it is an obligation to install such low use taps(76). In Mauritius, the

Maurice Ile Durable Fund has started a campaign for the use of such devices.

Other saving devices that have been introduced in some countries to save water include low-flush

toilets and urinals (an obligation in Singapore), low-flow taps and water-saving showerheads.

NESC recommends a vigorous awareness campaign for the use of such devices. NESC equally

recommends that the Maurice Ile Durable Fund campaign for the use of low-flow water saving devices

be given a more vigorous boost.

2.3.4.3 RAIN WATER HARVESTING

A lot of water usage at household level in the country does not need treated water. Such activities like

washing the floor or the car, watering the lawn and the garden can be done through the use of rain

water. But this water needs to be collected. Hence, rain water harvesting (RWH) is a term used for a

system put in place to collect rain water for later use.

In Rodrigues, there is quite abundant use of rain water harvesting though the system used is very basic.

20



Blessed with plentiful rain, it looks like an oddity that the general household in Mauritius lets the rain

water flow away. It instead uses the treated water of CWA for such non-drinking purposes. In Singapore,

they have gone to extremes in rain water harvesting. Rain water is collected wherever it can be - streets,

bridges, tall buildings etc. and taken by drains to reservoirs where the water is treated for domestic use.

NESC recommends that it is high time that the authorities offer incentives for the promotion of RWH.

Equally, NESC recommends that appropriate legislation be introduced to require selective new

buildings to accommodate a well-structured system to collect rain water through drains as well.

2.3.5 CONCLUSION TO SECTION

The per capita use of potable water is quite high in the country in comparison to other countries. Demand for

water is set to increase in the near future. NESC considers that there is a very strong rationale for the country

to be more efficient in its water use and recommends vigorous actions in this direction.

2.4 THE ECONOMICS OF WATER DISTRIBUTION

2.4.1 Tariff Structure and Tariff Increase

CWA has a tariff structure based on volume of water used and one that differentiates between different

user groups. Each water user group has a different tariff applicable. Hotels, integrated resort

development, commercial complexes fall in the business class. The table below indicates the main

users groups and the applicable tariff as currently in force.

Table 4: Water Tariffs for Different User Groups

Clients Minimum Charge Additional m3

Domestic Rs 45 Rs 6 (for first 10 m3)

Rs 8 (for next 10 m3)


Rs 32 (additional m3)

Business Consumers Rs 1122 (for first 33 m3) Rs 34

Public Sector Agency Consumers Rs 391 (for first 17 m3) Rs 23

Industrial Consumers Rs 450 (for first 25 m3) Rs 18

Agricultural Consumers Rs 220 (for first 20 m3) Rs 11

Commercial Consumers Rs 391 (for first 17 m3) Rs 23

Charitable or Religious Institutions Rs 60 (for first 10 m3) Rs 8 (for next 10 m3)


Rs 32 (additional m3)

Source: Central Water Authority



The CWA has since last year, in the context of its Strategic Plan 2012-2015, put in a request for tariff

increase with the authorities. As per the regulations, tariffs are approved by the Government. During the

consultations, CWA has put in arguments to support the increase in tariffs:

1. The tariff increase in 2012 came after ten years, the previous tariff increase having been in 2002.

The increase was not enough to absorb the cumulative cost increases.

2. Soon after the increase in 2012, CWA has had to face an increase in labour cost in the wake of the

PRB Report in 2013.

3. Input costs are also on the increase, particularly with regards to fuel cost, CWA’s treatment plants

being energy-intensive.

4. The CWA used to rely heavily on Government grants for its investment programmes. This is no

longer the case, as all investment funds from Government now come in the form of loans. These

need to be serviced and paid for.

5. Government is not able to provide for all the investment fund requirements of the CWA. Caught up

with a lack of investment funds, CWA is having recourse to multilateral development finance

institutions such as the African Development Bank, which also offer attractive rates of interest.

However, these institutions are imposing stringent conditions, notably in terms of reforms, of

profitability and maintenance of minimum operating cash flows.

As a consequence and also with a view to catching up with cost increases as well as to generate

sufficient revenues to provide for maintenance and investment requirements, CWA is in the expectation

of the approval of a tariff revision since 2013.

However, during the consultation process at the NESC, several stakeholders and, in particular, the

Consumer Associations, adamantly and strongly oppose such an increase and chastise CWA and the

authorities for poor management of the water sector. In particular, the Consumer Associations

underscored the fact that there is a lot of wastage of water for which CWA is not receiving revenue.

According to these associations, the water leakage problems are not being properly addressed. Had it

been so, it would have brought in revenue at the CWA and thus offset the requirement for tariff increase

sought in by CWA.

NESC feels that a tariff increase if granted would only provide a short time respite to the CWA, just as

the 2012 tariff increase did. NESC firmly considers that the fundamental issues in the matter of storage,

distribution, pricing of water and managerial issues need to be given a hard look. Firm decisions should

be taken for the long term viability of the water sector in the country and for the population being

afforded a quality water service on a 24/7 basis.

2.4.2 COSTING AND PRICING OF WATER BY CWA

There is a pervasive socio-cultural perception that water is God-given and is therefore free and that it

may be considered morally wrong to charge for water. There is also a view that water is not a privilege

but a right, a human right to adequate amounts of clean water for personal use.

22



Water may be available freely from the sky. However, this view of God-given water being free, ignores

the fact that, before reaching any housing unit, the water needs to collected, stored, filtered, treated,

and then distributed, all through a costly system of dams, reservoirs, processing plants and pipes. Even

water from boreholes involves drilling activities and pipeline constructions. Thus, the provision of

drinking water involves resource, operation and energy costs that have to be covered by someone.

Hence, the argument that water needs to be priced, albeit at an affordable rate.

The cost of provision of potable water bears several elements. In general, the cost of supply of water

generally quoted only refers to the cost of producing and distributing the water by the CWA. It makes

abstraction of the heavy costs to search for water, build dams and reservoirs, all generally considered

as sunk costs. This raw water is obtainable freely by the CWA.

As per the CWA, the cost of producing one m3 of water was Rs 12 in 2012. CWA was broadly selling

this water at Rs 13 per m3 (48). At a profit margin of only Rs 1 per m3, CWA asserts that this becomes

broadly unsustainable, as the revenue generated barely covers operations and maintenance costs. This

also leaves the institution with too little money for investment, which in this sector is significantly high.

NESC has considered this issue of costing raised by CWA during consultations. It is noted that many

water utilities around the world falter because they are unable to cover their full cost. It is true that

experiences and studies (33) have shown that water institutions around the world that have turned out to

be successful, invariably all charge at full cost basis. The World Bank invites reforms in this sector to

be accompanied by measures that encourage charges be based on the basis of full cost recovery.

NESC considers that, as the CWA is already charging about Rs 13 for a meter cube of water which is

costing Rs 12 to produce, this important element of full cost recovery for proper functioning of a water

utility has already been accepted by the authorities in the country. Acquiring this principle of full cost

recovery is not given to several water utilities around the world. If the principle of full cost recovery is

already embedded at the CWA, and notwithstanding this, CWA is finding itself difficult to make ends

meet; the problem could then lie elsewhere as would be discussed below in this report.

Accepting the principle of full cost recovery is one thing and accepting the cost structure and costing is

another. NESC therefore recommends that CWA makes its costing transparent and fully justifiable to be

able to win the battle of public acceptability and trust.

2.4.3 AFFORDABILITY OF WATER CHARGES

CWA states that the tariff of water for domestic use is priced on the low side (48). On the other hand, the

Consumer Associations feel that there is no justification for increase in the price of water as it affects

households and families.

NESC has thus deemed it important to look somewhat deeper into the affordability of the population to

manage to pay the water rates. Water affordability is a central element to access to water. No

government would accept that the water rate is not affordable, particularly for vulnerable groups as this

would throw up serious health, social and political issues. Whether socially vulnerable groups can afford

the water rates is also often brought forward as an argument against further tariff increases.



Affordability refers to the ability of consumers to pay for the water rates. At its simplest, affordability in

this case may be defined as the share of monthly household income that is spent on water.

NESC has brought in relevant figures separately from the CWA and from Statistic Mauritius to scrutinise

further this issue of affordability. As per CWA figures, the domestic consumer pays on average Rs 185

per month for water. The median income in the country as per Statistic Mauritius is Rs 21,790. Based

on this, the affordability of water rates in the country comes out to 0.01 %. The figure for Mauritius thus,

comes out fairly well in comparison to the benchmark used in measuring affordability.

Some countries and institutions have designated affordability thresholds which set the maximum

affordable water bill at a determined percent of the average median income of households. In brief, the

threshold represents what constitutes an acceptable level of expenditure on water. Some of the

thresholds are indicated in the table below:

Table 5: Affordability to pay water rates

Institution/Country Range/ Maximum Affordable Rate

World Bank 3- 5%

Asian Development Bank 5%

UK 3%

USA 2.5%

Mauritius 0.01% (Current rate)

Source: European Bank, 2005

From the above, it may be deduced that the water rates for the average household may be considered

very much affordable when compared to the average income and very much lower than the thresholds

set in some other countries and institutions.

2.4.4 DISPOSITION TO PAY THE WATER CHARGES

Consultations by NESC on the water rates payable by households brought forward several reactions.

Of particular interest are those who can clearly afford the payment; they tend to scoff sneeringly at the

water charges which they regard as of least concern. Discernibly, there is an indication here that some

people may not find the payment of the water rates such a burden.

NESC has explored this issue further in comparing payments for such a necessity as water in

comparison to other common household expenditures.

An analysis, out of data obtained from the Statistics Mauritius, indicates the following common

household expenditures for the average income family and for the lowest income quintile family:

24



Table 6: Breakdown of household expenditure

Items All Household Household in the

Lowest Income Quintile

Rs % of Total Expenditure Rs % of Total Expenditure

Food &non alcoholic beverages 6,494 31 3,754 45

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco 759 4 349 4

Clothing and footwear 1,063 5 269 3

Water supply 185.03 1 125.10 2

Electricity 896.61 4 495.16 6

Communication 922 4 298 4

Recreation and culture 1,048 5 336 4

Restaurants and hotels 908 4 247 3

Others 8,956 42 2,446 29

Total 21,231 100 8,320 100

Source: Household Budget Survey 2012, Statistics Mauritius

The information tends to indicate that the average income family spends only 1% of its common

household expenditure on water. Water is a necessity whereas expenditures on such items as alcohol

and restaurants are discretionary expenditures.

Surprisingly, the same pattern of expenditures (though at a lower level) has been observed for the

lowest quintile of income family. For such a family though, water expenditure represents 2% of the

common household expenditure.

NESC concludes that the affordability of the water rates may not be an issue for the average household

but that it could be so for the low-income household consumers.

NESC considers that expenditure of households on such necessities as water as compared to

discretionary expenditures such as entertainment and restaurants could serve as a proxy on the ability

to pay of the population.

2.4.5 ABILITY TO PAY WATER CHARGES BY VULNERABLE GROUPS

Notwithstanding the statistics above, several stakeholders point out that there are cases where families

find it hard to pay the water charges. Several stakeholders, consulted by NESC, also state they sensed

this hardship, as borne out in the course of their daily encounters during field visits.

This has prompted NESC to also consult families that can be regarded as low income earners. NESC

has found that some of these families really feel anguished and pained at the water rates. Furthermore,

in some low income earner areas, the households have not only to pay for the water bill, but the waste

water bill as well. To compound the situation further, the water provision is irregular and problematic.

Thus, while the average income household may find the payment of the water rates within their means,



this may look prohibitive to the low income household. For this group in particular, the payment of water

rates or any increase in water rates would involve a trade-off, as such payment would come at the

expense of some other spending. The analysis also indicates that the low income household pays a

relatively higher proportion of its already low income on the water rates.

Thus, the low income group spends comparatively much more than the average consumer on the water

(and waste water) charges. NESC considers that this could get worse in the future and that this group

merits attention. NESC considers that appropriate measures need to be put in place for water charges

for the families in the low income group.

2.4.6 CWA PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE HOUSEHOLDS

CWA, as well as the authorities, assert that they are very much concerned about the vulnerable households

and that the last tariff increase of 2012 was not made applicable to this group. CWA states that it practises

a cost subsidisation policy to protect the vulnerable households which pay a minimum charge of Rs 55 per

month. The vulnerable households are made up of some 100,000 household consumers (48). This has also

been echoed by the authorities when the water tariff was increased in year 2012.

NESC has scrutinised further this issue of protection of vulnerable households by the CWA. An

examination indicates that these 100,000 or so households constituting the vulnerable households are

out of a total of some 315,000 domestic household consumers registered at the CWA(8). This represents

a third of all household consumers. It is as well claimed that as much as 98% of all households in the

country are connected to its water network (21). This would therefore mean that CWA construes that a

third of all households in the country is deemed as vulnerable and hence needs protection and thus

benefits from its subsidised tariffs.

This seems to be an economic fallacy as it is hard to perceive or even observe that one out of every

three households in the country is economically vulnerable or is financially distressed and thus, needs

protection.

NESC believes that the CWA seems to have got its subsidisation target wrong and is thus losing

revenue. This seems to arise because it is considered that poor households, not having washing

machines, lawns etc consume less water. Thus, the tariff offers a fifty percent subsidy on the cost of

water and only claims a minimum charge of Rs 55 for a monthly consumption which does not exceed

ten meter cube of water. Some 100,000 households benefit from this subsidy.

NESC feels that the CWA system of designating vulnerable households quite plausibly includes middle

and high income households as well. Nowadays, the larger extended family system tends to break

down into a nuclear family type. The typical household now increasingly consists of a pair of adults and

one or two children. This family type consumes relatively less water and thus comes to fall in the CWA

vulnerable household group. The system also captures people’s second homes and bungalows where

the monthly household water consumption falls in the subsidised bracket.

26



As against CWA’s hundred thousand vulnerable households, Statistics of Mauritius identifies only

33,800 poor households in the country, a poor household being defined as a family of 2 adults and 2

children, the family earning less than Rs 13,330 per month.

NESC considers that CWA is losing significant revenue through a wrong targeting of its vulnerable

household policy. NESC believes that CWA’s definition of vulnerable groups based on volume of water

consumed lacks rationality. Alternately, it is felt that CWA could seek the services of, for example, the

National Empowerment Foundation, another state owned institution or the Social Register of the

Ministry of Social Security, National Solidarity and Reform Institution to identify each of the truly

vulnerable households. On option is for the CWA to then give a rebate on the water charges for this

specific group rather than having a tariff structure for this group which others benefit from as well.

Consequently, NESC recommends that CWA reviews its method of determining vulnerable groups as

the present system leads to heavy erosion of revenue for the organisation.

2.4.7 CWA CROSS SUBSIDISATION POLICY

The domestic tariff structure at the CWA is a tiered one, whereby the first 10 m3 is charged at Rs 6

per m3 and the next 10 m3 is charged at Rs 8 per m3. When the tariff was set up in 2012, the cost of

production of water at the CWA was Rs 12 per m3.

As per data obtained at the CWA, there are currently some 180,000 households who consume water

within the bracket of up to 20m3. NESC thus observes that it is not only the socially vulnerable group

which benefits from special considerations of the CWA, but that some 180,000 of its domestic

consumers pay the water charges below the cost of supply of domestic water and thus are also

beneficiaries of the subsidisation policy. These latter consumers constitute some 60% of the domestic

household consumers at the CWA. More still, even those households which consume much higher

volumes benefit from subsidised rates for the first 20m3 of water consumed.

An important observation here by NESC is that the subsidy system in place at the CWA benefits all

households, regardless of how wealthy they are. Thus, the subsidy system profits the better-off families

as well.

As at December 2013, domestic consumers constitute 317,786 (93%) out of total 341,620 consumers

of potable water. The other consumers are from the business, public institutions, commercial and

religious and charitable sectors. A pertinent issue raised at NESC is that if more than 90% of its

customers are subsidised to some extent, with many of them are charged much below cost, how could

CWA make ends meet?

NESC has given some thought to this matter. NESC notes that the losses on the domestic customers

are made up for by the revenues obtained primarily from the business and commercial sectors. This is

indicated in the table below:



Table 7: Extent of cross-subsidisation by non-domestic consumers

Category Volume of Potable Cost Revenue (Rs) Shortfall/

Water Sold (M3) (@ Rs 12/M3) Surplus(Rs)

Domestic 73,354,508 880,254,096 734,002,210 (146,251,886)

Non Domestic 22,501,969 270,023,628 595,422,820 325,399,192

Total 95,856,477 1,150,277,724 1,329,314,733 179,147,306

Source: CWA, 2014.

NESC thus observes that the non-domestic sector bears the brunt of the water charges and significantly

cross subsidises the domestic households water bills. It is interesting to note that, during consultations

at NESC, one consumer association remarked that the water charges and thus the cost borne by the

business and commercial sectors are finally passed on to consumers.

2.4.8 DETERMINING THE WATER TARIFF STRUCTURE AND LEVEL

Thus, NESC has suggested that the subsidisation policy of the CWA does not stand on objective

criteria. It furthermore leads to significant revenue forgone for CWA. The tariffs are set below or very

close to the cost recovery. CWA states that its supply cost in 2012 was at Rs 12 per m3 whilst its average

revenue was Rs 13 per m3, which barely leaves it a profit margin. CWA now contends that its water cost

in 2014 is much higher. This cost considers capital expenditure as it now no longer receives grants but

has to raise capital for investment purposes.

NESC acknowledges that political and social considerations have been prime considerations in setting

water tariffs in the country. The setting up of the tariff has been swayed by the desire to avoid passing

on a high burden to the vulnerable households. That may also explain why, after ten years of no tariff

increase, when the water tariff was revised in 2012, the vulnerable groups were excluded from an

increase. And they continue, in 2014, to pay the same minimum charge as in 2002.

In the country, as in several other developing countries, water tariff increases are considered as

politically sensitive issues, and the setting of the tariff is a political process that may be rife with

controversy. This may also explain why there are significant delays in approving water tariff revisions.

The revisions become occasional rather than regular, and very often lag behind inflation. The recovery

of cost then turns out to be elusive.

In some developed countries, a national regulatory agency has been set up to determine any water tariff

revisions that are requested by the water institutions. Several developing countries have followed suit,

including Mozambique and Kenya. The advantage of such a regulatory body is that it removes the

decision making from the realm of politics. In determining water tariff revisions, the agency looks deeply

into the cost structure of the institutions and the review process is made transparent and is based on

objective criteria set by law.

Mauritius has had some experience in this domain through the Information and Communications

Technologies Authority (ICT), which regulates the ICT sector and the Postal Services in the country.

28



It seems that the authorities have already determined legislation to have a regulatory body to regulate,

inter alia, tariffs in the energy, waste water and water sectors. NESC recommends the setting up of the

regulatory body to review all matters regarding the costing at the CWA, the request for water tariff

increase, and to conduct public hearings.

2.4.9 WASTE WATER CHARGES

As at 2013, only 62,982 households paid waste water charges out of the 318,398 who paid water bills

at the CWA. This represents a figure of 20%. It is expected that this figure will rise to 25 % by 2015.

The CWA bill for those having waste water system consists of two parts, the water bill proper and the

waste water bill. The waste water bill almost invariably represents more than 50% of the total bill. The

charges for waste water are higher than for the water as indicated in the table below:

Table 8: Tariff for Domestic Households

Tariff for Domestic Households

Consumption (m3) Current Tariff

CWA (Rs per m3) WMA (Rs per m3)

0 - 10 6.00 7.50

11-20 8.00 9.00

21 - 30 17.00 20.00

31 - 50 17.00 20.00

Above 50 32.00 45.00

Source: Central Water Authority

The waste water charge relates to the collection of the waste water in the sewer system and its

subsequent treatment in waste water treatment plants. The waste water is not a metered service. It is

instead based on the metered water consumption for the month. It thus uses a volumetric waste water

pricing based on the volume of water consumed. The waste water volume is closely tied to the

consumption of piped water. It thus assumes that 100% of volume of water used is discharged to the

waste water sewer system.

During the consultations at NESC, some stakeholders lamented the allegedly high waste water charges

which boost up the total bill to be paid by the users. Some considered that charging for waste water on

the basis of 100% of the water consumed is excessive. This may not be the actual volume of water that

is in fact discharged in the sewer system. Some stakeholders suggest that charging on the basis of 80%

would be fairer and more equitable.

2.4.10 CONCLUSION

NESC has examined to some depth the issues regarding the tariffs, the costing and the charging of water to

consumers. It has particularly raised the point that a better targeting of its policy towards the vulnerable groups

would not only really help the latter but would increase the revenue potentials at the CWA.



2.5 PRIVATISATION & PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION

2.5.1 INTRODUCTION

An issue which has emerged lately is the privatisation of the CWA. This has been proposed by the

African Development Bank (40). In fact, donor agencies and international multilateral institutions have

pushed hard for water utilities around the world to be privatised. They regard the traditional public sector

systems as suffering from under-investment and inefficiency due to political interferences and vested

interests, including from bureaucracies and the labour force (25).

2.5.2 ISSUE OF PRIVATISATION

A strong argument for the privatisation of the CWA is that the organisation has become ossified and

complacent. It is not able to deliver: the expectation of the population in having a decent water supply

has not been fulfilled. Privatisation would inject both investment and efficiency into the organisation. The

argument goes that the population wants access to a regular supply of clean water at a reasonable price

and is not concerned as to who provides the water, be it the public or the private sector.

At the consultations at the NESC, most of the stakeholders have come out strongly against the

privatisation of the CWA. The consumer associations, the trade unions and some civil society

organisations have been particularly strong on the issue. The main sentiments as expressed during the

consultations at NESC are as follows:

• Some feel that the CWA is being deliberately hobbled and rundown so as to make way for a private

sector take over. It is claimed that the organisation is not able to make and take its own major

decisions at its level.

• There are also moral issues which have been raised. Some feel that something as fundamental as

water should only be in the public hands. Stakeholders question as to how such a communal

commodity like water may be privatised.

• The point has been raised that privatisation has not been successful in countries where it has been

enforced. The private water companies, most of them multinational consortiums, have not made

sustainable returns on their investments. Besides, in most of these countries, privatisation has

encountered strong political opposition.

• It has also been put forward that privatisation inevitably leads to loss of jobs in the utility concerned.

• A main apprehension is with regard to the tariff to be charged. Of concern is whether it would be the

private sector that would be setting the price for a resource that is so essential? It is felt that the

vulnerable households would not be safeguarded and non-payers would be cut off indiscriminately.

2.5.3 ALTERNATIVE TO PRIVATISATION

NESC feels that the debate over whether privatisation of the CWA is suitable or not, is not likely to end

anytime soon. However, NESC is concerned that there should be a more efficient way of managing the

supply and distribution of water than the present one. The matter of NRW should be addressed urgently.

It is evident that the CWA is operating under a weak governance and financial framework and subjected

to multiple pressures and constraints. It is also reported that it lacks the autonomy to function.

30



In view of the above limitations and constraints, NESC feels that the matter of NRW and the

management of revenues may continue to fail to live up to expectations under the present structure at

the CWA. Pointedly, the structure at the CWA does not seem to be robust enough to have the capacity

to efficiently implement a full-fledged NRW programme.

NESC feels that the transfer of the state assets to private sectors as represented through privatisation

of the water undertaking is not a realistic target under the present circumstances. However, there are

alternative ways to bring in private sector involvement as an alternative to privatisation. Basically, the

assets are kept in public hands whilst certain activities ranging from management to operations might

be contracted out.

2.5.4 MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS

Management contract under a Public-Private Partnership contract is one such alternative. NESC

considers that, in the present juncture in the country, this is also quite likely to be controversial and could

as well spark a fierce debate as in the case of privatisation.

2.5.5 PERFORMANCE-BASED CONTRACTING

NESC feels that an option that can be considered is to have contractual schemes without delegated

management of the organisation to the private sector. This would entail outsourcing of activities. CWA

would remain in control of the total execution of the programme. However, such contracting should be

strictly a performance–based one.

The programme may also be more economical through competitive bidding. The private sector may be

able to quickly mobilise more resources for dealing with the work and the backlog than the CWA. It

would also lead to more sophisticated equipment and specialised workforce being brought in.

2.5.6 SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLE

Further, NESC feels that, if we are to go by its past performance, the CWA may not be able, under its current

structure, to manage the outsourcing programme. It is considered that it may not have the capacity to efficiently

perform contract management, particularly a performance-based one, monitoring and coordinating the

different works of the several private contractors, and measuring the performance indicators.

NESC thus recommends that a Special Purpose Vehicle system (SPV) be set up under a revitalised

CWA Board that would be specifically responsible to develop and implement an NRW programme from

conception through to execution. The SPV would only be created to fulfil a narrow objective and is

disbanded thereafter. An SPV or SPV type unit may be given the task to manage the NRW programme.

Typically, such SPV would operate with some autonomy and benefit from some degree of isolation from

the daily conundrum of tasks at the CWA.



2.5.7 CONCLUSION

NESC considers that a major challenge facing the country in the water sector is addressing the issue

of NRW. The waste of resources is considerable. The matter does not seem to have received the priority

it desperately deserves. So much so that dams such as the Bagatelle dam constructed at great cost

could ultimately have about half of their water produced lost through leaky pipes.

It looks evident that the CWA does not have the capacity to manage a vast and robust NRW programme

in addition to attending to its own daily chores. NESC thus recommends that the assistance of the

private sector be sought in the implementation of the NRW programme through a Performance-Based

Contracting system. NESC recommends as well a Special Purpose Vehicle type unit to be responsible

for the NRW programme.

2.6 GENERAL CONCLUSIONSDemand for potable water in the country is presently barely being satisfied by the CWA. This demand

is going to increase in the years ahead. This is explained by several factors, notably the growth in the

population, the increased consumption per capita as the standard of living improves, the demand from

the business and the commercial sectors and the development of the tourism industry. Already there

are cuts imposed on the consumers even during the period of wet seasons. Thus, NESC considers that

if the growth in consumption is not curbed, the country could face a serious water crisis in the future.

One option is to satisfy this increasing demand by the supply side approach; to proceed with more new

water resources projects, finding boreholes, digging up deeper boreholes and, above all, construction

of more dams and reservoirs to capture water. This latter solution bears a few important implications.

It is highly costly and thus brings high debt; the investment in new water projects may displace other

national projects, it has a high lead time, and it has important environmental consequences.

Another option is to move aggressively towards sustainable use of water. The current water use

practices are unsustainable. This report has enumerated some suggestions as to the way this may be

achieved. Water harvesting and use of water saving devices hold great promises. Water saving

technologies are generally not capital intensive or use high technology NESC has here recommended

a national water-consciousness campaign. NESC admits though that this would not fully address the

current problem but would ultimately make significant contribution in the long term.

The other option is an aggressive move towards the optimum utilisation of existing infrastructure and

facilities. The potential here is vast. This report has dwelled at quite some length on the potentialities of

this option. NESC has put up a strong case for addressing the issue of NRW. This would mean actively

addressing NRW by drastically reducing the physical losses, pursuing a policy to ensure that meters

deliver true readings and driving hard on thefts and illegal connections. This strategy has the advantage

of addressing, to a large extent, the current problems faced by the inhabitants, improving considerably

the living conditions of tens of thousands of citizens, avoiding unacceptable wastage of a valuable

resource, and postponing investment in new water projects. Above all, it brings in more revenue to a

cash strapped CWA, strengthening its capacity and financial performance. This would increase the

32



profitability of the CWA and improve the return on its investment. The higher profit would in turn, allow

it to improve its productivity. In any case, the present water distribution network will not be able to

sustain the domestic needs of the future.

Lastly, the economics of the water distribution has been examined by NESC. First, the tariff structure is

designed to operate a cross subsidy between non-domestic users (mostly industrial and commercial

users) and the domestic consumers. Secondly, the tariff provides for significant subsidy to households.

Thirdly, NESC has raised some issues on the special policy for vulnerable groups. NESC is of the

opinion that the policy of the CWA regarding the vulnerable groups allows many well-off households to

also benefit from this scheme. In fact, NESC has shown that all 330,000 household consumers in the

country are being subsidised the first 20m3 of water consumed. The subsidy is in the range of 35 to

50%. NESC recommends that a better pro-poor approach be developed. This would involve better

targeting approaches to reach the low income household.

At the core, NESC as well as stakeholders feel that the water problem in the country is not one of scarcity

of water. It is rather a managerial and a distributional problem. NESC considers that the distribution could

have been managed better and that the revenue collection system is leaving out huge revenue potentials.

To make up for the apparent lack of efficiency in the management of the distribution of water in the

public sector, international multilateral organisations often push for privatisation. Several stakeholders

consulted by the NESC are adamantly against any privatisation in the water sector in the country, and

this, for various reasons. At this juncture, NESC feels that, in lieu of privatisation, other forms of

assistance and engagement may be solicited through participation of the private sector. This would be

particularly in the management of NRW, which seems a daunting task, currently only feebly undertaken

by the CWA. Thus, NESC recommends moving towards a Performance-Based contractual system.

Furthermore, NESC recommends that a Special Purpose Vehicle type unit be set up to design and

manage an NRW programme in the country.

NESC considers that there is an urgent need to improve the overall efficiency of the water supply in the

country. It, however, concedes that no single action would improve the situation. Instead an integrated

approach is called for with a range of actions. These actions require competent institutions and

managerial capacity. At this level, the problem raised in this report may be related to inadequate

management, particularly operation management and in decision- making process. While policies set

may be appropriate, decision making process seems to be slow or inadequate.

The authorities regularly make reference to or call for expertise from Singapore. NESC feels it may here

be appropriate to appreciate the ingredients behind the accomplishments in the water situation in

Singapore. The success lies in an “autonomous water authority professionally run by excellent

professionals .They are not afraid to bring in private sector partners and do what they believe needs

doing and not what politicians want done” (76).



The NESC has also conducted consultations on water resources in Rodrigues. The findings are presented in

the following box.

34


Box3: WATER RESOURCES IN RODRIGUESThis section on water is based on the outcomes froma recent NESC mission to Rodrigues and the findingsof the consultative process held with localstakeholders. The purpose of the visit to Rodrigueswas basically to develop a logical and independentassessment on the socio-economic status of the localresidents and the state of governance by the team ofthe NESC through meetings and workshop withmembers of the civil society.

One of the main concerns of Rodriguans whichemanated from discussion held with stakeholders isthe problem associated with water availability. Waterremains a high priority for the socio-economicdevelopment of Rodrigues and has been viewed as akey factor hampering the economic development ofthe agricultural and tourism sectors.

IntroductionLike in Mauritius and in many other small islands,much of the water resource of Rodrigues is obtainedfrom rainfall, especially during the heavy rain periods.Some coastal areas, however, are very dry anddrought-prone.

Water SupplyWater supplies depend primarily on the amount ofrainfall obtained during the year, of which almost 80%goes to rivers and the sea because of the uneventopography of the island of Rodrigues. Despite thefact that recent rainfalls have been very generous,there doesn’t seem to be any guarantee that theywould meet the domestic and the socio-economicneeds of the island of Rodrigues throughout the wholeyear. A core issue regarding water, therefore, is howto capture, store and distribute rainwater which maybecome even more irregular because of climatechange.

Water Consumption by Households inRodriguesIt has been reported that many households inRodrigues mostly complain about irregular supply ofwater. Since water is not supplied on a frequent basis,local people do not have to pay for it. Water is onlyavailable once or twice a month. However, inRodrigues, many households have acquiredunderground, surface and roof tanks where they areable to store their water requirements. Manyhouseholds have much larger storage capacity tanksthan Mauritians because they have been used tostoring their needs for several weeks. ManyRodriguans have also made provision of undergroundtanks and in-built reservoirs of huge storage capacitywithin their housing units.

The concept of rain water harvesting is quite commonand successful in Rodrigues. Rain Water Harvestingdevices and storage techniques have allowed theinhabitants to provide themselves with free potablewater. A similar project was installed at Creve CoeurHospital in Rodrigues. The principle behind rainwaterharvesting is to capture rainwater through rooftopsand directed via gutters to drain pipes and into astorage tank. It is simple to install, operate, andmaintain. It allows Rodriguan households to preservewater stock for daily use over a long period of time.

Over the period 2000 to 2011, there has been ageneral improvement in the living conditions ofRodriguans as illustrated in the chart below.

Source: Statistics Mauritius, Housing Census 2000 & 2011



For the ease of reference, the types of water supplyin Rodrigues for the year 2011 are also given below:

Source: Statistics Mauritius, Housing Census 2011

Water as a factor of productionWater is one of the most important natural resourcesthat are necessary for the development of agriculturaland tourism sectors in Rodrigues. Agriculturalactivities have suffered the most from the lack ofwater availability for irrigation purposes. Allagricultural sectors tend to be affected duringshortage of rainfall and drought periods. Localinhabitants, hotels and guesthouses have resorted totanks, in-built reservoirs and desalination plants.Investments in water infrastructure such as reservoirsand dams are therefore viewed as a priority forsustainable development. The irregular availability ofwater in the productive sectors has kept income andemployment low, and has led to an increase in theincidence of poverty.

Desalination PlantsWith the unavailability of water and adverse impact ofthe climatic change, desalination plants for sea waterhave become a more plausible option for Rodrigues.Several hotels in Rodrigues have already investedmassively in the implementation of desalinationplants to cater for their daily activities. It is beingenvisaged to have more desalination plants andprojects across the island for the provision of wateron a frequent basis. These would mostly beundertaken by hotels, guesthouses and privateoperators for their daily consumption of water. TheRodrigues Regional Assembly is also working on afew state-of-the-art desalination projects to ease thewater stress in Rodrigues. The first SeawaterReverse Osmosis Desalination Plant wascommissioned at Songes.

Priorities for the Water Sector inRodrigues The long-term priorities for the water sector inRodrigues shall continue to be focused on thecleaning of rivers and water basins and surroundthem with plants and trees to help towards thepreservation of clean water. Reforestation for aperiod of six to seven years in Rodrigues should beset forward as a priority in order not to disturb theecological facet of the island thereby enhancingwater retention.

Solving water shortage in Rodrigues also involves theconstruction of dams and reservoirs that would caterfor the growing demand from all the productivesectors of the economy for its population

The enhancement of existing infrastructure and thebuilding of new ones will require huge amounts ofinvestment with respect to the building of dams andreservoirs for the collection of rainwater. Also,adequate budgetary provision could be made toenhance the water distribution. There will equally bethe need to provide for in-depth training required forvalve operators so as to better manage waterdistribution.

As a short term and ongoing measure, the populationshould be sensitised about water scarcity, the meansof water collection and maintenance of existingsources of water. The people of Rodrigues shouldmaximize the use of rainwater and constructappropriate reservoirs and basins to collect as muchwater as possible during heavy rainfall. There shouldthus be a social responsibility to capture andpreserve water on behalf of the local inhabitants. Theover exploitation of boreholes and underground wateris another matter of concern which requires strictcontrol and monitoring.

Source: Outcomes of the Misssion to Rodrigues, April 2014


List of Meetings and Working Sessions

Table 9: List of Participants at the Brainstorming Session of 3rd March 2014Brainstorming Session - 3rd March 2014

Representative InstitutionMr D Jahajeeah Water Resources Unit

Mr Hauzaree Irrigation Authority

Mr J Bholanath Mauritius Labour Congress

Mr J Eric Carver Water Research Co Ltd

Mr J Munbauhal Central Water Authority

Mr Keskong Irrigation Authority

Mr R Mungra Central Water Authority

Mr R Pokhun Water Resources Unit

Mr S Martial Water Research Co Ltd

Mrs Y Baguant-Moonshiram University of Mauritius

Ms K Heeramun Central Water Authority

Table 10: List of Participants at the Brainstorming Session of 9th April2014Brainstorming Session with Consumer Representatives - 9th April 2014

Representative InstitutionMr D Reechaye Association pour la Protection de

l’Environnement et des Consommateurs (APEC)

Mr J Chellum Association des Consommateurs

de l’Ile Maurice (ACIM)

Mr K Venkatasawmy Think Mauritius

Mr R Pillay Think Mauritius

Table 11: List of Meetings and Working SessionsMeetings and Discussions with Stakeholders

Representative InstitutionDr P.M Soonarane Ministry of Public Utilities

Mr A Duval CWA Meter Readers Union

Mr A K Sumputh Union of Employees of the CWA

Mr D Deepchand Water Resources Unit

Mr I Gunesh Union of Employees of the CWA

Mr J Kwok AHRIM

Mr Jugoo Water Resources Unit

Mr K Dookhit CWA Meter Readers Union

Mr k Nuckchady CWA Meter Readers Union

Mr P Saddul Central Water Authority

Mr R Ajodhea Statistics Mauritius

Mr R Bikoo Ministry of Public Utilities

Mr S K Cahoolessur Union of Employees of the CWA

Mrs E Sivance Movement Pour le Progres de Roche Bois

Mrs Heeramun Central Water Authority

Mrs M Ganoo Statistics Mauritius

36



Acknowledgements

The Council would like to thank the following persons and institutions for their valuable input and contribution

during preparation of this report:

Representative OrganisationMrs Heeramun Central Water Authority

Mrs Y Baguant-Moonshiram University of Mauritius

Mrs M Ganoo Statistics Mauritius

Dr P.M Soonarane Ministry of Public Utilities

Mr R Bikoo Ministry of Public Utilities

Mr P Saddul Central Water Authority

Mr J Kwok AHRIM

Mrs E Sivance Movement Pour le Progres de Roche Bois

Mr I Gunesh Union of Employees of the CWA

Mr A K Sumputh Union of Employees of the CWA

Mr S K Cahoolessur Union of Employees of the CWA

Mr K Dookhit CWA Meter Readers Union

Mr K Nuckchady CWA Meter Readers Union

Mr A Duval CWA Meter Readers Union

Mr D Deepchand Water Resources Unit

Mr Jugoo Water Resources Unit

Mr R Ajodhea Statistics Mauritius

Mr J Munbauhal Central Water Authority

Mr R Mungra Central Water Authority

Mr R Pokhun Water Resources Unit

Mr Keskong Irrigation Authority

Mr Hauzaree Irrigation Authority

Mr S Martial Water Research Co Ltd

Mr J Eric Carver Water Research Co Ltd

Mr J Bholanath Mauritius Labour Congress

Mr J Chellum Association des Consommateurs de l’Ile Maurice (ACIM)

Mr K Venkatasawmy Think Mauritius

Mr R Pillay Think Mauritius

Mr D Reechaye Association pour la Protection de l’Environnement et

des Consommateurs (APEC)

Mr Prayag Former Chief Engineer at CWA

Mr D Jahajeeah Water Resources Unit



REFERENCES

1. African Economic Outlook; AFDB/OECD 2007; Mauritius.

2. Al-Zahrani K, et al., 2013. Consumption Behaviour and Water Demand Management in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia:

Implications for Extension and Education. Arab Gulf Journal of Scientific Research, 31 (2/3), 79-89.

3. Asian Development Bank, 2010. Every Drop Counts; Learning From Good Practices in Eight Asian Cities, No. 1, 1-

66.

4. Assessing extent of cross-subsidisation of non-domestic consumers (2014). Central Water Authority.

5. Assimacopoulos D.; Recovery of Full Cost and Pricing of Water in the Water, Framework Directive, Department of

Chemical Engineering.

6. Boyle T., et al, 2013. Intelligent Metering for Urban Water: A Review. Water, Vol.5, 1052-1081.

7. Business Magazine; 2nd November 2013; Water Supply: Three Bottlenecks.

8. Central Water Authority; Average Monthly Potable Water Production from Treatment Plants and Boreholes to

Distribution Systems; 2013.

9. Central Water Authority; Water Distribution System.

10. Central Water Authority; Water Tariffs & Fees; January 2012.

11. Compagnucci R et al., Hydrology and Water Resources.

12. Corum, L, 2013. Commercial Demand Management; Water Supply Drying Up? Start Planning for 2040. Water

Efficiency, [Online]. November/ December, 22-27. Available at: http://www.waterefficiency.net/demand-management

[Accessed 11 March 2014].

13. Data for domestic households (2014). Central Water Authority.

14. Fankhauser S & Tepic S, (2005). Can poor consumers pay for energy and water? An affordability analysis for

transition countries. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

15. Farley M & Liemberger R (2005); Developing a Non-Revenue Water Reduction Strategy; Part 2: Planning and

Implementing the Strategy.

16. Fifth National Assembly; First Session; Debate No.9; 24th May 2011.

17. Forestry Services; Climate Change & Forestry; Country Report for Mauritius; 2013.

18. Franceys R, et al (2011). The cost of capital: Costs of financing capital expenditure for water and sanitation.

International Water and Sanitation Centre, Briefing note 1c, 1-20.

19. Frankhauser S & Tepic S (2005). Can Poor Consumers Pay for Energy and Water? An Affordability Analysis for

Transition Countries. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, No.92, 1-31.

20. Frauendorfer R. & Liemberger R., 2010. The Issues and Challenges of Reducing Non-Revenue Water. Asian

Development Bank, 1, 1-42.

21. Freshwater Country Profile Mauritius; 2004.

22. Gopaul P.R et al.( 2009); University of Mauritius; Water Quality Indexing for Predicting Variation of Water Quality Over

Time; Volume 15.

23. Grygoruk M et al. (2013); How Much for Water? Economic Assessment and Mapping of Floodplain Water Storage as

a Catchment-Scale Ecosystem Service of Wetlands.

24. Hall D et al (2005); Public Resistance to Privatisation in Water and Energy; Development in Practice, Volume 15,

Number 3 & 4.

25. Hall D et al.(2005); Public Resistance to Privatisation in Water and Energy; Developmetn in Practice; Volume 15.

26. Input for Draft Statement on Water Security; 66th Session of the UN Assembly.

27. Interpress Services; 2014.

28. ION News; Mauritius CWA to Spend Rs 1 billion to Plug Water Leakages; 7 Feb 2014

29. Jiang Y. et al. (2013), China’s Water Management - Challenges and Solutions. Environmental Engineering and

Management Journal, Vol. 12, No. 7, 1311-1321.

30. Johnstone D W.M (2013): Regulation and Reality: Some Reflecyions on 50 years of International Experience in Water

and Wastewater, International Journal of Water Resources Development.

31. Journalism and Communication for Global Change; Mauritius: Thirsty for Ideas to Address Water Woes; Inter Press

Service; December 2011.

38



32. Kein G., et al, Reducing Non Revenue Water in Retail Water Company. Yarra Valley Water, Melbourne, Victoria, no.1,

1-5.

33. Kingdom B, et al. (2006), The Challenge of Reducing Non-Revenue Water (NRW) in Developing Countries; How the

Private Sector can Help: A Look at Performance Based Service Contracting. The International Bank for

Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank, No.8, 1-40.

34. Le Matinal; 17th March 2014; “La Duree de Vie D’un Compteur Est de 15 Ans”.

35. Le Mauricien; 14 December 2011; Penurie D’eau- Ramgoolam: “We don’t plan properly”.

36. Le Mauricien; 14th July 2011; Present Crisis: The Water Problem-an analysis with recommendations.

37. Le Mauricien; 26 November 2011; Probleme D’eau- Beebeejaun: “On va rapidement s’occuper de la region de Mare-

aux-Vacoas.

38. Le Mauricien; 30th March 2012; Bagatelle Dam; Gestion Irrationnelle de nos resources en eau, selon le PM; Available

on lemauricien.com.

39. Le Mauricien; 30th October 2013; Laventure: Mise en garde de la CWA contre la manipulation de “Valve”.

40. Le Mauricien; 7th February 2014; La BAD préconise la privatisation de la CWA.

41. Le Mauricien; 7th January 2013; Water Crisis-Real or Mauritian Made Problem? ;

42. Lempert G., Lahnsteiner J., 2007. Water Management in Windhoek, Namibia. Water Science & Technology, Vol.55;

No. 1-2, 441-448.

43. Liemberger R. & Farley M. (2004), Developing a Non-Revenue Water Reduction Strategy. Investigating and

Assessing Water Losses, Part 1No. 1, 1-19.

44. Liemberger R., (2010). Recommendations for Initial Non-Revenue Water Assessment. IWA Water Loss, no.1, 1-13.

45. Liu B & Speed R (2009); Water Resources Management in the People’s Republic of China; International Journal of

Water Resources Development.

46. Mata L.J et al;( 2007), Fresh Water Resources and their Management; Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and

Vulnerability; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report; Climate Change; Chapter 3.

47. Mauritius Research Council (2012); Research Perspectives & Recommendations on Water Resources in Mauritius;;

Final Consultative Meeting of the National Research Group.

48. Mauritius Times; 21st March 2014; International World Water Day; Prem Sadul- Associate Professor and Chairman

of the CWA; “Singapore took some 60 years to reduce its non revenue water to the present 5%.”

49. Ministry of Agro Industry and Food Security; Report of The Director Of Audit (2010).

50. Ministry of Energy and Public Utilities; Master Plan for Development of the Water Resources in Mauritius 2012;

Volume 1.

51. Ministry of Energy and Public Utilities; October 2012; Master Plan for Development of the Water Resources in

Mauritius Volume 1.

52. Ministry of Energy and Public Utilities; Water Resources Unit; Storage in Reservoirs; in Million Cubic Metres; January

2014.

53. Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development; Chapter 3; Freshwater; Extract from National Environment

Outlook Report 2011.

54. Mission 2012; Clean Water; Reservation Water Rights.

55. Mitigation of the Impacts of Deforestation; Performance Audit Report No. 10

56. Mohayidin G., et al, (2009). Review of Water Pricing Theories and Related Models. Standard Review, Vol.4 (13),

1536-1544.

57. News; Deputy Prime Ministry Visits Non- Revenue Water Reduction Project; February 2014; Available from gov.mu

(Accessed 21/02/14).

58. Noga J & Wolbring G (2013); Perceptions of Water Ownership, Water Management, and the Responsibility of

Providing Clean Water.

59. Pappiah H. (2001), Forestry Outlook Studies in Africa (FOSA) Mauritius. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism,

1st ed., 1-29.

60. Perry C.J et al. (1997); Water as an Economic Good: A Solution, or a Problem? Research Report; International

Irrigation Management Institute.



61. Philippe M. (2009). Public-Private Partnerships for Urban Water Utilities;A Review of Experiences in Developing

Countries. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank, N0.8, 1-208.

62. Proag V (2006);Civil Engineering Department; Water Resources Management in Mauritius; University of Mauritius;

Reduit; Mauritius .

63. Responses to Questionnaire from the Special Rapporteur on the right to safe drinking water and Sanitation.

64. Sadoff C.W (2009); Perspectives on water and climate change adaptation; Better Water Resources Management-

Greater Resilience Today, More Effective Adaptation Tomorrow; Global Water Partnership.

65. Scope; 8th December 2011; Secheresse: La Colere va crescendo.

66. Seebaluck V.; Advancing a Nexus Approach to the Sustainable Management of Water, Soil and Waste; Water, Soil

and Waste Management Practices in Mauritius and Prospects for their Integrated Management; Dresden, Germany;

November 2013.

67. Shah M.N & Gottipati T.B (2011). Non-Revenue Water Imperatives to Improve Water Management of ULBs/WBs in

Indian Cities. The IUP Journal of Infrastructure, Vol IX, 4, 7-27.

68. Statistics from Central Water Authority (2014).

69. Statistics Mauritius; Energy and Water; 2012.

70. Statistics Mauritius; Energy and Water; 2014.

71. Tas E; Integrated Water Resources Management.

72. Taylor M (2014); Avoiding Conflicts over Water Rights; TuftsNow.

73. Teodosiu C et al. (2013); Public Participation in Water Ressources Management in Romania: Issues, Expectations

and Actual Involvement; Environment Engineering and Management Journal; Vol. 12.

74. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2012); Water Conservation Standards. Executive Office of Energy and

Environmental Affairs and Water Resources Commission, No.2, 1-82.

75. The Economist; 19th July 2003; Priceless; A Survey of Water.

76. The Economist; 22nd May 2010; For Want of A Drink; A Special Report on Water .

77. The Environment in Mauritius; Water: Resources, Uses & Pollution; January 1998.

78. Tokich-Hophmayer S & Tantri K; Water Management on Islands- Common Issues and Possible Actions; A concept

paper in preparation to the international Workshop: “Capacity Building in Water Management for Sustainable Tourism

on Islands”; The Center for Clean Technology and Environmental Policy, University of Twente at the Cartesius

Institute, Zuidergrachtswal 3, 8933 AD Leetwarden, The Netherlands.

79. Torajada C (2006) Water Management in Singapore, International Journal of Water Resources Development, 22:2,

227-240.

80. Tortajada C, et al (2003), Recommendations for Initial Non-Revenue Water Assessment. IWA Water Loss, Vol.32,

no.2, 124-129.

81. UNDP AAP Project Document; Brief Description; The Republic of Mauritius.

82. Water and Sanitation Programme (2009), Non-Revenue Water Management in South Asia: Issues and Challenges;

Lessons from an International workshop on sharing of good practices in nonrevenue water management; No. 1, 2-19.

83. Water and Sewer Rates: Full Cost Recovery. National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure, 2006, no.1, 21-

28.

84. Water for life; Water is not Scarce; 22 March 2013; Available from aquafluo.mu (Accessed 21/02/14).

85. Weekend Egoïste 12 Juin 2011; Penurie D’eau: Distribution Draconienne v/s Gaspillage.

86. Weekend; 27 Novembre 2011; Penurie D’eau: Nouvelle revision des frequencies de distribution d’eau dans le Sud et

l’Est.

87. Weekend; 6th October 2013; Pluviometrie Deficitaire: Penurie d’eau alors que les projets de barrage se font toujours

attendre.

88. Weekly Magazine 20-26 June 2013; The Water Network near Breaking Point? ; P. 13-15.

89. Zekri S et al. (2013); Managed aquifer Recharge Using Quaternary-Treated Wastewater: An Economic Perspective;

International Journal of Water Resources Development.

40



List of NESC Reports

Table 12: List of NESC Reports

Title of reports and document prepared by NESC Year

Opinion Report on electoral Reform and Social Stability 2014

Problems of Alcoholism in Mauritius 2013

Youth Unemployment: Improving Employment Prospects 2013

Employment of Persons with Disabilities 2013

Food Security: The Challenges for Mauritius 2013

The Impact of the Global Financial Crisis on the Mauritian Economy 2013

Indiscipline and Violence at Schools 2012

Electoral Reform and Social Stability 2012

Managing Indebtedness and Household budgets for better living. 2011

The Social Integration of Stigmatised Vulnerable Groups 2011

Maintaining the Green Cover of Mauritius 2011

Green Paper on Equal Access to Justice – A Reform in Legal Aid in Mauritius 2011

An Investigation into Food Safety in Mauritius 2010

Integration into the Global Economy: Challenges and Policy Implications for Mauritius 2010

Opinion Polling in Mauritius 2009

A Blueprint for the Energy Sector in Mauritius 2009

Comments made by the NESC at a hearing before Hunton& Williams 2009

The Crisis at Air Mauritius 2009

African Peer Review Mechanism Self-Assessment and Preliminary Programme of Action 2008

A Critical Overview of the Pharmaceutical Sector in Mauritius - Proposals for New Policies 2008

Environment Management – A Shift Towards Segregation and Recycling of Solid Wastes 2008

The Employment of Foreign Workers in Mauritius –

A Review of Current Policies and Proposals for their Update 2008

Government v/s Mauritius Sugar Producers’ Association (MSPA) 2007

Mauritius National Water Policy – Suggestions and Recommendations of the Council 2007

Proposals to Support the Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) Sector in Mauritius 2007

Solid Waste Management – The Strategic Choice For Mauritius 2007

Incidents Surrounding the Use of Loudspeaker for Religious Purposes in Quatre-Bornes 2007

National Environment Policy – Comments and Suggestions 2006



Working Time in Mauritius 2006

The Needle Exchange – Programme Opinions and Recommendations 2006

The Economic and Social Implications of HIV/AIDS in Mauritius – Suggestions for a new Strategy 2006

Integration of the Elderly in the Family – Proposals for New Policies 2005

Problems Associated with Road Congestion 2004

Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Bill 2004

Financial Reporting Bill 2004

Code of Corporate Governance 2004

Protection of the Elderly Bill 2003

White Paper on Health Sector Development & Reform 2003

Code of Practice on Employees’ Participation 2003

Long-term Socio-Economic Projections of Mauritius 2003

Wage Determination in Mauritius and Recommendations for Reform –

Report by Professor LIM Chong Yah 2002

42



NESC REPORT 28

June 2014

Management of

Water Resources

An independent national forum to address socio-economic issues,

enhance national policy-making and dynamise the democratic process through

consultation, dialogue and consensus-building.

10th Floor, Victoria House, Cnr Barracks & St Louis Street, Port Louis MAURITIUSTel: (230) 213 0772 Fax: (230) 213 0765

E-mail: [email protected]: www.nesc.mu

covnes copy 7/10/14 1:17 PM Page 1

an independent national forum management water resources · an independent national forum to...

Documents