Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T16:01:57.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Who is subsidising whom? Water supply cross-subsidisation policy, practice and lessons from Zambia*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2010

Horman Chitonge
Horman Chitonge*
Affiliation:
Land Reform and Democracy, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7700, Cape Town, South Africa
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper looks at the policy and practice of cross-subsidisation in the water sector, focusing on the Zambian experience. Setting a price for water services is a sensitive and controversial issue. Pricing water services below cost recovery can threaten the sustainability of the service and human welfare in the long term, while water pricing at full cost recovery often restricts access to water services for poor households, compromising their well-being. This paper looks at one of the approaches that policy makers use in an attempt to balance the trade-offs – cross-subsidisation. Lessons from the experience of implementing the cross-subsidy policy in Zambia are identified and discussed. This paper argues that while the objectives behind the cross-subsidisation policy are clear, the results from the implementation of this policy are, at best, unclear. The Zambian experience shows that for an indirect subsidy, such as cross-subsidisation (as opposed to a direct subsidy), to generate positive results, a careful consideration of the actual context in which the policy is to be implemented must be a precondition to its implementation.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Modern African Studies , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 599 - 625
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The author would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers, participants at the 2009 World Water Week, Stockholm, members of the NRF Chair on Land Reform and Democracy in South Africa for their comments and suggestions. The author would also like to acknowledge financial support from the Melon Foundation which helped in conducting the research.

References

REFERENCES

Banerjee, S. et al. 2008. ‘Cost recovery, equity, and efficiency in water tariffs: evidence from African utilities’, Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic working paper 7, Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Baumol, W. & Bradford, D.. 1970. ‘Optimal departures from marginal cost pricing’, The American Economic Review 60, 3: 265–83.Google Scholar
Bayliss, K. 2003. ‘Utility privatisation in sub-Saharan Africa: a case study of water’, Journal of Modern African Studies 41, 4: 507–31.Google Scholar
Bayliss, K. & McKinley, T.. 2007. ‘Privatising basic utilities in sub-Saharan Africa: the MDG impact’, UNDP research brief 3, New York: International Poverty Center, UNDP.Google Scholar
Boland, J. J. & Whittington, D.. 2000. ‘The political economy of water tariff design’, in Dinar, A., ed. The Political Economy of Water Pricing Reforms. Oxford University Press for the World Bank, 215–35.Google Scholar
Bond, P. 2004. ‘Water commodification and decommodification narratives: pricing and policy debates from Johannesburg to Kyoto to Cancun and back’, Capitalism Nature Socialism 15, 1: 7–25.Google Scholar
Bond, P., McDonald, D. & Ruiters, G.. 2002. ‘Water privatisation in SADC: the state of the debate’, Municipal Services Project paper series, available at: http://www.queensu.ca/msp, accessed 18.6.2007.Google Scholar
Central Statistics Office (CSO). 2008. ‘Projected mid-year population 2000–2008’, available at http://www.zamstats.gov.zm/media/projected_mid-year_population.pdf accessed 23.10.2009.Google Scholar
Chitonge, H. 2007. ‘Exploring the challenges of implementing a rights based approach to development: the case of the right to water in peri-urban Zambia’, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of KwaZulu-Natal.Google Scholar
Coase, R. H. 1946. ‘The marginal cost controversy’, Economica 13, 51: 169–82.Google Scholar
Craig, J. 2000. ‘Evaluating privatisation in Zambia: a tale of two processes’, Review of African Political Economy 85: 357–66.Google Scholar
Dagdeviren, H. 2008. ‘Waiting for miracles: the commercialisation of urban water services in Zambia’, Development and Change 39, 1: 101–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahan, M. & Nisan, U.. 2007. ‘Unintended consequences of increasing block tariffs under increasing block rates for water’, Water Resources Research 43, 3: 1–10.Google Scholar
Devolution Trust Fund (DTF). 2006. Aquatic Information System: water and sanitation to the urban poor (DVD). Lusaka: NWASCO.Google Scholar
Dinar, A. 2000. ‘The political economy of water pricing reforms’, in Dinar, A., ed. The Political Economy of Water Pricing Reforms. Oxford University Press, 1–25.Google Scholar
Dupuit, J. 1844. ‘On the measurement of the utility of public works’, Annales des Ponts et Chaussées.Google Scholar
Faulhaber, G. 1975. ‘Cross-subsidisation in public enterprises’, American Economic Review 65, 5: 966–77.Google Scholar
Government of South Australia (GSA). 2005. Transparency Statement: Part A: water and waste water prices in metropolitan and regional South Australia 2006–2007. Adelaide: GSA.Google Scholar
Hotelling, H. 1938. ‘The general welfare in relation to problems of taxation and of railway and utility rates’, Econometrica 6, 3: 242–69.Google Scholar
Komives, K. et al. 2005. Water, Electricity and the Poor: who benefits from utility subsidies? New York: World Bank.Google Scholar
Le Blanc, D. 2007. ‘Providing water to the urban poor in developing countries: the role of tariffs and subsidies’, Innovation briefs 4, New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
Lerner, A. 1970. ‘Optimal taxes with an untaxable sector’, The American Economic Review 60, 3: 284–94.Google Scholar
Marshall, A. 1920. Principles of Economics, Book v. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Meran, G. & Hirschhausen, C.. 2009. ‘Increasing block tariff in the water sector: a semi-welfarist approach’, discussion paper 902, Berlin: Deutsches Institut Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW).Google Scholar
Moulin, H. & Sprumont, Y.. 2002. ‘Responsibility and cross-subsidisation in cost sharing’, working paper 19, Montreal: Centre Interuniversitaire de Recherche en Économie Quantitative (CITEQ).Google Scholar
National Water and Sanitation Council (NWASCO). 2002. Urban and Peri-Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Report 2000/01. Lusaka: NWASCO, also available at: www.nwasco.zm.Google Scholar
NWASCO. 2004. Regulatory Tools and Legislation: regulating water supply and sanitation. Lusaka: NWASCO.Google Scholar
NWASCO. 2008. Urban and Peri-Urban Water Supply and Sanitation: sector report 2007/08. Lusaka: NWASCO, also available at: www.nwasco.zm.Google Scholar
NWASCO. 2009. Urban and Peri-Urban Water Supply and Sanitation: sector report 2008/09. Lusaka: NWASCO, also available at: www.nwasco.zm.Google Scholar
Nieswiadomy, M. & Molina, D.. 1989. ‘Comparing residential water demand estimates under decreasing and increasing block rates’, Land Economics 65, 3: 280–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD. 2003. Social issues in the pricing and provision of water services. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Queensland Competition Authority (QCA). 2000. Statement of Regulatory Pricing Principles for the Water Sector, available at: www.qca.org.au, accessed 29.3.2008.Google Scholar
Ramsey, F. 1927. ‘A contribution to the theory of taxation’, The Economic Journal 37, 145: 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Republic of Zambia (RoZ). 1994. National Water Policy. Lusaka: Ministry of Energy and Water Development.Google Scholar
RoZ. 2005a. Living Conditions Monitoring Survey Report (LCMS) 2000–2003. Lusaka: Central Statistics Office.Google Scholar
RoZ. 2005b. Census 2000. Lusaka: Central Statistics Office.Google Scholar
Swyngedouw, E. 2005. ‘Dispossessing H2O: the contested terrain of water privatization’, Capitalism Nature Socialism 16, 1: 81–98.Google Scholar
Water Aid Zambia (WAZ). 2009. ‘Country programme evaluation’, available at: www.wateraid.org, accessed 17.2.2010.Google Scholar
Whittington, D. 1992. ‘Possible adverse effects of increasing block water tariff in developing countries’, Economic Development and Cultural Change 14, 1: 75–87.Google Scholar
Whittington, D. 2003. ‘Municipal water pricing and tariff design: a reform agenda for South Asia’, Water Policy 5: 61–76.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2002. ‘Upgrading of low income settlements: country assessment report’, available at: www.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/case/zambia-report, accessed September 2005.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2009. African Infrastructure Country Diagnostic (AICD) Water Supply and Sanitation survey database, available at: http://www.Infrastructureafrica.org, accessed 3.3.2010.Google Scholar
Worldwide Index. 2009. ‘Zambia City and Town Population’, available at: http://www.tageo.vom/index-e-cities-zm.htm.Google Scholar