Urban Water Supply System-Thesis PDF

i
UNIVERSITY OF ZIMBABWE
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
ASSESSMENT OF PERFORMANCE OF URBAN WATER

SUPPLY IN THE CITY OF BULAWAYO, ZIMBABWE
Belindah Ncube
M.SC. THESIS IN IWRM
JULY 2011
ii
UNIVERSITY OF ZIMBABWE
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
In collaboration with
ASSESSMENT OF PERFORMANCE OF URBAN

WATER SUPPLY IN THE CITY OF BULAWAYO,
ZIMBABWE
by
Belindah Ncube
Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Eng. Innocent Nhapi
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of
Science in Integrated Water Resources Management of the University of Zimbabwe
July 2011
iii
DECLARATION
I, Belindah Ncube, declare that this research report is my own work. It is being
submitted for the degree of Master of Science in Integrated Water Resources
Management (IWRM) at the University of Zimbabwe. It has not been submitted before
for examination of any degree in any other University.
Date: ____________________
Signature: _____________________
iv
The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this study do neither reflect the
views of the University of Zimbabwe, Department of Civil Engineering nor of the
individual members of the MSc Examination Committee, nor of their respective
employers.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ...................................................................................................................... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... viii
DEDICATION .......................................................................................................................... x
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................... xi
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. xii
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background.............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Problem statement .................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Objectives of the study ............................................................................................. 3
1.3.1 Main objective ..................................................................................................... 3
1.3.2 Specific objectives ................................................................................................ 3
1.4 Scope and limitations of the study ............................................................................ 3

1.5 Justification.............................................................................................................. 5
1.6 Report outline .......................................................................................................... 5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Background.............................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Performance measurement in Public Utilities...........................................................10
2.3 Public perception ....................................................................................................13
2.4 Conceptual framework ............................................................................................15
2.4.1 Efficiency of investment ......................................................................................15
2.4.2 Efficiency of operations and maintenance ...........................................................16
2.4.3 Financial sustainability.........................................................................................16
2.4.4 Responsiveness to customers ..............................................................................17
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ...........................................................................................20

3.1 Description of the study area ...................................................................................20
3.2 Research design ......................................................................................................24
3.3 Data collection methods ..........................................................................................29
3.4 Data analysis and presentation .................................................................................31
3.5 Ethical considerations .............................................................................................31
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................32
4.1 Determination of operational performance indicators for BCC .................................32
4.1.1 Efficiency of investment ......................................................................................32
4.1.2 Efficiency of operations and maintenance ...........................................................38
vi
4.1.3 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................39
4.2 Determination of financial performance indicators for BCC ....................................40

4.2.1 Financial sustainability.........................................................................................40
4.2.2 Overall efficiency indicator ..................................................................................46
4.2.3 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................48
4.3 Assessment of public perception on performance of BCC ........................................49

4.3.1 Responsiveness to customers ..............................................................................49
4.3.2 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................57
4.4 Summary ................................................................................................................58

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................60
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................62
Appendices ...............................................................................................................................66
A1. Key Informant Interview Guideline ........................................................................67
A2. Household Questionnaire Guideline .......................................................................69
A3. Research Agreement ..............................................................................................73
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2. 1: Performance Indicators used in the study ................................................................................18
Table 3. 1: Supply capacities for Bulawayo’s surface water sources ..........................................................21
Table 3. 2: Bulawayo Storage Reservoirs ..................................................................................................23
Table 3. 3: Characteristics of urban residential areas in Bulawayo ............................................................24
Table 3. 4: Key informant interview generation guideline .........................................................................26
Table 3. 5: Household questionnaire generation guideline ........................................................................27
Table 3. 6: Sampled residential areas for household survey ......................................................................27
Table 3. 7: Survey sampling size for different residential areas .................................................................29
Table 4. 1: BCC estimated water consumption levels ................................................................................32
Table 4. 2: Efficiency of investment performance indicators .....................................................................34
Table 4. 3: Household consumption figures for different socio-economic groups.......................................36
Table 4. 4: Efficiency of operations and maintenance ...............................................................................38
Table 4. 5: Efficiency of operations and maintenance indicators ...............................................................39
Table 4. 6: Conceptual framework results on objective 1 for 2010 ............................................................40
Table 4. 8: Burst pipes and new connections that were reported and attended to .....................................54
Table 4. 10: Benchmark performance indicators for the study ..................................................................59
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3. 1: Water supply dams for the study area (Adapted from Byo Master Plan 2000-2015) ...............20
Figure 3. 2: General elevation of the study area (Adapted from Byo Master Plan 2000-2015) ...................22
Figure 3. 3: General organisation chart for BCC (Adapted from Byo Master Plan 2000-2015) ....................26
Figure 3. 4: Map of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe showing household survey study area (Adapted from Byo Master
Plan 2000-2015) ........................................................................................................................28
Figure 4. 1: Household survey results on consumers’ average household water consumption, April 2011 ..34
Figure 4. 2: Household survey results on consumers’ average household size, April 2011 ..........................35
Figure 4. 3: Costing of water by BCC for the years 2000 to 2006 ...............................................................41
Figure 4. 4: BCC operating cost coverage ratio performance from years 2000 to 2005 ..............................43
Figure 4. 5: Average collection period for consumers with BCC during the year 2000 to 2006 ....................44
Figure 4. 6: Relationship between collection ratio and unaccounted for water for BCC for the years 2000 to
2006 ..........................................................................................................................................45
Figure 4. 7: Overall efficiency indicator of urban water supply utilities for selected Southern African
countries (Adapted from Water Operators Partnership-Africa Utility Performance Assessment,
2010).........................................................................................................................................47
Figure 4. 8: Household survey results on consumers’ average household income ranges, April 2011 .........50
Figure 4. 9: Household survey results on consumers’ perceptions on cost of water provided by BCC, April
2011 ..........................................................................................................................................52
Figure 4. 10: Household survey results on nature of consumers’ complaints to BCC, April 2011 .................53
Figure 4. 11: Household survey results on consumers’ perception on performance of water services
provided by BCC, April 2011 .......................................................................................................55
Figure 4. 12: Household survey results on consumers’ perceptions on drinking water quality provided by
BCC, April 2011 ..........................................................................................................................56
Figure 4. 13: Household survey results on consumers’ perceptions on pressure of piped water provided by
BCC, April 2011 ..........................................................................................................................57
ix
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
BCC Bulawayo City Council

BWB Blantyre Water Board
BWCP Bulawayo Water Conservation Project
CWA Central Water Authority (Mauritius)
IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management
KWSC Kafubu Water and Sewerage Company Limited
LWB Lilongwe Water Board
LWSC Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company Limited
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MoHCW Ministry of Health and Child Welfare
NRWB Malawi Northern Region Water Board
NWSC National Water and Sewerage Corporation (Uganda)
OandM Operation and Maintenance
OCCR Operating Cost Coverage Ratio
SADC Southern African Development Programme
SWSC Swaziland Water Services Corporation
UfW Unaccounted for Water
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNICEF United Nations Children‟s Fund
WDM Water Demand Management
WHO World Health Organisation
WSS Water Supply and Sanitation
ZINWA Zimbabwe National Water Authority
x
DEDICATION
This piece of work is especially dedicated to my mother who has stood by me and always
believed in me. You are the best.
xi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the guidance of the Lord God Almighty in my life. I am
what He says I am and I can do what He says I can do. My sincere gratitude goes to
WaterNet for sponsoring the IWRM Masters Degree programme and all Civil
Engineering staff in the Faculty of Engineering. To my supervisor, Prof. I. Nhapi, you
have been a great mentor and pillar of strength during my time of study. Special thanks
goes to the following: Mr Dabengwa and Mr Nkiwane from the City Treasurer‟s
Department at Bulawayo City Council for your assistance in processing and interpreting
financial data, Mr. K. Kujinga from the Institute of Environmental Studies, UZ and Mr
Paradza from the Department of Psychology, UZ for your assistance in processing and
interpreting social science data and all your constructive comments. Much appreciation
goes to Bulawayo City Council staff for allowing me to carry out investigations for the
study and all residents who participated in the customer survey exercise.
xii
ABSTRACT
The provision of adequate and reliable water supply in developing countries is becoming
a challenge for most water utilities especially public service providers. The existence of
an information gap regarding the assessment of utility performance and a lack of focus on
consumer‟s perceptions regarding the efficiency of service provision formed the basis of
this study. The aim was to investigate performance indicators that would best reflect the
efficiency of the Bulawayo City Council and to assess the perceptions from the end users.
A conceptual framework was developed with 16 indicators in relation to key performance
indicators broadly categorized as (a) efficiency of investment, (b) efficiency of operations
and maintenance, (c) financial sustainability and (d) responsiveness to customers.
The methodology included literature and documentary review and participatory methods
such as customer survey questionnaire and key informant interviews. The relative
performance of the utility was analyzed based on the Overall Efficiency Indicator (OEI)
which is a function of unaccounted for water (UfW) and collection ratio. Customer
survey questionnaires were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(SPSS) while the thematic approach was used to analyse data from the key informant
interviews.
The research analysis revealed that Bulawayo City Council‟s best recorded performance
was achieved in the year 2002 with an Overall Efficiency Indicator of 38% which is still
far below the target of 66% according to the Water Operators Partnership-Africa Utility
performance targets. Of the 16 indicators investigated only the metering level ranging
from 80 % to 90 % was meeting best practise. Among other indicators were UfW ranging
from 30 % to 55 %, collection ratio ranging from 35 % to 40 %, overstaffing with a range
of 8 to 16 staff per 1,000 connections and cost of water at an average US$0.72 with about
35 % consumer judgement as affordable. However, the system had a number of factors
affecting its performance which include seasonal water shortages, customer affordability,
declining economic situation during the years 2000 to 2006 and scarce water resources.
It was concluded that the system performance is below expectations of best practice
targets and about 60% of consumers in Bulawayo generally have a negative perception of
service delivery. The most cited problems arising from the perceived lack of response to
burst water pipes, the lack of forewarning and explanation for water cuts and the
perceived high current cost of water. It was recommended that performance targets can
be achieved by strengthening the focus on consumers, providing incentives for utility
managers to lift performance and through establishment of a regulatory board to monitor
performance of utilities and protect consumer interests.
Key words: Best Practices, Bulawayo City Council, Performance Indicators, Urban
Water Supply, Service Efficiency.
Assessment of Performance of Urban Water Supply in the City of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The cost of failing to properly address the water and sanitation gap is significantly
higher than the cost of addressing it (Muhairwe, 2010). The challenge of inadequate
service provision is exacerbated by the fact that population growth and the mounting
pressures of increasing urbanisation have offset much of the gains in service
coverage (Gentry et al. 1997). This constraint can be seen clearly in the context of
the MDGs where Africa lags far behind other regions in expanding access to
appropriate levels of services to their growing urban populations (WHO-UNICEF,
2010; Castro and Mugabi, 2009).
At the end of the last decade, Zimbabwe was well placed to meet a major strand of
the Millennium Development Goal 7 (halving the proportion of people without
sustainable access to "safe" drinking water and "basic" sanitation by 2015, relative to
2000 levels) with regard to water supply and sanitation coverage which was around
90% in urban areas (BCC, 2002; UNICEF AUS-AID, 2009). It has been estimated
that coverage with adequate water supply is now only 60% and for sanitation only
40% (MoHCW, 2009). The quality of water provided and the high standard of
sanitation service that Zimbabwe's urban areas enjoyed in the past has deteriorated
significantly implying that access, quantity and quality has declined and thus is not
increasing, counter to the MDGs to which Zimbabwe signed up (WHO-UNICEF,
2010).
Apart from problems of service coverage, other problems also plague public service
providers. Many public utilities, for example, experience high Unaccounted-for-
Water (UfW) rates, which often range between 40%-60%. Such UfW rates mean that
half of the potable water produced by a service provider is lost somewhere in the
provision process. Public water utilities are also frequently overstaffed. According to
Haarmeyer and Mody (1997) these utilities have five to seven times more employees
than what is considered „efficient‟. Moreover, the service providers are often
challenged with financial problems due to a combination of low tariffs, poor
Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 1

Assessment of Performance of Urban Water Supply in the City of Bulawayo
consumer records and inefficient billing and collection practices (Idelovitch and
Ringskog, 1995; Mwanza, 2004).
Based on the nature of water services and the factors underlying the organization of
the water services sector, each region has organized the water services sector in their
own way, resulting in a wide landscape of organizational modes. Although the
specific characteristics of each region differ, in the vast majority of cases the
responsibility for providing water services has been attributed to the public sector
organizations. Although exact figures on the degree of private sector participation in
the water supply and sanitation sector do not exist, it is generally assumed that the
number of people served by private utilities is limited to about 200 million (OECD,
2003). This leaves about 5.8 billion people who receive water services from either
public water utilities or independent systems. It appears that many developing
countries emphasize the fact that water services are a merit good in combination with
the sector‟s monopolistic characteristics. This underscores the need for strong
regulatory arrangements to protect the consumers of water services. For this purpose
many countries have opted to have the task of water service provision undertaken by
public sector organizations (Hughes, 2003).
The efficient performance of water utilities is a key issue in urban water supply in the
Zimbabwean governments‟ quest for improved service delivery (WHO-UNICEF,
2010). The existence of information gap and little studies on the performance of
Public Water Supply Utilities in Zimbabwe formed the study. This research seeks to
use existing theories/tools to assess technical-operational performance, financial
performance and to assess the public perception on the performance of water services
provision. Bulawayo City Council was used as a case study to carry out
investigations on the performance of the water utility and the consumer‟s perceptions
regarding its performance.
1.2 Problem statement
The City of Bulawayo in Zimbabwe is located in Natural Region 4 of Zimbabwe

(Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010) characterized by annual rainfall of between 400
and 650 mm. This reflects a drought-prone area with low rainfall amounts. Frequent

water restrictions and rationing are common in Bulawayo and this has been
necessitated by scarce water resources due to insufficient storage in the supply dams
coupled by the high evaporation rates and siltation (BWCP, 2001; BCC, 2002).
Bulawayo is the second largest city in Zimbabwe with a population of about 677,000
(CSO, 2002). The heavy industry consumes about 30% of the restricted demand of
120,000 m3/d (BCC, 2004). Faced with the challenges of meeting demand and the
general economic decline in the recent past which contributed to poor service
delivery, there is need to establish how BCC has been performing. The perception of
residents regarding the performance of service delivery by BCC needs to be
established as there is no regulator to protect the interests of consumers.
1.3 Objectives of the study
1.3.1 Main objective

The main objective of the study was to assess technical and financial performance of
BCC and how this performance is viewed by the consumers.
1.3.2 Specific objectives
1. To determine technical-operational performance indicators of BCC

2. To determine financial performance indicators of BCC
3. To assess public perception on performance of BCC
1.4 Scope and limitations of the study
Although there are several indicators that are used for the assessment of the
performance of urban water supply services provision (Tynan and Kingdom, 2002;
Mwanza, 2006; Yguinez, 2009 ), the relative performance of BCC was based on
comparing the total volume of water the utility produces and the total volume of
water for which the utility collects revenue. This will provide an approximate
indication of the overall position of a utility which will assist to make an overall
conclusion on performance of the utility (Mwanza, 2004; Baietti et al., 2006; Castro
and Mugabi, 2009). Information contained in this study is limited to urban water
supply only.

In other similar studies quoted in Msuku et al. (2010) where they carried out
financial performance assessments in Malawi‟s public water supply utilities, UfW
was included as a major indicator though not a financial performance indicator. The
UfW has indirect impact on the revenue as the cost of production of the water
becomes heavy on the utility. The costs associated with UfW are pumping costs,
treatment costs, transmission costs and storage costs, among others. It is in line with
these associated costs and the technical factors that account to UfW that it was
deemed imperative to assess technical and financial performance indicators as the
UfW is also a major link between these two performance categories.
Kimey et al. (2008) studied two main indicators in Tanzania‟s urban water supply
utilities which are quality of service and UfW. In their findings, performance of the
utilities was measured by levels of UfW and service quality was measured by
consumer‟s perceptions regarding the water quality, billing efficiency and customer
care, which affect consumer‟s willingness to pay. Water demand management
strategies were recommended for the reduction of UfW and environmental
conservation awareness campaigns for the end users.
Chinyama et al. (2007) in their studies assessed the impact of effective metering and
billing on water demand management in the city of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Among
some of her findings was how UfW could be used as a crude measure of Water
Demand management performance of a water utility as metering and billing practises
influence the levels of water consumption by different consumers. The study was
limited to one component of UfW to assess the performance of BCC utility.
The researcher inclusively considered performance indicators from Kimey et al.

(2008) and Msuku et al. (2010) to assess the performance of Bulawayo City Council
as a water service provider and how it can best improve its water supply services.
The following limitations were encountered during the study:

 Legal implications to accessing data from BCC - Prior to the collection of data an
application was made to each department to seek permission to access
information for the study. All applications were forwarded to Council (board of
directors including the town clerk and mayor) for review. The review process

took 2 months before legal binding permission was granted to proceed with the
study on the 1st of February 2011. (see Appendix 3)
 Inflation and accounting for unaudited data - accessibility was granted only to
audited information with the exception of the year 2010 which corresponded to
the household survey results. The latest years with relevant audited information
to the study were 2000 to 2006.
 Comparison of data with different currencies (ZWD$/USD$) - the years 2000 to
2006 reflect values in ZWD$ while 2010 is in USD$. Processing and analysis of
data was made without any conversion of currencies since ratios were used for
financial indicators.
 Challenge of an academic study on a realistic institution - the data collection was
mostly from the Engineering Services and Financial Services departments. Some
key informants were not at liberty to release information for the study.
1.5 Justification
In Zimbabwe reforms have taken place in the water sector to address irregularities
that existed in water resources management which affected coverage and equity in
water supply and sanitation distribution around the country. Among some of the
reforms which include access to water for primary use for all, all water to be
beneficially used, water to be treated as an economic good and water tariffs to take
cognizance of those unable to pay the full price. Constraints to sustainability
aggravated by the macro-economic challenges faced by Zimbabwe during the period
2006-2008 eroded capacity of local authorities to operate efficiently.
Among some of the water problems associated with service delivery in Zimbabwe
which include insufficient coverage of services, interruption of services, low water
quality for human consumption, water losses and financial problems. Little has been
done to review and analyze the performance of the urban water supply utilities.
1.6 Report outline
Chapter 1 -Introduction, research questions, objectives of the study, scope of the

study on what other scholars have done with an indication of which main category of

indicators were selected for the study and the limitations encountered in accessing
information for these indicators.
Chapter 2 -Theoretical part of the thesis with brief background on WSS situation
globally and nationally. Literature review on what other authors have suggested
relating to performance measurement in public utilities and public perceptions on
water services provided by public utilities. A conceptual framework was developed
with the indicators that would be used for the study.
Chapter 3 – The chapter gives the description and background of the City of
Bulawayo, the capacity of the water supply utility BCC and how it functions.
Information about residential areas selected for the household surveys. Description of
how the research was carried out, what data was collected and how it was processed
including relevant data collection techniques that were used. The chapter indicates
what actually happened in the field.
Chapter 4 - This chapter looks at the raw data that was collected in line with the
conceptual framework developed. All data collected during the face to face
interviews, the analysis and discussion of the results. The data was organised
scientifically using tables and graphs to make interpretations.
Chapter 5- The chapter gives conclusion and recommendations derived from

findings in chapter 4 while also outlining areas for future research. The researcher
also narrates main observations made during the research.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Background
The provision of safe and clean water to rural and urban communities ranks top
among the priorities of governments all over the world (HDR, 2006). During the
International Conference on Water and the Environment in 1992 in Dublin another
description was added to water in which water was to be „recognized‟ as an
„economic good‟, which highlighted that water had an economic value in all its
competing uses (IWCE, 1992). Although the exact meaning of the term „economic
good‟ is rather vague, it has arguably been the most contested and debated of the
Dublin principles. Moreover, it sharply focused discussion of water services
provision to questions relating to the financing of the service provision process.
According to some identifying water services as an economic good allowed for new
economic instruments to be explored that could be used to realize service provision
improvements. Others, however, argued that the emphasis on water as an economic
good was nothing short of moving towards the „co modification‟ of water. In this
perspective categorizing water as an economic good was a first step in „privatizing‟
the provision of water services. Each of the categorizations mentioned above are
correct, in the sense that water services can indeed be viewed as a private good, and
they are indeed an economic good (in the sense that water is a scarce resource), and
they are indeed a merit good and they are indeed subject to market failure. What
makes managing water services difficult, however, is that these different perspectives
can lead the water manager to different ways of managing water services. The main
question is which of the different dimensions are emphasized by the respective
manager.
An illustration of the dimensions regarding the management of water services is the

comparison of two contrasting statements. Nickson and Franceys (2003) argue that
the nature of the water services sector is such that it “does not provide any argument
in favour of direct public provision”. Barlow (2002), on the other hand, takes a
different perspective. She emphasizes that “water is part of the earth's heritage and
must be preserved in the public domain for all time and protected by strong local,

national and international law”. She continues by saying that “we believe that access
to clean water for basic needs is a fundamental human right. Each generation must
ensure that the abundance and quality of water is not diminished as a result of its
activities.”
What distinguishes the two statements, however, is the emphasis they place on the
different aspects of the nature of water services. If an emphasis is placed on water
services as a private and economic good, whilst still acknowledging that it is also
merit good subject to market failure, the statement made by Nickson and Franceys
(2003) can be understood. Essentially, a private, economic good could be provided
by the private sector as long as adequate regulation is in place. The role of the
government could then be limited to that of regulation, whilst provision could be left
to the private sector. Barlow (2002), on the other hand, emphasizes the „merit good‟
nature of water services. If this aspect is emphasized, the private sector becomes a lot
less attractive as a service provider. In case of a merit good, a private utility may
have the incentive to undersupply the merit good or to try to limit or avoid supplying
the good in unprofitable locations. If one prioritizes the water services as a merit
good then Barlow‟s perspective that the provision of water services should be kept in
the public domain seems logical. In other words, emphasizing different
characteristics of the nature of water services will likely lead to different
management options.
The dimension in which the organisation of the service provision process may vary
from one location to next relates to the type of organisation that is responsible for
providing water services. This dimension relates to the characteristics of the service
provider (public, semi-public or private organisation, legal status of the organisation)
and the administrative level (local, regional, national) at which the organisation
operates. The importance of this dimension lies in the fact that different types of
organisations may have different rights and obligations, which may benefit or
hamper service provision (Schwartz, 1999). Vickers and Yarrow (1991) and Martin
and Parker (1997) found that on balance it seems that neither private nor public
sector production is inherently or necessarily more efficient.

Public utilities provide the “cheapest” water and because of economies of scale once
the network is in place, the marginal cost of delivering each additional unit of water
decreases sharply, (Kariuki and Schwartz, 2005). Most governments regulate tariffs
to achieve a range of equity and efficiency objectives (Schwartz, 2006). The tariffs
are designed to provide water that is affordable to households and to generate enough
revenues to cover part or all of the costs of delivery. The problem in many cases is
that tariff structures intended to enhance equity have the opposite effect, (UNDP,
2006). Water provision through a network is a natural monopoly hence this reduces
the scope for efficiency gains through competition and makes effective regulation to
secure consumer interests an imperative, (UNDP, 2006). The key role of regulation
in this context is to create competitive pressures, set prices and quality standards,
establish targets for investment and maintenance and ensure that the benefits of
efficiency gains are passed on to consumers (Mwanza, 2004; Castro and Mugabi
,2009; Muhairwe ,2010).
Zimbabwean municipalities fall into the category of public utilities whose

jurisdiction is governed by various policies which include the amended Zimbabwean
Urban Councils Act of 2002 and the constitution of Zimbabwe. The Bulawayo City
Council has the mandate to supply water to households and industries in the city
under section 168 of the Urban Council‟s Act ( Chapter 29:15) and section 64 of the
Public Health Act (Chapter 15: 09), the city is also recognised as the water and
sewerage authority for the area under its jurisdiction (Zimbabwe, 1996a and
Zimbabwe, 1996b). The act provides for urban local authorities to enter into
partnership to outsource the provision of these services. As far as participatory
governance structures, it was observed that Bulawayo has ratepayers associations
that are represented from ward level (Mkandla et al., 2005). These act as pressure
groups and are mandated to advocate for improved municipal service delivery and
were originally formed to co-ordinate and assist citizens in representing their
interests to the elected Council of Bulawayo.
Historically in Zimbabwe most urban councils have been well-run, responsive and
have provided all municipal services including utilities of water supply, sewage
collection and disposal to a good standard. With the political and economic crisis in
the years 2005 to 2009 coupled with hyper-inflation and burgeoning poverty, costs

increased and the ability to pay them decreased (WHO-UNICEF, 2010). Urban
services like many other services suffered. In 2005 in an effort to address the
situation central government gave responsibility for town water supplied to the
national agency, the Zimbabwe National Water Authority (ZINWA). There was little
changed as ZINWA suffered from the same problems as the urban councils, which
among them included a lack of finance and expertise aggravated by the exodus of
„brain drain‟ migration out of the country in search of greener pastures (Manzungu,
2006; UNICEF-AusAID, 2009).
In February 2009, water and sanitation services taken from urban councils and given
to ZINWA were handed back to local authorities to operate and maintain. This
initiative had a further unfortunate outcome as some Council observe that many of
the records of operations were negatively affected during 2006 to 2009 which were
coupled with overlapping responsibilities during the time of take-over by ZINWA.
As a result little information exists on the operations of the utility during the
respective period (UNICEF-AusAID, 2009; BCC Report, undated).
2.2 Performance measurement in Public Utilities
The concept of performance indicators of water utilities is a guide to show how well
a utility is doing in meeting their goals and objectives. Indicators are pointers,
numbers, facts, opinions or perceptions that measure an organizations performance
(Wouter et al., 2005). Any Municipality‟s performance, hence its ability to coerce
customers to pay for services rendered, requires some sort of accountability. Baietti
et al. (2006) points out some of the key performance indicators that should exist in
any municipality. Their argument points to;
a) External accountability as referring to customer orientation thus includes the
extent to which utilities “listen” to clients, how it works better to meet their
needs, solicit their views regarding standards and levels of services and how
to answer promptly to their complaints.
b) Internal accountability looks at how management and staff are held
accountable for effectiveness and efficiency. The indicators would include
staff annual performance evaluation, rewards and penalties to staff for
inducing performance and training of staff.

Municipality performance targets suggested by Baietti et al. (2006) for developing

nations –
 Total revenue
 Water production
 Drinking water quality
 Customer service
 Water consumption
 New connections.
On the other hand Yniguez (2009) suggests the following performance targets for
water utilities in Asian developing countries;
 Coverage percentage
 Availability of service offered in hours per day.
 Consumption in litres per capita demand
 Metering percentage
 Operating ratio
 Collection period
 Staff to 1000 connections
The public policy for the private sector in setting performance targets for water
utilities by Tynan and Kingdom (2002) suggest the following standards for
developing countries:
 UfW
 Working Ratio
 Collection Period
 Water Supply Connection fees
 Affordability of water
 Continuity of service
However Tynan and Kingdom (2002) argue that their suggested proposed targets are
not comprehensive but there is need to provide a complete assessment of utility
performance by expanding the measures to governance and accountability, to capital
efficiency and to better measures of responsiveness to the needs of the poor. Tynan
and Kingdom (2002) argue that performance indicators serve three purposes:
a) To highlight the wide variation of performance to be found amongst
developed and developing country utilities. This will provide stakeholders

with some appreciation of the range of values to be found around the world,
and the performance being achieved by “best practice” providers.
b) To propose target indicator values for utilities in developing countries. These
target values are already being achieved by utilities in developing countries
thus giving them grounding in reality.
c) The exercise will be a starting point from which more comprehensive and
regularly updated analysis can be undertaken, providing stakeholders with
more and better information with which to assess the performance of their
utilities.
OfWat International Comparator studies, OfWat (2007) as cited in Schouten (2009),
which were executed to set out relative performance by making international
comparisons in a number of key performance areas and to assess whether privately
owned companies outperform public WSS providers suggest the following main
indicators;
 Bills to customers
 Customer Service levels
 Water quality and environmental performance
 Water delivered, leakage and water efficiency
 Unit costs and relative efficiency
 Network activity
 Financial performance
According to OfWat (2007), the approaches to define, collect and use performance
indicator information vary dramatically between the WSS providers; therefore they
recommend that interpretation be done with care.
In defining and collecting useful indicators the main question would follow, “Is
performance linked to how well a Municipality is able to collect revenue, and then
how can such a municipality improve its performance to enhance its revenue
collection?” Baietti et al. (2006) argues that certain key performance indicators must
be set in motion and be satisfied for any utility to be a good performer and hence this
consequently or directly has a positive appeal in the face of customers. Castro and
Mugabi (2009) suggest the use of an overall efficiency indicator that attempts to
provide a global measure of utility efficiency by comparing the volume of water for
which the utility collects revenue and the total volume of water it produces. There is

some evidence from several studies that competition is generally more important
than ownership in explaining performance improvements in the WSS sector. Galal et
al., (1994), Sachs et al., (2000), Wallsten, (2001) and Zhang et al., (2003a and
2003b) all conclude that ownership alone is not enough to generate economic
performance improvements in WSS sector but competitive markets also reinforce the
benefits of public ownership.
Municipalities provide a service that should be generating enough revenue to meet

operation and maintenance costs and at the same time be able to sustain the staff
employed to run it. Revenue comes from different sources namely; government
grants, bank loans, donors and from customers. The system should be self sustaining
being able to rely most from finance streams flowing from the customer. This can
only be achieved if the service delivery is appealing to the customer and there is
openness and accountability as supported by Baietti et al. (2006). Municipalities in
Zimbabwe provide a mix of public services such as education, land, caravan and
recreational parks, botany gardens, cemeteries, stadiums, beer halls, access roads,
city halls; user services (water, sanitation and hygiene, refuse), shop licenses, rentals
from flea-markets (informal sector), rates, parking fees and property leases (ibid).
2.3 Public perception
To what extent do public utilities “listen” to clients, work to better meet their needs,
solicit their views regarding standards and level of service, or answer promptly to
their complaints? Important measures of customer orientation include friendliness of
the customer billing and collection system, orientation toward seeking customers‟
opinions and views, availability of options for service delivery, timely information to
customers on developments in relation to water services, and response to customers‟
complaints (Baetti et al., 2006)
Price does have an effect on the amount of water demanded by all classes of water
consumers, and consumer's attitudes to water usage and their perception about water
consumption may be changed by appropriate water payment strategies. Khanyakahle
(2006) in her investigations of effective municipal payments found that it is expected
that loyal ratepayers, that became loyal because of positive experiences with the

municipality will influence others positively through what they say and do. Her
findings were that most of the lower income households find their accounts difficult
to understand and pay their accounts by cash. The higher income groups, it was
found, made use of a variety of payment options such as cash, credit card, bank
transfers, etc.
The level of willingness to pay should not be a forced down matter on clients if
service delivery is satisfying, if there is constant engagement between the
municipality and the customer, and if there is clear communication as highlighted by
Bov‟ee and Thill (1992, 2) of a motivated and capable working staff with clearly laid
out key performance indicators that could be attributable to the turnaround of an
organisation. In a paper by Kitundu (2005) for Mwanza city council in Tanzania,
speaks on stakeholders‟ involvement as demonstrating the importance of partnership
and how it brings out a shared vision, alliances, action goals, dialogue, mutual trust
and mutual benefits. He goes on to demonstrate the positive effects of mutual
understanding between the service provider and the customer resulting in improved
revenue.
Nickson (2002) argues that decisions related to the provision of water services are
mainly taken with the aim of achieving the objectives of the producer-side, rather
than the consumer-side of the service provision process. With the objectives of the
producers often conflicting with those of the consumers, while the services provided
to the consumers are of a very low quality. Wolff and Gleick (2002) encourage the
“soft” path for water which delivers diverse water services matched to the users‟
needs and works with water users at local and community scales. The soft path is a
comprehensive and long term approach to water demand management which requires
active participation by water users and effective strategic planning to create the
appropriate mix and timing of conservation measures. The “soft” path relies on
centralized infrastructure, but complements it with extensive investment in
decentralized facilities, efficient technologies and human capital which provide an
integrated approach to improve performance of utilities. The soft path has been
witnessed by the contribution of humanitarian organisations that have complemented
water service provision outside the water utilities‟ boundary in the form of boreholes,
rainwater harvesting, bowsers and other efficient technologies. While the “hard” path

which relies almost exclusively on centralized infrastructure and decision making

which has proved to negatively influence performance of utilities through the top-
down management approach of service delivery.
In assessing quality of drinking water, consumers rely principally upon their senses.
Microbial, chemical and physical water constituents may affect the appearance,
odour or taste of water and the consumer will evaluate the quality and acceptability
of the water on the basis of these criteria (WHO, 2004). Hoko and Hertle (2006) state
that the perception of water quality is partly subjective, apart from personal
sensitivity to taste, adaptation could account for the differences, and adaptation is
affected by such factors as duration of stay in the area, period of use and availability
of other sources. Gulyan (2001) found that although some substances in water may
have no direct effect, water that is highly turbid, highly coloured or has an
objectionable taste or odour may be regarded by consumers as unsafe and may be
rejected for the use.
2.4 Conceptual framework
In this section, the topic of performance is elaborated upon by looking at a

framework for analyzing performance which was developed by Tynan and Kingdom
(2002). The framework forwarded by Tynan and Kingdom was originally developed
as a framework for benchmarking, meaning that the framework would allow for a
comparison between different utilities. The frame work distinguishes the following
performance categories broadly categorized as a) efficiency of investment, b)
efficiency of operations and maintenance, c) financial sustainability and d)
responsiveness. The indicators they have suggested might not necessarily represent
the best possible indicator for a selected dimension. This is because they also use the
criterion of availability of information of the indicator for the selection of the
indicator.
2.4.1 Efficiency of investment

Efficiency of investment refers to investment in new assets which Tynan and
Kingdom (2002) emphasize should only occur when absolutely necessary and to
ensure efficient, long-run operation of existing assets and daily maintenance.

Maintenance is crucial for pipe networks which account for up to 70% of asset value
but are often neglected in favour of more visible assets. The measure of UfW, which
is the difference between water supplied and water sold as a percentage of water
supplied, captures both physical and commercial losses due to illegal connections
and inefficient billing respectively. Thus high levels of UfW indicate poor system
management, poor commercial practices as well as inadequate pipeline maintenance.
2.4.2 Efficiency of operations and maintenance

Operational efficiency is defined by Tynan and Kingdom (2002) as the lowest cost
use of inputs which could be labour, energy, water and materials in the daily
operation of a utility with the most efficient combination of inputs depends in part on
local input prices and past capital investment decisions. Analysts use ratios of inputs
to outputs to measure operational efficiency. One such ratio is staff per 1000
connections with a high ratio possibly indicating single water connections serving
multiple households or may reflect inefficient use of staff.
2.4.3 Financial sustainability

Financial sustainability requires timely collection of payments and cost recovery
relating to capital asset values and rates of return on investment. Failure to cover
costs leads to underinvestment in assets, weakened operations and declining service
quality. Therefore financial performance of an organisation is important whatever its
regulatory framework (OfWat, 2007). Some key financial ratios provide an
indication of a company‟s ability to finance its functions. A simple measure of cost
recovery is the working ratio- the ratio of total annual operational expenses,
excluding depreciation and debt service, to total annual pre-tax collections from
billings and subsidies (Tynan and Kingdom, 2002).A working ratio of more than one
means that a utility fails to recover even its operating costs from annual revenue,
while a ratio of less than one means that it covers all operating costs plus some or all
of its capital costs. Castro and Mugabi (2009) cite the inverse of the working ratio as
the operating cost coverage ratio (OCCR) as a key measure of the utility‟s ability to
cover its operating costs (excluding interest and depreciation) from revenues, without
reliance on external subsidies.

2.4.4 Responsiveness to customers

A utility‟s responsiveness to its customers is usually indicated by the quality of
services it provides. However, quality of service has several dimensions - water
availability, water quality, water pressure, and customer relations. But the only ones
for which the sample provides sufficient data is water availability as captured by the
continuity of service, hours of service a day (Tynan and Kingdom, 2002) and
customer relations as captured by the number of customer complaints and response
time it takes to address complaints. Castro and Mugabi (2009) argue that Water
Services can perform Utility Performance Assessments through tools derived from
Tynan and Kingdom‟s(2002) Water scorecard with the objective of identifying
utilities‟ operating strengths and weaknesses which will assist in moving towards
standardizing the indicators for the sector in Africa. The report takes into
consideration the fact that indicators should not be interpreted rigidly as utilities face
different social, political and financial constraints but rather as indicative of strength
or weaknesses of a utility relative to its peers. Schouten (2009) in his studies
concluded that comparing the performances of water companies in Europe through
benchmarking schemes is just as hopeless as comparing the beauty of a tulip with
that of a rose, also citing benchmarking as a type thereof, by soccer trainers
abominated, scoreboard journalism. OfWat Report (2007) as cited in Schouten
(2009), suggest that data is very robust and can only be used to put the regulated
companies‟ performance in an appropriate wider context suggesting that data is not
fully comparable but exposes differences that challenge the current performance
levels of the regulated. The report further concluded that the results of the empirical
studies carried out were very mixed, some giving advantage to public ownership,
others to private ownership and yet others had no significant difference between the
two.
Castro and Mugabi (2009) give a list of indicators derived from Tynan and Kingdom
(2002) which have been used in setting performance targets for water utilities for
selected African countries. These indicators are derived from the performance of the
top quartile of all utilities in the Water Operations Partnerships (WOP) - Africa
Theme Report, 2009. Guided by the ideas and concept from each of the performance
categories, it is possible to develop indicators that suit the local circumstances as
shown in Table 2.1.

Table 2. 1: Performance Indicators used in the study
Performance Indicator Description Range Reference Selected

target
1.Efficiency of investment
Volume of water „lost‟ 15-23% Tynan and 20%
a) UfW as % of net water Kingdom, 2002;
supplied.
Mwanza, 2004.
b) Percentage of metered No. of connections with 80-100% OfWat, 2007; 85%

connections operating meter as % of Yniguez, 2009
total connection
c) Overall efficiency indicator, Ratio of total volume >66% Baietti, 2006; 66%
(OEI) for which utility Castro and
collects revenue and the Mugabi, 2009
total volume of water it
produces.
2. Efficiency of operations and
maintenance Ratio of inputs to <5 OfWat, 2007; 5
outputs Yniguez, 2009
a)staff/1000 connections
Tynan and
b) water production and Supply to meet demand, >100l/ca Kingdom, 2002; 100l/cap
consumption m3/dy p/dy OfWat, 2007. /dy
3.Financial sustainability
US$0.12 Mwanza, 2004; US$0.7
a) average tariff per m3 Actual amount billed - Castro and 6
per m3 of water US$1.12 Mugabi, 2009;
Muhairwe, 2010
b) unit operating cost per m3 Ratio of utility‟s total >ave Mwanza, 2004; >ave
sold annual operating tariff per Castro and tariff
expenses and total m3 Mugabi, 2009; per m3
annual volume of water Muhairwe, 2010
sold
c) operating cost coverage Ratio of total annual 0.8-1.5 Mwanza, 2004; 1

ratio, (OCCR) billed revenues to total Castro and
annual operating costs Mugabi, 2009;
(excl. interests and Muhairwe, 2010
depreciation
d) collection ratio 73-100% Mwanza, 2004; 73%

Ratio of actual revenues Castro and
collected and total Mugabi, 2009;
billed revenues Muhairwe, 2010
e) collection period Average time to collect <3month Mwanza, 2004; 3mths

outstanding revenues s Castro and
Mugabi, 2009;
Muhairwe, 2010

4. Responsiveness to
customers <20% Tynan and <20%
Percentage of average Kingdom, 2002;
a) Cost of obtaining a household income Castro and
new connection Mugabi, 2009
>75% Tynan and >75%

b) cost of water
Percentage of consumer Kingdom, 2002;
judgement as affordable Castro and
Mugabi, 2009
24hrs Tynan and 24hrs

c)water availability Hours of service per
Kingdom, 2002;
day Castro and
Mugabi, 2009
d) response to consumer <3dys Tynan and <3dys

Average response time
complaints Kingdom, 2002;
Castro and
Mugabi, 2009
e) Water quality and pressure Percentage of consumer 100% Tynan and 100%
satisfaction Kingdom, 2002;
Castro and
Mugabi, 2009

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Description of the study area
The study was carried out in the City of Bulawayo which is Zimbabwe‟s second
largest city with an estimated population of over 677,000 in the year 2002 (CSO,
2002). Bulawayo is situated in the south western part of the country 1,341 metres
above sea level in a semi-arid and drought-prone region with a long-term average
rainfall of about 650 mm per year (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010). The city is
situated near the divide of the northern catchment area draining to Zambezi River
and the southern catchment area draining to Limpopo River. Its location near the
water divide has significantly contributed to its water problems as all rivers within
easy reach are small with small catchment areas (Chinyama et al. 2007).
Figure 3.1 shows water supply sources in Bulawayo which consist of 5 dams in the
Southern Catchment (Matabeleland South), namely Umzingwane, Inyankuni, Insiza
and Ncema Complex (constitutes of Upper Ncema and Lower Ncema).
Figure 3. 1: Water supply dams for the study area (Adapted from Byo Master Plan 2000-2015)

There is also a groundwater scheme (not shown), north-west of Bulawayo with 68

boreholes commissioned in 1993 (BWCP, 2001, BCC, 2004). The present total
capacity of Bulawayo‟s water supply dams is 352 million cubic metres (Table 3.1).
The operation policy for the urban water supplies in Zimbabwe is that the water
supply dams should hold at least 21 months supply by 31 March of each year (BCC,
2000). If the quantity of water stored is less than this, then water rationing must be
introduced.
Various engineers have calculated the 4% yield of Bulawayo‟s Southern Catchment

dams over the last few years and related it to the risks of water scarcity which could
pose a threat to future water supplies (Table 3.1). Some alternative sources of water
for the city have been sought through the Bulawayo Matabeleland Zambezi Water
Project and the Mtshabezi Dam Project but funding remains a major setback in the
implementation of these proposed projects (BWCP, 2001; BCC, 2004).
Table 3. 1: Supply capacities for Bulawayo’s surface water sources
Dam 4% Yield (m3/d) to BCC

(Net Capacity-m3) Department
of Water Burrow Binnie SWECO Bulawayo Ministry of
Resources City Council Rural
(Various Feasibility Resources
dates) Study and Water
(1992) (1995) (No date) Dev
(1999)
Umzingwane 26,197 31,233 35,342 33,151 30,040

(42 million)
Inyankuni 17,699 23,836 20,822 36,428 17,697

(74 million))
Ncema Complex 56,986 61,644 42,466 60,00 36,095

(63 million)
Insiza 48,244 75,616 33,699 45,205 28,643

(173 million) (Stage 1
Only)
Total Yield 149,126 192,329 132,329 174,794 112,475
Source: (BWCP, 2001; BCC, 2004)

The existing water supply system serving the City of Bulawayo comprises of two
water treatment plants namely Criterion and Ncema Water Treatment. Works have
today an estimated capacity of 181,000 m3/d and 30,000 m3/d respectively, which
amounts to a total of 211,000 m3/d. At the time of the interview (April, 2011) it was
reported that the City‟s water reticulation system consists of approximately 6,000 km
of various sizes of pipeline and 6 distribution reservoirs. The distribution is mainly
by gravity feed. The bulk of the reticulation system is old and has never been
replaced since establishment more than 40 years ago (UNICEF-AusAID, 2009; BCC,
2010). This is the perceived cause of recurrent water bursts and leaks which have
resulted in serious water losses in the system estimated at between 35 to 40% (BCC,
2010). The City has well over 10,000 m of pipelines that are not functional. As a
result, water consumptions for these places are currently unknown and billing was
therefore based on estimates (Chinyama et al., 2007).
Bulawayo‟s water reticulation is fed with water from 6 reservoirs which are
interlinked. Treated water is fed into the reservoirs from where it gravitates into the
reticulation system. Figure 3.2 shows the general elevation of the city of Bulawayo
which slopes down from the south towards the north.
Figure 3. 2: General elevation of the study area (Adapted from Byo Master Plan 2000-2015)

The list of the reservoirs and their capacities during the years 2002, 2004 and 2006 is
shown in Table 3.2. Woodville reservoirs have been abandoned over the years due to
lack of capital funding for expansion. At targeted consumption of 100,000 m3/d, this
represents about 4 days‟ storage which is safe assuming the reservoirs are full (BCC,
2010).
Table 3. 2: Bulawayo Storage Reservoirs

Reservoir Capacity,m3
2002 2006 2010
Tuli Hill 50,000 50,000 50,000
Criterion 90,000 90,000 90,000
6J 45,000 45,000 45,000
Hillside 45,000 45,000 45,000
Rifle Range 67,500 67,500 67,500
Magwegwe No.8 108,000 108,000 108,000
Woodville 2,250 - -
Total 407,750 405,500 405,500
Source: (BWCP, 2001; BCC, 2002, 2006 and 2010)
The Bulawayo City Council was declared a municipality in 1897 according to

Zimbabwean classification of towns. BCC is composed of five departments namely
housing and community services, health services, engineering services, financial
services and chamber secretary. The engineering services department is further
divided into roads, town planning and water services where water services constitute
water supply (water supply treatment and wastewater treatment), water distribution
(water supply and sewage) and electro-mechanical divisions (BCC, 2010).
The current number of customers is estimated at approximately 150,000 (ie. number

of water supply connections) and the consumers targeted in the community include
domestic, non-domestic, institutional and commercial. It is estimated that there are
around 146,000 dwelling units (made up of 122,000 in the high density suburbs and
24,000 in the low and middle density areas respectively (all typology of dwellings)
accommodating approximately 350,450 separate households .This means there is an
average 2.4 households occupying every dwelling unit (deduced from the Master

Plan).However, it would appear this growth rate has increased in the years 2007 to
2009 during the unfavourable macro economic conditions where there has been a
massive migration into the city evidenced by a great rise of the informal sector and
overcrowding (BCC Report, 2010). The consumer survey study focused on domestic
consumers and was carried out in 6 suburbs: 2 high density, 2medium density and 2
low density suburbs (Table 3.3)
Table 3. 3: Characteristics of urban residential areas in Bulawayo

Residential Area *Size of Land Holding Level of Income
Low Density >1,000 m2 High Income (>US$900)
2
Medium Density 400-1,000 m Middle Income (between US$180 and US$900)
High Density 150- 400m2 Low Income (<US$180)
Adapted from: Manzungu and Machiridza, (2005), *Byo Master Plan (2000-2015)
Historically, suburbs in Bulawayo were established along racial lines which ceased
in 1980 with Zimbabwe‟s independence from colonial rule (Zinyama, 1995). Today
the divisions are socio-economic with the former white areas now known as low
density suburbs being home to high-income residents (Manzungu, 2008). Similarly,
the former black areas, now known as high density suburbs house the low-income
people. Density describes the concentration of population in the respective areas. The
medium density suburbs were landfills of open areas converted for residential
settlements as population in the city increased (City of Bulawayo report, 2010). The
old suburbs are those built during the colonial rule and the new suburbs are those that
were constructed after independence (Byo Master Plan, 2000-2015).
3.2 Research design
The study employed mixed methods which include both qualitative and quantitative
approaches. The quantitative approach focus was mainly on quantifiable data in
terms of numbers and measures that can be analysed statistically and the deductive
approach emphasized detailed planning prior to data collection and analysis
(Neuman, 2000).
Qualitative research was generally interpretive (Creswell, 2000). The research made
an interpretation of data by developing a description of an individual or setting,
analysing data for themes or categories and making an interpretation or drawing

meanings personally or theoretically, stating the lessons learnt and offering further
questions to be asked. The data was also filtered through a personal lens that is
situated in a specific socio-political and historical moment.
Issues that were considered during the research design:

a) Institutional issues – The Engineering Services department provides water
supply, sewerage and sanitation services. Financial functions are handled by the
City Treasurer‟s department eg. water billing and water meter reading. The Town
and Planning department is responsible for designs and constant updates to the
operational Bulawayo Master Plan (2000-2015). The Health Services department
responsible for all health related businesses which among them include collecting
and keeping track records of all waterborne and water related issues in the city.
The Housing and Community department handles residential and household
issues around the city eg. community based projects. What is the relationship
among these departments and how are the water service activities harmonised?
b) Legal framework – The Chamber Secretary department handles all BCC legal
matters. What legal powers does the water utility have to implement the role of
regulation to create competitive pressures, set prices and quality standards,
establish targets for investment and maintenance and ensure that the benefits of
efficiency gains are passed onto consumers?
Figure 3.1 shows the general organisation chart for BCC indicating the relationship
of the five main departments and with those directly involved in day to day activities
with water services indicated below the dashed line. The water services department is
indicated in the enclosed dotted area. The department of Housing and Community
authorised and confirmed the household questionnaire generated for the survey while
the selected suburbs for the household survey exercise were authorised by Town and
Planning department. The Chamber Secretary department was not available for
interviews during the time of study so secondary sources of information from other
departments had to be utilised.

Figure 3. 3: General organisation chart for BCC (Adapted from Byo Master Plan 2000-2015)
Table 3.4. shows four categories used to generate the key informant interview
guideline which include general information, water supply, customer services
provision and external factors. The same interview guideline was administered to key
informants of all relevant departments. Factors used to analyse each category were
open to further discussions depending on the department. The key informant
interview questions generated from the guideline are shown in Appendix 1.
Table 3. 4: Key informant interview generation guideline

Category Factors used to analyse category
General information History of authority

Functions of the organisation
Type of consumers
Water Supply Sources of water

Production vs. Demand
Water losses
Costs and revenues
Customer Services Provision Communication channels

Affordability
Customer operator relations
Customer complaints
External factors Marketing strategies

Existing roadblocks

Table 3.5. shows three categories used to generate the household questionnaire and
the main factors used to analyse each category. The three categories are accessibility,
reliability and consumer perception.
Table 3. 5: Household questionnaire generation guideline

Category Factors used to analyse category
Accessibility Pipe water supply system

Household main water source
Per capita water used
Seasonal water shortage
Reliability Duration of water supply

Water supply pressure
Consumer Perception Water quality perception

Affordability
Customer operator relations
Customer complaints
The same questionnaire was administered to selected households in all the three
different types of socio-economic suburbs as described in Table 3.6. The
questionnaire generated from the guideline is shown in Appendix 2. The consumer
survey study focused on domestic consumers and was carried out in 6 residential
areas: 2 high density, 2medium density and 2 low density suburbs (Table 3.6).
Table 3. 6: Sampled residential areas for household survey

Description Low Density Suburb Medium Density Suburbs High Density Suburbs
Old Suburbs Romney Park Sizinda
New Selbourne Park Mahatshula Emganwini
Industry, institutions and commerce were not included in the customer survey study.
In order to compare findings, an old suburb and a new suburb were selected in each
residential area respectively as shown in Table 3.6. This was done to consider service
reliability of aged pipe distribution systems and the existences of pilot studies carried
out on water audits which confirm the type of leaks, quantities of wastage with the
subsequent need of actions having been evaluated (BWCP, 2001).

Figure 3.1 is a map of Bulawayo city showing positions of residential areas selected
for the household surveys.
Figure 3. 4: Map of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe showing household survey study area (Adapted from Byo
Master Plan 2000-2015)
According to the purpose of the study, to the population size and the available
resources, the sample size of 200 was adopted with 10% as precision level, 95%
level of confidence and 0.5 degree of variability (Kish, 1965). Equation 3.0 was used
to determine sample size:
Eqn 3.0
where N = population size,

n = sample size,
e =desired level of precision
Table 3.7 indicates that a total of 255 questionnaires were administered through face
to face interviews to the selected residential areas and of this number 240 were used
for reporting as the rest were either incomplete or incorrectly filled out .

Table 3. 7: Survey sampling size for different residential areas

Residential area *No. of % of housing Target Actual Sample Valid
housing units unit total Sample size size Sample size
Emganwini 6 255 50.4 101 105 102
Sizinda 2 082 16.8 34 40 36
Romney Park 457 3.7 7 30 26
Mahatshula 2 091 16.8 34 40 36
Suburbs 698 5.6 11 20 20
Selbourne Park 830 6.7 13 20 20
Total 12 413 100 200 255 240
Source: *BCC Department of Housing and Community Services, (2006)
Inorder to guarantee quality assurance of household questionnaire administration:

 Five enumerators of undergraduate level from a local university in Bulawayo
who have knowledge of local languages were employed to assist in the
survey exercise,
 Respondents to the household questionnaires had to be aged 18 years and
above,
 Respondents had to be responsible for all or most of the monitoring of water
usage during the periods of water rationing or the payment of monthly water
bills or both,
 Respondents also had to know how much water their household usually
consumed every day.
3.3 Data collection methods
In order to fulfil the objectives of the study, data was collected using structured
questionnaires and unstructured interviews. A structured questionnaire contained a
lists of questions to which an individual has to respond by choosing his/her best
appropriate answer from the options provided (Ogunniyi, 1992). Interviews can be
defined as a conversation with a purpose of gathering information (Behr, 1983).
Purposive sampling (Sanchez, 2006) was used in identifying key informants and
asking informants to indicate individuals and documents that provided insightful

information regarding the study. The concept of saturation (Sanchez, 2006) informed
the sample size for the study, which states that the number of people to be
interviewed is not specified at the beginning of the research but the interviewer
continues to collect data until a point that no new information is emerging.
The survey sample size for each residential area considered the total number of
housing units in each area which was safely assumed to represent response level of
consumers. A survey aims to give systematic, representative and reliable information
about a particular research population (Pratt and Loizos, 2002). Baker (2004) defines
a sample as a set of elements or units drawn from a larger whole of all elements: the
population. Depoy and Gitlin (2005) put forward that the main purpose of sampling
is to select a sub-group that can accurately represent the population the intent being
to draw accurate conclusions about the population by studying a smaller group of
elements. He further argues that the enumeration of the population is the sampling
frame which is the empirical representation of the population. For the purposes of
this study the operational Bulawayo Master Plan (2000-2015) for residential areas
was the sampling frame from which the individual elements were selected.
Household questionnaire generation involved asking randomly selected people a

series of formal questions, writing down their responses and subsequently analysing
them (Pratt and Loizos, 1992). Information was elicited by directive and non-
directive probe questions which informed the development of a questionnaire which
was piloted to remove all sources of error and weakness. The questionnaire was
pretested on 30 households (5 people from the 6suburbs selected for the study) to
erase ambiguities. One standard questionnaire was developed after the pre-test and
was administered to all households in the low, medium and high density suburbs.
The questionnaire was designed to get information concerning accessibility,
reliability and the consumer perception on water supply service quality (Kimey et al.,
2008).
Systematic convenience sampling was used in selecting the households to be

interviewed (Depoy and Gitlin, 2005). This involves determining a sampling interval
width and then selecting every Kth element from a sampling frame. For this study the
3rd house along the selected streets was interviewed from the randomly selected

starting point. However, based on the inclusion criteria, households that were willing
to participate in the study were interviewed.
3.4 Data analysis and presentation
The relative performance of the utility was assessed based on the achievement of
public policy for private sector water services provision in relation to four broad
performance categories (Tynan and Kingdom, 2002). The findings were supported
by information gathered from key informants, annual reports, financial statements
and literature review. Data was presented in the form of tables, bar graphs and line
graphs showing trends.
The quantitative data collected through the customer survey questionnaires was
analysed using the Statistical Packaging for Social Sciences (SPSS Version 16.0).
Responses given from the open ended questions derived from the semi structured
interviews were examined to derive categories, which were coded and in effect,
changed into a closed ended response set on a post hoc analytic basis. Thus
numerical coding scheme based on the range of responses obtained was developed
and codes were assigned to each subject then the numerical response was then
analysed. Data was explored specifically for distribution trends and frequency
responses. Cross Tabulations were used to compare findings from the different
suburbs and presented in the form of graphs.
3.5 Ethical considerations
Ethical issues in research are concerned mainly in balancing the right of people for
privacy, safety, confidentiality and protection from deceit with the pursuit of
scientific endeavour (Pilot and Hungler, 1998). The Bulawayo City Council
Authority was engaged from inception, as the current water services provider of the
city of Bulawayo. In addition consent was sought for each household before the
interview and the purpose of the interview was clearly explained beforehand.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Determination of operational performance indicators for BCC
4.1.1 Efficiency of investment

Unaccounted for Water
In this study UfW was calculated as the difference between water supplied and
water sold i.e., volume of water „lost‟ expressed as a percentage of net water supplied
(McIntosh, 2003; IB-NET,2006; IWA, 2009). This represents water that has been
produced and is „lost‟ before it reaches the customer either through leaks, theft or
through legal usage for which no payment is made. Table 4.1 shows estimated water
consumption levels in the City of Bulawayo by BCC. The consumption for Industry
is over-estimated as key informant sources confirmed that there is suppressed
demand due to the inactive industry. The estimated UfW therefore is estimated at
between 30-40%, assuming suppressed demand in the inactive industry and
consumption is maintained at 140,000m3/d. The domestic water allocation is
estimated at 45% with household consumptions of approximately 450 l/household/d.
Table 4. 1: BCC estimated water consumption levels
Category % *Estimated Total Consumption, Unit consumption/

Number of household/d
Consumers m3/day
High Density 30 94,595 42,000 450
Low Density 15 47,297 21,000 450
Industry 25 13,966 35,000 -
System losses 20 Leaks, pump 28,000 -

breakdowns
Non Revenue 10 Fire and 14,000 -

Municipal
Premises
TOTAL 100 140,000
Source: *Byo Master Plan (2000-2015)

In 2002 UfW was estimated at 18%, while in 2006 the system performance had
deteriorated to an estimated UfW of 54%. Chinyama et al. (2007) assessed the
metering and billing in BCC and estimated the 2002 UfW at 20%, with water
production at 100,000 m3/dy and consumption at 100 l/cap.d and domestic water
allocation estimated at 55%. Their study found that no actual water losses could be
established because of metering and billing inaccuracies from over estimation of
consumption. This implies that the UfW indicator captures physical losses and
commercial losses due to inefficient billing or illegal connections. Thus high levels
of UfW water may indicate poor system management and poor commercial practices
as well as inadequate network maintenance.
The best practise UfW level is 20 % (Table 2.1). This indicates that in 2002 BCC
water services system performance was at its best with UfW estimated at 18% (see
Table 4.2) and had severely deteriorated in the year 2006 to 54%. Among some
factors influencing performance in 2002 was the implementation of the Bulawayo
Water Conservation Project (BWCP) in 2001 which was witnessed by the
rehabilitation of the distribution network system and conservation campaigns to
consumers. In 2006, performance was almost crippled due to the economic downturn
of the country with high rates of inflation estimating over 1,000% (BCC, undated). In
2010, performance is assumed to be on recovery due to the USD$ period which has
fairly stabilised the economy of the country (BCC, undated). Key informants
confirmed rehabilitation work has since commenced with the recovery of the
economy through implementation of meter replacements and pipe replacements.
Water production and consumption

The water production indicator was used to measure total water supplied for
distribution while the consumption indicator represents the urban water demand in
m3/d as indicated in Table 4.2. The difference in the water production and water
consumption indicators reflects the UfW, which is shown as a percentage of water
production in Table 4.2.

Table 4. 2: Efficiency of investment performance indicators

Indicator 2002 2006 2010
Water production, m3/d 120,000 150,000 215,000
Water consumption, m3/d 98,000 69,900 140,000
UfW,% 18 54 35
Adapted from BCC, 2002, 2006 and 2010
Unrestricted demand represents household consumption at 450 l/d and restricted

urban water demand at 350 l/d when water rationing takes place. WHO (2004)
guidelines recommend consumption at no less than 60 l/cap.d for metabolic and
hygienic needs in households with a flush toilet. Figure 4.1 shows the average
household water consumptions for different socio-economic groups obtained from
the household survey exercise.
30 to 50l/dy 50 to 100l/dy 100 to 150l/dy 150 to 200l/dy above 200l/dy

60
50
Respondents,%
40
30
20
10
Residential area
Figure 4. 1: Household survey results on consumers’ average household water consumption, April
2011
Household consumption figures were estimated by a 20 litre bucket and respondents

had to state how many buckets of water they would use per day for the household.
Figure 4.2 shows the average household sizes for each of the residential areas which
correspond to the average consumption per day from figure 4.1.

less than 5 5 to 10 11 to 15
70
60
50
Respondents,% 40
30
20
10
Residential Area
Figure 4. 2: Household survey results on consumers’ average household size, April 2011
The respondents were asked to estimate household size including babies as it was
revealed that households with babies consumed about 30 litres more water than the
same household without a baby. The low density households had an average
household size of 6 persons inclusive of domestic servants both in the households
and gardens and their respective families residing in the cottages. In the medium and
high density households most household sizes were influenced by the number of
lodgers renting extra rooms within the household hence in some instances the
household size range was 11 to 15 persons. Table 4.3 shows the estimated
consumption which is the restricted urban water demand for different socio-
economic groups ranging from 50 l/d to 200 l/d. The customer survey exercise
revealed that households in the low density are consuming up to 200 l/d with an
average household size of 6 persons.

Table 4. 3: Household consumption figures for different socio-economic groups

Residential area Category *Number of Average Average Total
housing units household Consumption Consumption,
size, no. per l/d
household,
l/d
Suburbs Low density 698 6 200 139,600
Selbourne Park Low density 830 6 200 166,000
Romney Park Medium 457 7 150 68,550

density
Mahatshula Medium 2,091 8 100 209,100

density
Sizinda High density 2,082 13 100 208,200
Emganwini High density 6,255 11 100 625,500
Total 12,413 1,416,950
Source: *Department of Housing & Community Services BCC, 2006
According to the respondents the estimated consumptions figures are from stored
reserves when water cuts are prevailing in the city. The extrapolated consumption
figures in Table 4.3 are already below the restricted consumption of 350 l/d per
household during water rationing by BCC. Key informants in the engineering
services department confirmed that demand from inactive industry and commerce
was below the allocated demand from BCC. This implies that consumers in the city
of Bulawayo are currently consuming less than the estimated consumption of
140,000 m3/d deduced by BCC. Absolute figures for water consumption for each
category were extrapolated from dividing the average household consumption by the
average number of persons in the household. Per capita consumption is at an average
of 35 l/cap.d for low density areas, 20 l/cap.d for medium density and 10 l/cap.d for
high density consumers. The extrapolated consumption figures imply that consumers
do not consume at least the minimum daily requirements within the range of 60 to 80
l/cap.d enough to take care of basic hygiene needs according to WHO (2004). The
Sanitation Manual Design (2000) for Zimbabwe cites 60 to 250 l/cap.d consumption
for households with multiple connections.
In a study carried out by NORPLAN (2005), the investigations on water use, water
conservation and affordability in the city of Bulawayo, found that water conservation
is firmly entrenched in consumers. Studies showed that respondents indicated that

they practice water conservation measures despite the lifting of water rationing. The
report further indicates that among domestic users, the most common methods of
conservation were using grey water for gardening, not using a hosepipe, flushing the
toilet infrequently and doing laundry once a week. In the non-domestic sector, the
most common methods of conservation were checking the water meter regularly,
instituting a water audit, installing low-flush toilets and infrequent flushing, using
borehole water, using recycled water in the manufacturing process and not using a
hosepipe to water the garden. This probably explains the low consumption figures for
all surveyed residential areas.
Metering level
This was the number of connections with operating meter as a percentage of total
connections. The number of water supply connections was derived from the number
of billed accounts from the financial services department which were compared with
the number of residential stands from the housing department. The engineering
services department installs meters on all buildings within BCC‟s area of
responsibility. Costing of water use relies on meter reading. Estimates are used for
households with stolen or faulty meters. The metering level was then deduced from
the number of estimated billed accounts which were then assumed to have
operational meter in place as a percentage of total connections.
Table 4.4 shows the number of water supply connections and the corresponding
metering levels for the years 2002, 2004 and 2006. The number of water supply
connections has increased over the years, while the metering level has remained
constant around 90%. This is because it is compulsory that a meter is installed with
every new water connection (BCC, 2002). The metering of water consumption
allows customers to influence their water bills and provides water supply utilities
with tools and information to allow them to better manage their systems. Best
practise value for metering level is 85 % from Table 2.1.

Table 4. 4: Efficiency of operations and maintenance

Indicator 2002 2006 2010
Water supply connections, # 106,050 112,400 152,800
Metering level, % 90 88 90
Population served, # 676,700 706,900 738,600
Adapted from BCC report, 2002, 2006 and 2010
Studies carried out by Chinyama et al. (2007) found that some institutions such as
police camps which have a number of households have bulk meters which have a
negative impact on water demand management practises due to metering and billing
inaccuracies because of over-estimation of consumption. They concluded that
individually metering and billing properties could reduce the level of water
consumption and that water losses in the system could then be more accurately
estimated.
Population Served
This was defined as the population with access to water supply from BCC, either
with direct service connection or within reach of a public water point. This study
considered the total population of Bulawayo as under the BCC utility‟s area of
responsibility. The population of Bulawayo was estimated at 676,650 in 2002 (CSO,
2002). Table 4.4 illustrates how the number of water supply connections has
increased with the projected population increase. According to the city‟s operational
Master Plan (2000 - 2015), the annual growth rate for Bulawayo was estimated at
2.7% in the year 2000. The growth rate has since increased during the years of
economic downturn when there was massive urban migration into the city as
witnessed by a great rise of the informal sector and overcrowding.
4.1.2 Efficiency of operations and maintenance

Staff per 1,000 connections
This was defined as the cost of labour input in the daily operation of a utility
measured as a ratio of inputs to outputs. Table 4.5 shows the number of staff per
1000 connections and best practice suggests a value of 5 or less for efficient
performance. In 2002 and 2006, the utility was characterised by overstaffing as the

number of employees was above the required BCC staff establishment of 1,286. In
2010, however the indicator is 4.43 which is within the acceptable range but the
reality is that there is a high staff turnover of skilled personnel within the water
services department which has negatively affected operations (BCC, undated). The
composition of the indicator then points to the abundance of unskilled personnel
which then distorts the expected interpretation of the output of 4.43 being within the
acceptable best practice range. In Africa staff per 1,000 connections is estimated
within 4 to 45 (Mwanza, 2006).
Table 4. 5: Efficiency of operations and maintenance indicators

Indicator 2002 2006 2010
Water supply connections, # 106,050 112,427 152,806
Water and Sewerage services 1,301 1,497 678

section employees, #
Staff per 1,000 connections 12.27 13.32 4.44
Adapted from BCC, 2002, 2006 and 2010
Assuming BCC is operating at full staff establishment of 1,286 in 2010, the staff per
1,000 connections would be 8, which is still way above the best practice target of 5.
A high ratio may indicate inefficient use of staff or they may reflect relaxed
employment practices, often a result of political interferences in the water utility
(Tynan and Kingdom, 2002). It may also mean that single water connections are
serving multiple households (Chinyama et al., 2007).
4.1.3 Conclusion
Table 4.6 shows the results of the technical-operational performance indicators from
the conceptual framework developed. The results indicated are below expected best
practise targets. UfW is estimated at 35 % which is above the best practise target of
20 %. Water consumption is at an average 20 l/cap.d which is far below the target of
60 l/cap.d. Metering level is at 90 % and population served is at 95 % assuming total
population of Bulawayo city as under BCC utility‟s area of responsibility. The staff
per 1,000 connections is at 4.43.

Table 4. 6: Conceptual framework results on objective 1 for 2010
Technical-operational Description Target Results

performance indicator
Volume of water „lost‟ as % of net water

Unaccounted for Water supplied. <20 % 35 %
Percentage of metered No. of connections with operating meter as >85 % 90 %

connections % of total connection
Staff/1000 connections Ratio of inputs to outputs <5 4.43
3
Water production & 60 l/cap.d 20 l/cap.d
Supply to meet demand, m /d
consumption
Population served % of population with either direct or within 100 % 95%

reach of service connection
The BCC water supply sector has the characteristics of a natural monopoly due to the
huge investments required to build the network. The potential for introducing
competition needs to be investigated with the aim of reducing inefficiencies that have
been argued to exist in the process of supplying water. The evidence of these
inefficiencies has been highlighted by the levels of UfW and the staff per 1,000
connections. Introducing competition through privatisation in the production and
cleaning of water may reduce these inefficiencies.
4.2 Determination of financial performance indicators for BCC
4.2.1 Financial sustainability

Average tariff per m3 sold
This was defined as the ratio of a utility‟s total annual direct billed revenue to total
annual water consumption, ie. volume of water sold. Direct revenue is the actual
amount billed for water services which includes domestic, commercial and industrial
revenue but not bulk water revenue. Revenue from other sales, sundry income or
interest received is excluded, as are direct revenue subsidies. Average tariff measures
the notional average tariff of the utility and it is not the same as the actual tariff
charged which may include tariff bands and different tariffs for domestic and
industrial customers. Figure 4.3 shows the trend of the average tariff over the years

2000 to 2006 and how the impacts of hyper inflation (WHO-UNICEF, 2010) affected
the costing of the water.
Ave tariff ZWD$000/cubic metre Unit operating cost ZWD$000/cubic metre

40000
35000
30000
ZWD$'ooo
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Year
Figure 4. 3: Costing of water by BCC for the years 2000 to 2006
There was a sharp increase in the cost of water during the years 2005-2006, in an
effort to try and cost water according to unit operating costs (BCC, undated).
According to key informant sources in the financial services department, the number
of complaints from consumers regarding water billing reduced significantly to near
zero as consumers benefited from the illegal mobile bureau de change. A key
informant stated that:
The nature of complaints has not changed much over the years but in terms of
water charges, complaints went quiet as from 2006 to 2009 due to „burning‟.
This crippled operations in the utility as the value of money was diminished
before any development could be carried out. BCC then devised a plan in
support of residents to pay water levies to procure chemicals for water
treatment.
The 2010 average water tariff per cubic metre was US$0.72 which is within margin
of the best practise value of US$0.76 as shown in Table 2.1.
Unit operating cost per m3 sold

The unit operating cost per cubic metre sold reflects the cost of providing water at
the customer take off point. This was defined as the ratio of a utility‟s total annual
operating expenses and total annual volume of water sold (Mwanza, 2006). The

operating cost for a water supply consists of the running costs (including salaries,
energy, chemicals) and maintenance costs (spares, repairs). Figure 4.3 shows how
BCC has always targeted to cost water charges according to unit operating cost as the
line graphs are overlapping until 2006 when hyper inflation in the country began to
affect operations. This saw BCC failing to cover running costs, among them
employees salaries, resulting in the loss of skilled personnel to seek „greener
pastures‟ and failing to afford procurement of chemicals for water treatment (BCC,
2006). Consumers were the most affected as water quality and availability
deteriorated which resulted in the nationwide cholera epidemic in 2008 to 2009
(MoHCW, 2009).
The unit operating cost of production per cubic metre was US$0.72 for the year 2010
deduced from figures in financial statements. For best practise, the unit operating
cost of production must be at least equal to or less than the average tariff for
sustainability. (Mwanza, 2006) Muhairwe (2010) in his investigations on business
approaches to the management of water and sanitation and experiences in the water
company, NWSC of Uganda, encourages public water services to at least recover
operating costs for the sustainability of operations even though there is the burden of
balancing equity with efficiency.
Operating cost coverage ratio (OCCR)

The operating cost coverage ratio is the key measure of the utility‟s ability to cover
its operating costs which exclude interest and depreciation from revenues, without
reliance on external subsidies. This was defined as the ratio of total annual billed
revenues to total annual operating costs (excluding interest and depreciation). The
average tariff per m3 sold, unit operating cost per m3 sold and the OCCR, give insight
into the financial discipline of a utility, its ability to cover operational costs with
revenues from tariffs and the general commitment to pursue a commercial approach
to the provision of a public service (Castro and Mugabi, 2009; Muhairwe, 2010). The
OCCR is also defined as the inverse of the working ratio (Tynan and Kingdom,
2002).
Figure 4.4 shows BCC‟s operating cost coverage ratio over the years 2000 to 2006.
In the year 2000 the OCCR was 0.55 and declined to 0.25 by the year 2002. This

reflects how the utility was tying budget to the upgrade of operational performance
on the rehabilitation of the distribution network (BWCP, 2001). The successful
implementation of the project is reflected as the OCCR immediately increases in
2003 to 0.4 but is short-lived as the ratio plunges down again in 2004 to 0.28 before
it rises again to 0.48 in 2006. The rise of the OCCR between 2004 and 2006 does not
necessarily reflect magnificent performance but shows how the effects of high
inflation rates can give misleading financial trends (BCC, 2006). The OCCR for
BCC deduced from the figures provided in the financial statements for the year 2010
was 0.6. This implies that BCC is unable to cover its operational and maintenance
costs from tariff revenues. An OCCR value greater than one means that revenues
from tariffs cover the operating and maintenance (OandM) costs. A value less than
one indicates that a utility is not able to cover its OandM costs. An OCCR value
equal to one means that a utility barely covers its OandM costs. Best practise target
for OCCR is 1.2 (Mwanza, 2004; Castro and Mugabi, 2009) while Tynan and
Kingdom (2002) proposed a benchmark level of 1.5 for developing countries.
0.6
0.5
Performance ratio
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Year
Figure 4. 4: BCC operating cost coverage ratio performance from years 2000 to 2005
Msuku et al. (2010), in their comparative assessment on performance of water

utilities in Malawi found that Lilongwe Water Board (LWB) achieved a working
ratio of 0.85 (OCCR of 1.2) and Blantyre Water Board (BWB) achieved a working
ratio of 0.9 (OCCR of 1.1). The figures imply that the water boards are able to
recover enough revenues from tariffs to cover operational and maintenance costs.
Castro and Mugabi (2009) in their report state that NRWB achieved OCCR of 0.8
based on billings and 0.7 based on actual collections while LWB achieved OCCR of

0.7 based on billings and 0.55 based on actual collections. The difference in findings
of financial performance of the water boards could be attributed to the different
composition of each researcher‟s definition of the OCCR.
Collection period
The collection period was calculated as the year end accounts receivables as a share
of annual revenues, expressed in day equivalents. Figure 4.5 shows the trend of the
collection period for BCC during the years 2000 to 2006. The period 2000 to 2002
shows that the collection was fairly constant at around 9 months but improved to 7
months by 2003 as a result of the massive public awareness campaigns from the
implementation of the BWCP (2001). The collection period remained relatively
constant until 2005 to 2006 which reflects an even further improvement to less than 3
months collection period. The best practise target is less than 3 months collection
period for well performing utilities shown in Table 2.1. This may reflect as good
performance from BCC during 2005 to 2006 but this was as a result of the impacts of
inflation which saw consumers benefiting from the exercise at the expense of service
delivery.
10
9
Collection period, months
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Year
Figure 4. 5: Average collection period for consumers with BCC during the year 2000 to 2006
Key informants within the utility confirmed that although consumers could afford to
pay bills for the whole year, the value of the money diminished before any
meaningful development could be implemented. For the year 2010, collection period
was 8 months calculated using debtors formula given as debtors divided by sales x

365 days. This implies that most of the funds for BCC were locked up with bad
debtors. Poor collection efficiency is usually blamed on customers but the utility may
also be at fault for delayed and faulty billing, inadequate responses to consumer
queries on billings, poor customer service and a lukewarm effort to collect overdue
accounts (Tynan and Kingdom, 2002; Chinyama et al., 2007).
Collection Ratio
This was defined as the ratio of the utility‟s actual revenues collected and total billed
revenues, expressed as a percentage. The effectiveness of the collections process is
measured by the total amount collected as a percentage of the billed amount (Baietti
et al., 2006; Yguinez, 2009). Figure 4.6 shows the trend of the collection ratio for
BCC from year 2000 to 2006. In 2000 the collection ratio was at 20% and improved
gradually to 42% by 2002 due to the implementation of the public awareness
campaigns of the BWCP in 2001. The collection ratio remained fairly constant over
the years at around 40% until 2006 when it shot up to 78%. A collection ratio of 73%
is recommended for best practise as indicated in Table 2.1. This implies that in 2006
BCC performed well in terms of meeting target performance of collection ratio.
However the reality of the impacts were not to the benefit of BCC as the
performance was influenced by prevailing high inflation rates which eroded the value
of the collected income before any meaningful development could take place. The
collection ratio is estimated at 35% for 2010.
90 collection ratio,% unaccounted for water,% overall efficiency indicator,%

80
70
Performance,%
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Year
Figure 4. 6: Relationship between collection ratio and unaccounted for water for BCC for the years
2000 to 2006

Metering and billing inaccuracies mostly result from high levels of faulty metering
and over estimation of consumption for billing (Chinyama et al., 2007). This implies
that metering and billing practices influence levels of willingness to pay and water
consumptions by different consumers.
4.2.2 Overall efficiency indicator

The Overall Efficiency Indicator (OEI) attempts to provide a global measure of
utility efficiency by comparing the volume of water for which the utility collects
revenue and the total volume of water it produces (Mwanza, 2004; Baietti et al.,
2006; Castro and Mugabi, 2009). The OEI indicator is a function of non-revenue
water and collection ratio as illustrated in Fig. 4.6. The OEI is best representative
when unaccounted for water is at its minimum and the collection ratio at a maximum
as shown in the year 2002 with OEI at 38%. In 2006 the OEI was at 38% once more
but misrepresented in that while the collection ratio was at its maximum due to high
inflation rates in Zimbabwe, there was a high value of UfW. This reflects the
different socio-economic factors that influence performance of BCC and the reason
not to interpret indicators rigidly.
The OEI indicator seeks to ensure meaningful comparison between water utilities,
although not entirely perfect, providing a good indication of the overall position of a
utility and allowing one to make an overall conclusion on performance. The results
presented in Figure 4.7 indicate the best recorded performance to the date of
publication of the report. The assumptions made over this graph are that the
efficiency indicator has remained constant and still need to improve from the
recorded figures onwards.

Johannesburg water (South

53
Africa)
NRWB (Mzuzu, Malawi) 60
SWSC (Swaziland) 62
BCC (Bulawayo, Zimbabwe) 38
LWSC (Lusaka,Zambia) 40
CWA (Mauritius) 45
KWSC (Ndola,Zambia) 18
0 20 40 60 80
efficiency, %
Figure 4. 7: Overall efficiency indicator of urban water supply utilities for selected Southern African
countries (Adapted from Water Operators Partnership-Africa Utility Performance Assessment, 2010)
The best practise target is 66% for a utility to be defined as performing efficiently as
proposed by Water Operators Partnership- Africa Utility Performance Assessment
Report (2010). From the Southern African countries presented in Figure 4.7, none of
the utilities have achieved the target figure. However, there are indications that
Swaziland Water Services Co-operation (SWSC) of Swaziland and Northern Region
Water Board (NRWB) of Malawi are performing more efficiently as shown by the
high figures of 62% and 60% respectively. BCC is lagging behind at 38% though
performing more efficiently than Kafubu Water and Sewerage Company (KWSC) of
Zambia which is at 18%. Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company (LWSC) of Zambia
and Central Water Authority (CWA) of Mauritius are also not very far ahead of
BCC, with efficiency indicators at 40% and 45% respectively.
SWSC of Swaziland operates under performance contracts with central government

(Mwanza, 2006). The contracts have an average duration of five years and cover
technical performance, service indicators, efficiency and financial indicators as well
as human resource issues. The contracts are able to enforce penalties for poor
performance. NRWB of Malawi is a state owned enterprise operating under
commercial law (Msuku et al., 2010). The water board is expected to generate
adequate revenues that will make its business viable, sustainable and therefore
develop appropriate and optimal business policies and strategies that will achieve its
financial objectives. BCC is a municipal run water supply service. The degree of

flexibility of BCC is less and is also weakened by political interference. This

explains how management setup of each water supply utility contributes to the
performance of the services provided.
Msuku et al. (2010) in their comparative assessment of public water utilities BWB,
LWB and NRWB in Malawi, found that financial performance indicators were above
the best practise targets recommended for developing countries. The assessment
further highlighted that overstaffing, high levels of UfW, huge debts and revenue in
arrears owed by bad debtors had a negative impact on the financial sustainability of
the water utilities.
4.2.3 Conclusion
Table 4.7 shows the results of the financial performance indicators from the
conceptual framework. The unit operating cost of production indicator is meeting
best practice as it is lower than the average tariff per cubic metre sold. The proposed
average tariff is at US$1.08 which is higher than the best practice value of US$0.76.
The OCCR is at 0.68 which is below the target of one. The target collection ratio is at
73 % but result from the study is far below at 35 %. Collection period is at 8 months
above the target of 3 months. The OEI is at 23 % far below the target of 66 %.
Potential pricing policies that could reduce water demand for BCC are the use of
taxes and subsidies. The challenge for practical policy making is that goals will need
to be expressed in terms of volumetric reductions in demand. Taxation is also
considered unfair especially to the low income households who may experience
budgetary problems upon introduction of taxes. According to Pollit (2002), the
achievement of the policy goals by the imposition of taxes is often a process of trial
and error and the use of subsidies to advocate efficient use of water is inferior to the
use of taxes.

Financial performance Description Target Results

indicator
3 3
Average tariff per m Actual amount billed per m of water US $0.76 US $0.72
3
Unit operating cost per m Ratio of utility‟s total annual operating < ave tariff m
3
US $0.72
expenses and total annual volume of water
sold
sold
Operating cost coverage Ratio of total annual billed revenues to total >1 0.68
ratio, (OCCR) annual operating costs (excl. interests and
depreciation
Collection ratio Ratio of actual revenues collected and total > 73 % 35 %

billed revenues
Average time to collect outstanding revenues
Collection period < 3 months 8 months
Overall efficiency Ratio of total volume for which utility > 66 % 22.7%
indicator collects revenue and the total volume of
water it produces.
4.3 Assessment of public perception on performance of BCC
4.3.1 Responsiveness to customers

Cost of obtaining a new connection
Information gathered from household survey shown in Figure 4.8 indicates the
average household income ranges for each residential area. About 55% of
respondents in the low density area of Suburbs and 45% from Selbourne Park earn an
average household income above USD$900 with less than 10% earning less than
USD$180, the rest of which are in the range of USD$180 to USD$900. From the
medium density suburbs of Romney Park and Mahatshula about 55% of respondents
earn household income of between USD$180 to USD$900 while about 5% earn
above USD$900 and the remaining 45% below USD$180. In the high density areas
of Sizinda and Emganwini 55% of respondents earn a household income of less than
USD$180.00 and 45% between USD$180 and USD$900, the remaining 5% above
USD$900.

less than USD$180 US$D180 to USD$900 above USD$900

70
60
Respondents,%
50
40
30
20
10
0
Residential area
Figure 4. 8: Household survey results on consumers’ average household income ranges, April 2011
Demographic data is normally available at Central Statistics Office but none was
available for the USD$ period at the time of study so information had to be sourced
from the household surveys. During the pre-test questionnaire survey, respondents
were not willing to give exact figures of their average household incomes as a result
a range of income figures was generated based on literature review to the final
questionnaire. Information regarding household incomes was released subject to
respondents‟ inquiries on what they would benefit out of their willingness to
participate in the exercise. This reflects on the limitations in accessing data regarding
household incomes as respondents are likely to distort their responses.
The proposed cost of a basic water connection for BCC was at USD$103.50 which is
within the same magnitude compared to the capital cost of USD$91.00 suggested by
WHO (2004) for the Africa region. Best practise suggests cost of obtaining a new
individual connection is at most 20% of average household income (Table 2.1). From
the household survey the average household income for the high density consumers
was less than USD$180.00 and 20% of this is USD$36.00. This implies that the basic
water connection fees are not affordable to the majority of consumers. However,
BCC devised a credit facility for water connection fees which is charged to the
prospective water bill (BCC, 2010).

The regional differences in cost of a basic house connection are significant with up to
more than USD$100.00 difference between Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean for
example. Africa has the lowest capital cost for water supply connections due to the
existing challenge of inadequate service provision to the growing urban populations,
in the context of the MDG‟s, where Africa lags far behind other regions ( WHO-
UNICEF, 2010).
Cost of water
The proposed tariff schedule by BCC takes into consideration those that cannot
afford to pay through their scheme for vulnerable sections where the first 5,000 m3/d
will be free water for all for domestic consumers only (BCC, 2010). The scheme
further considers sending social workers to vet situations in households that cannot
afford full cost of water services charged to them, and then BCC covers 50% of the
bill charges to ease the financial burden on the household (BCC, undated).
The proposed average block water tariff was USD$1.08, which lies within magnitude
of the range of best practise of USD$0.12 to USD$1.16 (Mwanza, 2004; Castro and
Mugabi, 2009). However, the selected best practise target is at USD$0.76 from Table
2.1, which suggests that the current water tariff is high as indicated by majority of
consumers in the medium and high density suburbs as shown in figure 4. 9.
During the household surveys, it was evident that households in the low density
suburbs were more affluent and less densely populated than those in the medium and
high density suburbs. As such, uses of water for landscaped gardens with lawns and
fountains, functional swimming pools and borehole water use were used as proxy for
affluence. Figure 4.9 shows consumers perceptions on cost of water provided by
BCC from each residential area. Responses given were that either the cost of water
was high, fair or low. According to key informants in the Financial Services
department on average an estimated charge of USD$75, USD$45 and USD$15 are
billed to consumers every month to residents in the low density, medium density and
high density respectively, assuming no interests are accruing on the accounts. During
the household survey some residents managed to produce their water bill statements
and about 80% of these had accruing interests. This reflects on affordability of water
services to the consumers.

80 high fair low

70
60
Respondents,%
50
40
30
20
10
0
Residential Area
Figure 4. 9: Household survey results on consumers’ perceptions on cost of water provided by BCC,
April 2011
More than 60% of the consumers in the medium and high density perceived the
water pricing as high, with about 55% of respondents in Suburbs and Selbourne Park
perceiving it as fair. Best practise target for cost of water is that at least 75% of
consumers should consider water as affordable (Table 2.1). During the fieldwork,
some households in the low density suburbs were observed to have completely
resorted to boreholes as their water source after BCC cut off supply due to
consumers resisting payment of council bills.
Khanyakahle (2006), in her investigations of effective municipal payments in South

Africa, found that most of the lower income households find their accounts difficult
to understand and pay their accounts by cash. The higher income groups, it was
found, made use of a variety of payment options such as cash, credit card and bank
transfers implying that they have easy access to pay bills. This reflects that there is
an observed low level of willingness to pay from consumers in the low density
suburbs as evidenced by some residents in the low density suburbs who have resisted
payment of council bills and resorted to more expensive sources of water.
Customer complaints
Figure 4.10 shows responses from household survey regarding nature of consumers‟
complaints to BCC. The major issues arising from the type of complaints were

related to water bills, pipe bursts and water quality. The household survey revealed
that 50% of consumers in the low density areas were more concerned with the
frequent pipe bursts which were perceived as increasing potholes on the roads which
later caused damage to their personal vehicles. Among other perceptions were that
flowing water compromised parking space for their visitors outside their homesteads
and water seepages into their yards interfered with their gardening and landscape.
About 38% complained about the quality of water and how it stained their swimming
pools which increased their cleaning costs. Residents in the medium and high density
also expressed concern over pipe bursts which led to frequent water cuts. However,
about 70% of all respondents state that their main complaints to BCC were in
relation to water bill issues like cost of water, over-estimated consumption and
interests charged on accumulating debt. Chinyama et al. (2007) in their studies found
that major complaints relating to water bills included billing errors and accounts
query issues due to inaccurate meter reading and over estimation from bulk meters.
The similarities of these findings further support the outcome from the survey in
relation to complaints on water bills issues.
100 Water Bills Pipe Bursts Poor water quality

90
80
Respondents,%
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Residential area
Figure 4. 10: Household survey results on nature of consumers’ complaints to BCC, April 2011
The types of complaints mentioned by consumers during the survey were similar to
those mentioned by key informants as being received from consumers, with the
complaints of issues relating to water bills topping the list as seen in Fig. 4.10. The
exact number of complaints per year could not be established but key informants

from BCC confirmed that the frequency of the three common complaints has since
increased from the USD$ period in 2009. BCC gives priority to complaints regarding
water bursts and leaks. A record of the number of leaks and burst pipes attended to
per annum by BCC reflects more on operation and maintenance indicator, as shown
in Table 4.8.
Table 4. 8: Burst pipes and new connections that were reported and attended to in 2002, 2006 and
2010
Incidents 2002 2006 2010
Burst pipes 890 234 378
Service connections, 5,845 1,328 3,262

valves and fire hydrants
New water connections 4,257 133 672
Total 10,992 1,695 4,312
Source: Engineering Services Report for 2010
Complaints are relatively easy to track but they do not tell us much about the
performance of a utility on customer relations. Customers may have become
accustomed to poor service and do not complain. In other instances it may be
difficult for customers to report complaints depending on the means and channels of
communication flow between the residents and council. For these reasons, it is
sometimes difficult to derive any meaning from the number of complaints indicator
(Tynan and Kingdom, 2002; Castro and Mugabi, 2009) . A very low number of
complaints might indicate a utility not in touch with its customers, where relatively
little interaction occurs between the utility and its customers. The other extreme is
very high levels of complaints where there is dissatisfaction and customers are
expressing it. Between these extremes lies an acceptable level of interaction where
customers are generally satisfied but the realities of not being able to keep everyone
happy, continues to generate interactions.
Continuity of Supply
Continuity of supply is defined in terms of the average hours of service a day. This
indicator was difficult to establish as consumers cited a lack of forewarning and
explanation prior to water cuts from BCC. There was general dissatisfaction amongst

respondents with the water supply delivery system in the City of Bulawayo and their
major concern was with the numerous and frequent burst pipes which they felt were
not being attended to promptly hence affecting the continuity of supply. Figure 4.11
shows responses from the each residential area regarding consumers‟ perceptions on
performance of water services provision provided by BCC. About 55% of consumers
from all residential areas confirmed that while service delivery from BCC had
deteriorated, they at least could guarantee supply of piped water within 24 hours and
rated a fair performance of BCC under the existing circumstances.
70 excellent very good fair poor very poor
60
Respondents,%
50
40
30
20
10
0
Residential area
Figure 4. 11: Household survey results on consumers’ perception on performance of water services
provided by BCC, April 2011
Continuity of supply is an important customer indicator because being connected to

the network does not necessarily mean a customer is receiving good quality water
when they need it. Inefficiencies resulting from the poor state of repair of water
infrastructure, institutional weaknesses and a lack of financial viability, often make it
difficult to have potable water flowing continuously in the pipes.
Water quality
Figure 4.12 shows the responses from consumers regarding the quality of drinking
water supplied by BCC. In the low density area of Suburbs, 95% of respondents
perceived that the water provided by BCC was not purified and was not fit for human
consumption. About 50% of respondents in Selbourne Park stated that the water was
coloured, with the remaining 45% stating that the water is simply not purified. In the

medium and high density suburbs, 65% of respondents confirmed their

dissatisfaction with the most common response stating that the water is not purified
at all. This means residents had perceived all the possible combinations of negative
description of the water from odour, colour, taste and particles with the remaining
percentage just simply emphasising one dominant negative property. For example in
Emganwini high density suburb one respondent stated that;
“If the water is collected in a container a layer of sediments settles at the
bottom and cloudy water remains, this has compelled us to boil the water to
make it safe for drinking.”
120 odour taste colour particles not purified
100
Respondents,%
80
60
40
20
Residential area
Figure 4. 12: Household survey results on consumers’ perceptions on drinking water quality
During the household survey it was observed that if drinking water from a piped
source is not clear consumers generally perceive that it is not fit for human
consumption as supported by Carter (1996) who states that water sources may be
rejected because of unpleasant but not harmful, aesthetic water quality parameters
such as colour, taste and odour. According to WUP (2005) water should be free of
taste and odour that would be objectionable to the majority of consumers.
Water pressure
Figure 4.13 shows household survey results on consumers‟ perceptions regarding the
pressure of piped water provided by BCC. Frequency of responses are given for each

suburb and consumers indicated high, average and low pressure with some
confirming that they did not know. About 70% of all respondents in all residential
areas confirmed that the pressure of the piped water was normal, though some
respondents did confirm frequent burst pipes and repairs interfered with the pressure
of the piped water as low pressure was evident at the return of water after water cuts.
80 high average low dont know

70
60
Respondents,%
50
40
30
20
10
0
Residential area
Figure 4. 13: Household survey results on consumers’ perceptions on pressure of piped water
4.3.2 Conclusion
Table 4.9 shows the results of the public perception indicators according to the
conceptual framework developed. The results shown are from the household survey
carried out in April 2011. The figures show indicators that are below expected best
practice targets. The cost of obtaining a new connection was found to be on estimate
60 % of average household income above the target of 20 %. In terms of cost of
water indicator about 35 % of the respondents‟ judgement as affordable, this is below
the 75 % target. Water quality indicator scored 5% of consumer satisfaction while
the water pressure was 70 % of consumer satisfaction. Response to customer
complaints indicator reflects the average response time to respond to major pipe
bursts around the city and not the actual customer complaints as expected. The other
nature of complaints like water bills and water quality issues are dealt with
individually if consumers directly approach council premises.

Public perception indicator Description Target Results
Cost of obtaining a new Percentage of average household income < 20 % 60 %

connection
Cost of water Percentage of consumer judgement as > 75 % 35 %

affordable
Water availability Hours of service per day
24 hrs *24 hrs
Response to customer Average response time
< 3 days 3 dys
complaints
Water quality Percentage of consumer satisfaction
100 % 5%
Water pressure Percentage of consumer satisfaction
100 % 70 %
*Water availability is subject to irregular frequent water shedding, recurrent bursts pipes and unannounced
water cuts
Consumers of services provided by public organizations have come to demand

services of better quality. This is supported by Osborne and Gaebler (1992) who state
that „…people today expect to be valued as customers, even by government service
providers.‟ They further explain that the improved levels of education of the
consumers explain part of this shift whereby increasingly well educated and
demanding citizens were less prepared to accept poor service from public officials.
Barzelay (1992) argues that the most important conceptual challenge to the
bureaucratic paradigm arising in the world of practice is the notion that government
organizations should be customer driven and service oriented. BCC therefore needs
to strengthen its focus on consumers so that it becomes customer-oriented service
driven.
4.4 Summary
The performance assessment was carried out using existing theories in relation to
four broad performance categories. Benchmark indicators, depending on availability
of data, are derived from these categories to give a quick review of the performance
of a utility (Tynan and Kingdom, 2002). Table 4.10 gives a quick review of the
performance of BCC from which one can deduce whether BCC utility is performing

well or not. The indicators in Table 4.10 reflect progress on performance over the
years as shown by the number of connections that have increased with increasing
population. Other indicators like UfW and collection ratio show fluctuations over the
years which make it difficult to interpret performance without considering external
and internal factors influencing the indicated levels of performance.
Table 4. 10: Benchmark performance indicators for the study

Indicator Target 2002 2006 2010
Population served - 676,650 706,920 738,540
Water Supply connections - 106,050 112,427 152,806
No. of employees 750 1,301 1,497 678
UfW 20% 18% 54% 35%
Working ratio(1/OCCR) <1 4.2 2.08 1.67
Staff per 1,000 connections <5 12 13 4.43
Collection ratio 73% 42% 77% 35%
Average domestic tariff (USD$/m3 ) 0.76 0.37 0.06 1.08
Overall Efficiency Indicator 66% 37.8% 35.4% 22.7%
Mwanza (2004) and Castro and Mugabi (2009) cite the following limitations when
making conclusions on benchmark indicators of utilities:
 Indicators tend to portray an incomplete picture of a utility‟s performance as they
often exclude other contributing factors such as accountability of institutions and
incentives that are not readily quantifiable.
 Analysis of data of a single year provides only a snapshot of performance.
 Indicators not to be interpreted rigidly as utilities face different social, political
and financial constraints.
Taking the limitations into consideration the results of the study in Table 4.10
are inconclusive. The non-availability of data from 2007 to 2009 has made it
difficult to come up with the latest trends on the performance of BCC. However,
among some of the prevailing factors influencing current performance is the
‘dollarization era’ of which it is uncertain how long it will exist..

5. CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
From the objectives and results of this study, the following conclusions and
recommendations were made:
Objective 1 To determine operational performance indicators of BCC.

Observations There is suppressed demand due to dormant manufacturing
industry which is still trying to recover from the macroeconomic
challenges. Service delivery was mainly being affected by high
staff turnover in the recent past.
Conclusion The target performance levels were below best practices targets.
Recommendations Further studies are required to link perceptions and technical

information on the ground.
Objective 2 To determine financial performance indicators of BCC.

Observations The utility has experienced low revenue collection efficiency and
revenue owed by bad debtors and high inflation rates in the past.
High levels of UfW and revenues in arrears owed by bad debtors
have a negative impact on the financial sustainability.
Conclusion The performance levels that were obtained in this study were
below the standard best practices recommended for developing
countries.
Recommendations BCC should close the gap between costs and revenues through
public awareness campaigns to encourage people to pay for
services provided.
Objective 3 To assess consumers’ perceptions on performance of BCC.

Observations Consumers have a negative perception towards BCC arising from
the perceived lack of response to burst water pipes, the lack of
forewarning and explanation for water cuts and the perceived high
current cost of water. Water conservation is firmly entrenched in

consumers, with respondents indicating that they practice water

conservation measures, despite the lifting of water rationing.
Consumers rate an overall fair performance on BCC.
Conclusion About 60% of consumers in Bulawayo generally have a negative

perception of service delivery.
Recommendations There is need to establish a regulatory board to protect consumers

interests and monitor performance of water services.
Further studies should include industry, commerce and
institutions in addition to domestic consumers.

REFERENCES
Asia Development Bank, ADB. (1997), Second Water Utilities Data Book: Asia
and Pacific Region, A.C. Macintosh and C. E. Yniguez Edition, ADB,
Manila.
Baietti, A., Kingdom, W. and Ginnekem, M. (2006), “Characteristics of well
performing public water utilities.”: Water supply and Sanitation working
notes www.siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWSS/Resources/workingnote9.pdf
(Accessed November, 2010).
Bov‟ee, C.L. and Thill, J.V. (1992), “Business Communication Today”, 3rd Edition,
McGraw-Hill, USA.
Barzelay, M. (1992), Breaking Through Bureaucracy: A New Vision for Managing
in Government, Berkeley: University of Carlifornia Press.
Bulawayo Encyclopædia Britannica. (2010), Encyclopaedia Britannica Ultimate
Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.
Bulawayo City Council (BCC) (2000), Annual Water Report, Bulawayo,
Zimbabwe.
Bulawayo City Council (BCC) (2001), Annual Water Report, Bulawayo,
Zimbabwe.
Bulawayo City Council, (BCC) (2002), Annual Water Report, Bulawayo,
Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe.
Bulawayo City Council, (BCC) (2010), Annual Water Report, (Unpublished).
Castro, V. and Mugabi, J. (2009), Water Operations Partnerships - Africa Utility
Performance Assessment. Final Report, Global WOP Alliance.
Chinyama, A., Gumbo, B. and Hoko, Z. (2007), Assessment of Metering and
Billing as Water Demand Management Measures: A Case Study of the City of
Bulawayo, MIWRM Thesis, University of Zimbabwe.
Chioreso, R., Mabiza, C.C. and Manzungu, E. (2008), Impacts of water scarcity on
households in Harare, Zimbabwe, MIWRM Thesis, University of Zimbabwe.
Creswell, J. W. (2000), Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches
(2nd Edition) Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Depoy, E. and Gitlin, L.N. (2005), Introduction to Research: Understanding and
Applying Multiple Strategies (3rd edition). St. Louis Missouri 63146: Elsevier
Mosby.
Franceys, R.W. (2001), Financial Management and Marketing. Unpublished
Lecture Notes. IHE. Delft, The Netherlands.
Gentry, B. and Fernandez, L. (1997), „Evolving Public-Private Partnerships:
General Themes and Urban Water Examples‟, OECD Workshop on

Globalization and the Environment: New Challenges for the Public and
Private Sectors, November 13 and 14 1997, pp. 19-25 Paris: OECD.
Ghebremichael, K. (2010), Water Supply and Sanitation, Unpublished Lecture
Notes. UNESCO-IHE, Polytechnic of Namibia.
Government of Zimbabwe (2002), Central Statistical Office Census Report
Bulawayo Province, Printflow, Harare, Zimbabwe
Haarmeyer, D. and Mody, A. (1997), Worldwide Water in Privatisation: Managing
Risks in Water and Sanitation, London: Financial Times Energy.
Harvey, N. (2002), “Effective Communication”, Gill and MacMillan Limited,
Dublin.
Hughes, O. (2003), Public Management and Administration: An Introduction, third
edition, New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Idelovitch, E. and Ringskog, K. (2000), Private Sector Participation in Water
Supply and Sanitation in Latin America, Washington D.C.: World Bank.
International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation, IBNET, (2006), Non-
Revenue Water at the International Benchmarking Network for Water and
Sanitation Utilities., Water 21, Journal of IWA, p30.
International Water Association, IWA. (2003), Assessing Non-Revenue Water and its
Components - A Practical Approach, (Accessed February 2011)
Kimey, V., Hoko, Z. and Mashauri, D. (2008), Assessment of the performance of

urban water supply utilities: A case study of Korogwe and Muhezwa towns,
Tanzania, MIWRM Thesis, University of Zimbabwe.
Kitundu, K. J. (2006), “Stakeholders‟ involvement – New Models of participation in
Tanzania (The experience of Mwaloni market environmental improvement
project in Mwanza city council)”, Municipal economist, Mwanza city
council, Tanzania.
www.tanzaniagateway.org/.../stakeholderinvolvement_newparticipationmode
lsinTanzania.pdf, (Accessed March 2011)
Manzungu, E. (2008), Towards a New Water Creed: Water Management,
Governance and Livelihood in Southern Africa, Weaver Press, Avondale,
Harare
Manzungu, E. and Machiridza, R. (2005), An Analysis of Water Consumption and
Prospects for Implementing Water Demand Management at Household Level
in the City of Harare, Zimbabwe. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 30:
925-934
McIntosh, A. C. (2003), Asian Water Supplies: Reaching the Urban Poor, Chapter
9: Non-Revenue Water, Asian Development Bank:
[http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Asian_Water_Supplies/chapter09.pdf
(Accessed July 2011)
Msuku A., Kimwaga R. and Mashauri D. (2010), Assessment of Public Water
Utilities‟ Performance in Malawi: Case of Blantyre, Lilongwe and Northern
Region Water Boards, MIWRM Thesis, University of Dar es Salaam.
Mugabi, J., Kayaga, S. and Njiru, C. (2006), Strategic Planning for Water Utilities
in Developing Countries. Utility Policy, Volume 15, Issue 1.
www.sciencedirect.com/science (Accessed February 2011).
Muhairwe, W.T. (2010), Making Public Enterprises Work, Paper presented at the
11th Waternet/WARFSA/GWP-SA Symposium held in Victoria Falls,
Zimbabwe 27-29 Oct.2010

Mwanza, D. (2004), African Public Utilities Not Performing Efficiently, Paper

presented at the 12th Union for African Water Suppliers Congress, 16 to19
February, 2004 in Accra, Ghana.
Mwanza, D. (2005), Promoting Good Governance through Regulatory Frameworks
in African Utilities, Water Science and Technology, Vol 51 No. 8, London:
IWA Publishing, pp. 71-79
Mwanza, D. (2006), Benchmarking of Utilities for Performance Improvement.
Water and Sanitation Program, WSP (8th December 2006)
Nickson, A. (2002), The Role of the „Non-State Sector in Urban Water Supply,
Paper for the„Making Services Work for Poor People‟ World Development
(WDR) 2003/04
NORPLAN, A.S., (2005), Water Use, Water Conservation and Affordability
Report; Implementation of the Bulawayo Water Conservation and Sector
Services Upgrading Project. Submitted to Bulawayo City Council.
NORPLAN, A.S., (2001), Bulawayo Water Conservation and Sector Services Up-
grading Project Final Report, Vol. 1 Submitted to Bulawayo City Council.
OFWAT, (2007), International Comparison of Water and Sewerage Service: 2004-
05, Office of Water Services, Birmingham (April, 2007).
Orodho, (2003), Essentials of Education and Social Science Research Method.
Nairobi Masola Publisher
Osborne, D. and Gaebler, T. (1992), Reinventing Government: How the
Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, Reading: Addison-
Wesley.
Panayotou, T. (1997), 'The Role of the Private Sector in Sustainable Infrastructure
Government Working Together for a Better Environment, Yale School of
Forestry and Development', In: Gomez-Echeverri, L. (ed.), Bridges to
Sustainability: Business and Environmental Studies Bulletin Series 101, New
Haven: Yale University.
Polit, D. and Hungler, B. (1998), Nursing Research: Principles and Methods.
Lippincott: Williams Wilkies.
Pollit, C. (2003), The Essential Public Manager, Maidenhead: Open University
Press.
Sammy, W. (2004), “Water privatisation in Kenya: Global issues papers No. 8”,
www.boell.de/downloads/internationalepolitik/GIP8.pdf (Accessed March
2011)
Sanchez, A. (2006), Examples of Qualitative Research methods. Available at:
http://e-articles.info/e/a/title/EXAMPLES-OF-QUALITATIVE-
RESEARCH/(Accessed November 2010)
Schouten, M., Hes, E. and Hoko, Z., (2009), „Innovative Practices of African Water
Providers,‟ Published by Sun Media Publishing. South Africa.
Schwartz, K. (2005), Politics and Water Services: The Need for a Political
Approach to Water Services Management, Paper presented at the AGUA 2005
Conference held in Cali, Colombia 31 October – 4 November 2005.
Spiller, P. and Savedoff, W. (1999), „Government Opportunism and the Provision
of Water, In: Spiller, P. and W. Savedoff (eds.), Spilled Water: Institutional
Commitment in the Provision of Water Services, Washington D.C.: Inter-
American Development Bank.
Tynan, N. and Kingdom, W. (2002), A water scorecard: Setting Performance
Targets for Water Utilities. Public Policy for the Private Sector, Note No.
242, World Bank

United Nations Development Programme, (2006), Beyond scarcity: power, poverty

and global water crisis. Human development report, 2006, New York: United
Nations Development Programme
UNICEF-AusAID. (2009), Assessment of water and sanitation systems in
Zimbabwe, Assessment Report submitted to Bulawayo City Council.
UnitedCitiesandLocalGovernments;www.cities-
localgvernments.org/gold/Upload/Country_profile/Zimbabwe.pdf, (Accessed
April 2011)
Wolff, G. and Gleick, P. (2002), The soft path for water. In: Gleick, P. (editor). The
world‟s water: 2002-2003. Washington DC: Island Press
Workshop, 4-5 November in Oxford.
Wright, A. (1997), Toward a Strategic Sanitation Approach: Improving the
Sustainability of Urban Sanitation in Developing Countries, Washington
D.C: World Bank.
WHO-UNICEF. (2001), Joint Monitoring for Water Supply and Sanitation. Global
Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment, Geneva and New York.
World Health Organisation, WHO. (2004), Guidelines for drinking water quality,
Third Edition. Volume 1. Recommendations, Geneva, Switzerland.
World Health Organisation, WHO. (2002), Water Supply and Sanitation Sector
Report, 2000. Africa Regional Assessment.
World Health Organisation, WHO. (2000), Tools for assessing the Operation and
Maintenance status of water supply and sanitation in developing countries:
Tool 7; Performance indicators for water supply and sanitation. Geneva,
Switzerland.
Yerpes, G. and Dianderras, A. (1996), Water and Wastewater Utilities Indicators,
2nd Edition. World Bank, Washington D.C., USA.
Yniguez, C.E. (2009),”Phillipines Small Towns water utilities performance: World
Bank waterweek”,
www.siteresources.worldbank.org/.../8.2_Philippines_benchmarking_study_
Yniguez.pdf (Accessed March 2011)
Ziria, N. A. (2008), “Local revenue generation: Uganda experience”,www.ansa-
africa.net/.../uganda_revenue_generation_Ziria_( Accessed May2010)
Zinyama, L. (1995), „The evolution of the spatial structure of the greater Harare.‟
1890 to 1990 in Zinyama, L. M, Tevera, D. S. And Cumming (eds) 1995,
Harare: the growth and problems of the city. University of Zimbabwe
Publications, Harare

Appendices

A1. Key Informant Interview Guideline
Name of Respondent: .................................................................
Position: ...............................................................................
Date: ..........................................
(A) General Information
1. When did the authority start? (History of authority)
2. Briefly explain the structure of the organisation and their functions.
3. What is your current number of customers?
4. What kind of people in the community do you target?
(B)Water Supply
5. What are the sources of water for your production?
6. What is the current production of water per day?
7. What is the current percentage of production v/s demand in water supply?
8. What is the percentage estimation of UfW per day?
9. What is the total number of customers that have been connected in the system?
10. How many out of them have been metered?
11. How many community stand pipes do you have?
12. How many are working?
13. Which month in the year do you have critical water shortage?
14. What are the main causes of this water shortage?
15. What is the unit operational cost of production?
16. What is the average water tariff for different users?
17. What are the total revenues collected per year?
18. What is the collection period of tariffs from consumers?
19. What is the labour cost as proportion of operational cost?

20. How do you rate your performance as a water supply utility?
(C) Customer Service Provision
21. What are the ways in which customers can get access to the utility? (phone, in
person, internet etc.)
22. To what extent are customers involved in decision making to the utility?
(customer council, suggestion boxes, etc.)
23. What is the nature of complaints over the past years? (poor services, pipe burst,
water shortage, poor water quality etc.)
24. How do you resolve the customer‟s problems? Or how does the authority use the
information generated by the complaints?
25. Has the nature of complaints changed over the years?
26. How do you cater for the urban poor?
(D)External Factors
27. What are the existing roadblocks (regulatory, institutional, structural etc.) in
water supply provision?
28. How do these roadblocks affect your organisation‟s action related to the customer
relation?
29. What marketing strategies do you have for your services?
30. What procedure is used to establish tariffs?
31. In your opinion, what problems do you see when you look at the management of
your water provision? What do you think should be done?

A2. Household Questionnaire Guideline
GENERAL INFORMATION
Enumerator‟s Name:............................................................................................
Name of Respondent:...........................................................................................
Name of Suburb:...................................................................................................
House Address:.....................................................................................................
Date:............................... Start Time:............................... Finish Time:.................
Please respond by ticking one answer to each relevant question. For each of 1b) and 1c) indicate the
number of females and males respectively.
Section A: Accessibility of Water
1. Demographic and Socio-economic status of household
a)No. of b)No. of c)No. of d)Collective e)Income generating

people adults children Income activities carried out at
within the households
household
[ ]Selling vegetables
[ ]females [ ]females [ ]US$180>
[ ]Less than 5
[ ] Home salons
[ ]males [ ]males [ ]US$180-US$900
[ ] 5-10
[ ] Home industry
[ ] 11-15 [ ]US$900<
[ ] Commodity trading
[ ]other
specify [ ] Formally employed
[ ] other
specify..................................
2. Please indicate type of house
[ ] Semi-detached [ ] Flat [ ] shack
[ ] Bungalows [ ] Mansionatte []
other............................................

3. What is the main water source used by the household?
[ ] Piped water [ ] water vendor [ ] River/pond
[ ] well/borehole [ ] tanker truck []

other..................................
4. If it is piped, where is the source connected?
[ ] In own house [ ] In own yard/plot [ ] In neighbours house
[ ] communal kiosk [ ] other..................................
5. In a situation where piped water is not available, what is your alternative source?
[ ] Public kiosk [ ] neighbouring house [ ] pond/river
[ ] water vendors [ ] well/borehole []

other.................................
6. If well/borehole who is the owner?
[ ] district council [ ] community [ ] private
[ ]other.................................
7. On average how frequently do you receive piped water?
[ ] once a day [ ] twice a day [ ] once a week
[ ] continuous 24hr supply [ ] every alternate day []

other..................................
8. Do you experience seasonal water shortages in each year? Yes [ ] No

[]
9. If yes, which months in the year?
[ ] Dec - March [ ] March – June
[ ] June – Sept [ ] Sept – Dec
Section B: Affordability and Reliability
10. What is the average water consumption per day for the household use?(sample
using a bucket to estimate consumption)
[ ] 30- 50litres [ ] 50-100litres [ ] 100-150litres
[ ]150 – 200litres [ ]other................................

11. Is your piped water metered? Yes [ ] No [ ]
12. If yes, how much do you pay per cubic meter/unit of water? .....................
13. If no, how much do you pay per month? ................. daily? ......................
14. In your opinion how do you perceive water price?
[ ] high [ ] fair [ ] low [ ] other..........................................
15. Do you afford to pay for water services? Yes [ ] No [ ]
16. Have you ever experienced a situation where you could not afford to pay water
bills in the past 12months? Yes [ ] No [ ]
17. If yes, give

reason(s)........................................................................................................
18. In your own opinion, do you think water services have improved in the past three
years? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Section C: Sufficiency and Effectiveness
19. Do you receive your water bill in time every month? Yes [ ] No [ ]
20. If no, how long does it take to receive your water bill?
[ ]1-2months [ ] 2-4months [ ]4-6months
[ ] >6months [ ]other..................................
21. Have you ever made any complaint to the authority about water services?
Yes [ ] No []
22. If yes, what type of complaint?
[ ]water bills [ ] Pipe Burst [ ] poor water quality
[ ]other specify.....................................................................................................
23. Was your complaint handled? Yes [ ] No [ ]
24. If yes, were you satisfied with the way your complaint was handled?
Yes [ ] No [ ]
25. Does the BCC supply good water for drinking? Yes [ ] No [ ]
26. If no, please state why?
[ ] odour [ ] taste [ ] coloured [ ] particles []

other............................

27. When piped water is available how do you rate the water pressure?
[ ]high [ ] average [ ] low [ ]don‟t know [ ]other.....................
28. In your opinion, do you think BCC is providing good services? Yes [ ] No [ ]
29. What do you perceive as major problems in relation to water services provision?
[ ] cost of water [ ] water shortage [ ] customer services
[ ] water losses [ ]other....................................
30. How would you describe the level of information you have about BCC water
supply services?
[ ]very well informed [ ] well informed [ ] not at all informed
[ ]don‟t know [ ]other.........................................................................
31. In your opinion what do you think should be done by BCC to improve the water
service provision?
.........................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................
32. Performance Evaluation of Service Provision
Billing Value for Promptness Supply Performance

Accuracy money in repairing efficiency of service
burst pipes provision
i)Excellent
ii)very good
iii)fair
iv)poor
v)Very poor
Please respond by ticking one comment for each column.
vi)Other specify...........................................................................................................

A3. Research Agreement

Urban Water Supply System-Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Urban Water Supply System-Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Urban Water Supply System-Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

ASSESSMENT OF PERFORMANCE OF URBAN WATER

M.SC. THESIS IN IWRM

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

ASSESSMENT OF PERFORMANCE OF URBAN

Prof. Dr. Eng. Innocent Nhapi

DECLARATION ...................................................................................................................... iii

1.4 Scope and limitations of the study ............................................................................ 3

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ...........................................................................................20

4.1.3 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................39

4.2 Determination of financial performance indicators for BCC ....................................40

4.3 Assessment of public perception on performance of BCC ........................................49

4.4 Summary ................................................................................................................58

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

BCC Bulawayo City Council

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 1

1.2 Problem statement

The City of Bulawayo in Zimbabwe is located in Natural Region 4 of Zimbabwe

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 2

1.3 Objectives of the study

1.3.1 Main objective

1.3.2 Specific objectives

1. To determine technical-operational performance indicators of BCC

1.4 Scope and limitations of the study

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 3

The researcher inclusively considered performance indicators from Kimey et al.

The following limitations were encountered during the study:

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 4

1.6 Report outline

Chapter 1 -Introduction, research questions, objectives of the study, scope of the

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 5

Chapter 5- The chapter gives conclusion and recommendations derived from

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 6

An illustration of the dimensions regarding the management of water services is the

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 7

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 8

Zimbabwean municipalities fall into the category of public utilities whose

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 9

2.2 Performance measurement in Public Utilities

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 10

Municipality performance targets suggested by Baietti et al. (2006) for developing

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 11

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 12

Municipalities provide a service that should be generating enough revenue to meet

2.3 Public perception

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 13

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 14

which relies almost exclusively on centralized infrastructure and decision making

2.4 Conceptual framework

In this section, the topic of performance is elaborated upon by looking at a

2.4.1 Efficiency of investment

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 15

2.4.2 Efficiency of operations and maintenance

2.4.3 Financial sustainability

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 16

2.4.4 Responsiveness to customers

Belindah Ncube MSc IWRM 2010/11 Page 17

Table 2. 1: Performance Indicators used in the study