water supply service in india: corruption as perceived by the bpl population

8/14/2019 Water Supply Service in India: Corruption as perceived by the BPL Population

1/15

Water Supply Service

Introduction

Water is a basic and essential need of all households. For poor households, availability ofsubsidized & regular water supply through different schemes provided by the governmentplays a crucial role to meet their daily water requirements for drinking, sanitation and

irrigation.

National Water Policy (2002) among many other things aims at subsidized water supplyto the disadvantaged and poorer section of the country.1

The Government of India provided assistance to the states to establish specialinvestigation divisions in the Fourth Five Year Plan to carry out identification of problem

villages. Taking into account the magnitude of problem, and to accelerate the pace of

coverage of problem villages, the central government introduced ARWSP in 1972-73 toassist States and Union Territories with 100% grants-in-aid to implement drinking water

supply. Coverage norms:

40 litres per capita per day of drinking water for human beings

1 hand pump or stand post for every 250 persons, and

Availability of water source within 1.6 km in plains and 100 metres elevation in

hilly areas.

This programme was given a mission approach when the Technology Mission on

Drinking Water Management, called the National Drinking Water Mission (NDWM),was introduced as one of the five missions in the social sector in 1986, NDWM was

renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991, andfurther in 1999, the department of drinking water supply was created. The Missions

main objectives are:

To ensure coverage of rural habitations with safe drinking water supply

To preserve quality of water by institutionalising water quality monitoring and

surveillance as well as support the states for tackling the quality problem.

To ensure the sustainability of the systems and sources

A number of habitations, which were covered under ARWSP, have slipped back to not

covered or partially covered due to a number of factors like:

Sources going dry or lowering of ground water table,

Sources becoming quality affected,

Systems outliving their lives,

Systems working below rated capacity due to poor operation and maintenance,

Increase in population resulting in lower per capita availability,

Increase in population or emergence of new habitations.

1http://wrmin.nic.in/ (National Water Policy 2002)

1


2/15

Bharat Nirman conceived as a plan to build rural infrastructure within a four-year period

(2005-06 to 2008-09) have drinking water supply as one of the components as it hastaken over ARWSP. As drinking water supply is a state subject the respective states take

responsibilities of providing the facility but central assistance is indispensable.

In terms of coverage of habitations for water supply underBharat Nirman Programme,

the states have been categorized as above the national average and below. But betterachievement does not necessarily mean that all habitations of these states have been

covered with water connectivity and all covered habitations are being provided water

supply of good quality and in sufficient amount. These percent figures as revealed by thegovernment could be an indication at best that, water issues are being attended to and in

no way this figures reflect BPL households.

Table 1: Percent of Habitations covered under Bharat Nirman(Coverage during 2005-06 to 2006- 2007)

States/UTs

Percentage of Habitations Covered against

Target Set Above or Below Average

Manipur 373

Above

Pondichery 172

Uttar Pradesh 117

Mizoram 99

Chattisgarh 92

Madhya Pradesh 82

Assam 80

Orissa 76

Sikkim 70

Haryana 67

Gujarat 64

Himachal Pradesh 58

Karnataka 58National Average

Bihar 57

Below

Kerala 54

Tamil Nadu 52

Rajasthan 52

Uttarakhand 50

Goa 50

Meghalaya 49

Maharashtra 45

Tripura 43

Andhra Pradesh 43

Punjab 43Arunachal Pradesh 41

Nagaland 40

Jharkhand 32

Jammu & Kashmir 22

West Bengal 17

Source: http://ddws.nic.in/

2


3/15

To assess BPL households perception and experience with the water service during the

last one year, TII-CMS ICS 2007interacted with 22728 households across 31 States andUTs in the country.

Interaction with Water service

Among the surveyed BPL households covered in 31 states and UTs, 14 percent interactedwith water service for one or other purposes during the last one year. Wherever the waterservices are available now, there are chances for more households to interacting with.

(in %)

Usage of Service

All India

(N=22728)

States by Targets Achieved

Better Low

14 17 12

The interaction of households for water service could be broadly categorised in to two.

One, which are recurring in nature and other are non-recurring ones and therefore needslesser number of interaction with service providers.

Recurring visit is for bill payment at the designated outlets while non-recurring shouldinclude interactions made for connection related issues like getting a new connection,

repairing of meters among others.

The percentage of BPL households visiting water supply was more in better achieved

states (17%) compared to low achieved states (12%). However, in states like Gujarat

and Sikkim, the percentage of BPL households visiting the service provider was around

one-third while in Chandigarh & Goa among low performing states, it was nearly one-

fourth.

There is a marked difference between rural and urban to the extent of BPL householdinteraction. In urban area, 22% poor interact with water service while it is only 11 % in

rural areas. Rural households more likely rely on community sources like wells, tube-

wells and natural sources of water (e.g., spring, river etc) whereas in urban slumshouseholds largely depend on piped water supply. More urban households have

individual connections and are entitled to pay water bills. So interaction of urban BPL

households is more compared to their rural counterparts.

Purpose of Visit

Of those who interacted with water supply service nearly 40 per cent visited for

installation/maintenance of hand pumps followed by visit to pay the bill (36%). Among

states, a major chunk of households in Gujarat (73%) and Meghalaya (63%) interactedfor installation/maintenance of hand-pumps during the last one year.

3


4/15

The households labelled as BPL are not subjected to pay the bill for water. As selection

procedure of BPL households in every state has not been done properly in some cases theBPL households without a BPL card are treated like general households.

More than 80 percent of BPL households in Goa and Chandigarh interacted with thewater supply service to pay the monthly bill. Since in states like Delhi, Goa, Chandigarh

and Pondicherry, the villages are more urbanised and have more number of individualconnections so percentage of households interacting for paying water bill is relativelyhigh. Number of households interacting for supply of water tankers is high in states like

Assam (31%), Delhi (21%) and Tripura (16%).

Purposes of Interaction: All India

Installation/maintena

nce of hand-pumps

38%

Regularization of

unauthorised water

connection

4%

Bill payment

35%

Supply of water

tankers

7%

Irrigation water

6%

Repair of water pipe

6%

Water meter

installation

4%

The study revealed that the BPL households had to make repeat visits to the concerned

office for purpose other than to pay the water bill.

Of the households visiting for purposes other than paying their monthly bill, as high as 56

percent had to make three or more visits to the water supply outlets during the last one

year. A break up of reasons for which these households interacted thrice or more bringsout that majority of these BPL households interacted for installation/maintenance of hand

pumps.

Visiting Three Times or More

4


5/15

(in %)

Purpose of Visit All India

States by Targets Achieved

Better Low

Installation/maintenance of hand-pumps 60 66 53

Supply of water tankers 10 11 45

Irrigation water 10 9 11Repair of water pipe 8 6 9

Regularization of unauthorised water

connection

6 5 8

Water meter installation 6 4 9

About 66% BPL households are forced to interact several times with water supplyservices for installation/maintenance of hand pumps reveals that the better performing

states have failed to provide consistently workable source of drinking water.

As high as 45% households interacting the service for supply of water tankers in the lowperformance states indicates the unavailability and irregularity of water supply.

Difficulty Factors

In order to avail the services, most of the poor households had to face one or the other

difficulty. The nuisance included procedural delays, absence of staff, and corrupt staff.Being illiterate, the BPL households during their visit to the office come under the

influence of middlemen at the time of filling up forms or applying for the purpose.

Difficulty Factor All India

Procedural 41Corrupt Staff 31Absence of Staff 23Interference of Middlemen 5

More than half of these BPL households felt that office staffs who are responsible for

providing services under the water supply programmes either indulge in corrupt practices

or are unavailable. The unwanted delays force BPL households either to remain deprivedof the benefits or use unfair means to make the system work. BPL Households believe

that causing such procedural delays is a deliberate practice of the department staff

towards compelling visitors to use unfair methods like paying bribe or using a contact.

Perception about Water Supply service

42 percent of these poor households view that corruption exists in the water supply

service. Even though some states have taken measures towards curb corruption and make

the service delivery efficient, it is yet to be felt at the grassroots. As a result BPLhouseholds continue either to be deprived of the service or keep visiting.

5


6/15

In Assam, despite achieving 80% of the allotted targets nine out of ten BPL households

felt that corruption existed in the water supply service. While in Arunachal Pradesh,where only around 40% water supply targets was achieved, as low as 14% believe that

corruption exists.

On being enquired whether corruption has increased or decreased in the last one year,

around one-fourth felt that it has increased while half of the respondents did not noticeany change in the level of corruption during the last one year. In states like Jharkhand(65%) and Assam (62%), relatively higher percentage of BPL households felt that

corruption in water service has in fact increased during last one year. However, in states

like Delhi (61%), Chattisgarh (53%), Bihar (56%) and Chandigarh (51%), majority of the

surveyed households believe that corruption has come down in the department.

21

48

3129

53

17

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Respondents(%

Better Low

Group of States

Perception about Level of Corruption in Water Department

by Category of States

Increased Same Came Down

Incidence of Corruption

Of the BPL households who interacted with water supply service 14 percent had to eitherpay bribe or use contact for availing the services.

Although these BPL households perceive corruption in water services but due to theirinadequate source of income, about 4 % could not afford to pay bribe and thus could notavail the services. Moreover, since most of them do not have any contact to influence

to get their work done, they remain deprived of the benefits.

6


7/15

8

6

4

6 6

4

11

6

4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Respondents(%

All India Better Low

Category of States

Gateway of Services-Bribe or Contact?

P aid Bribe

Used Influence

Did not take service

Scarcity of water supply could be the reason for more BPL households paying bribe in

the states where achieved target is lower than the national average.

Reason for Paying Bribe

Among reasons cited by those who paid bribes, installation/maintenance of hand pumpswas reported by high percentage (49%) of the BPL households, out of those who paid

bribe. This may be due to the lack of proper implementation or inconsistency of water

supply programmes.

The second most important reason cited by BPL households for paying bribe was to get

water connection regularized. This is more prevalent in urban areas than the rural

counterpart. The next important reason was the repair of water pipes in the states likeArunachal Pradesh (27%), Jammu & Kashmir (30%) & Delhi (43%). Many BPL

households had to pay bribe to get supply of water tankers in Delhi (29%), Karnataka

(16%) and Meghalaya (13%).

In many states like Delhi, potable water is supplied through tankers, in the event of non-

availability/short supply of water, within 3 hours of the complaint subject to availabilityof tanker at a particular location. This service is free of cost.

7


8/15

Case StudyShyam Ahuja is a resident of Najafgarh in Delhi whose water meter had stopped functioning. He

promptly registered a complaint in the Water Supply Department.

But no action was taken on his complaint. He recalls, I made innumerable visits to the Water

Department to plead them to take an immediate action but each time they sent me back with some lame

excuse. Without a meter I was unable to verify my bills so I was unable to make the payments. A yearpassed away making rounds of the water supply department..

Then one day Shyams water supply was disconnected without any notice due to non payment ofbills. He was compelled to make the payment without any verification. However even after paying the bills

the supply was not re-started. Shyam recalls, Life without water even for a day is so difficult but here the

department did not care if days passed away without any water supply. We had to now purchase water with

our meager income to manage our work. I made several frantic visits to the department but the indifference

continued. Then one day a water department staff took me aside and told me that my work could be done if

I was willing to pay Rs.300. After spending a huge amount in the visits to the department and thenpurchasing water; I was completely stressed out. I knew I had no choice so I decided to pay the bribe to

finally get the meter repaired!

Reasons for which bribe was paid

53

10

14

7

9

7

4

1

8

9

11

458

13

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Installation/Maintenance of hand pumps

Bill payment

Regularization of unauthorized w ater connection

Water meter installation

Supply of w ater tankers

Repair of w ater pipe

Irrigation Water

Rural Urban

Regularization of unauthorised connections was one of the reasons for which more urban

poor households had to pay bribe. In rural areas paying bribe was more for reasons suchas installation of hand pumps and for irrigation water, whereas BPL households paying

bribe for issues related to water bill was more in urban locations.

Route of Bribe Payment

Four-fifth of those who paid bribe to avail water services paid it directly to concerned

government officials/staffs of the water service. Presence of middlemen was also noticed

within the system. One out of five BPL households paid it through an agent. These poor

households due to their low socio-economic profile many a times hesitate to interact

8


9/15

directly with the concerned staff and therefore get in to trap of middlemen or agents. In

better performing category of states, the percentage of households paying bribe throughagents was a little more.

(in %)

Route of PaymentAll India

Govt. official/staff 81Agent/Middlemen 18

Local Representative 1

Interestingly, the present study found that apart from agents and middlemen, localrepresentatives like panchayat or ward members also played the role of intermediary for

routing bribe amount to the officials. However, agents/middlemen were found to be more

active in urban locations while in rural areas official staffs were prominent as far asrouting of bribe is concerned.

A higher percentage of rural BPL households (83%) paid bribe to govt. officials than in

urban BPL households (78%). On the other hand, 20% households paid bribes throughMiddlemen in urban areas against 16% in rural areas. Role of middlemen was reportedly

found to be more in Manipur, Mizoram, Jammu & Kashmir, Goa and Tamil Nadu.

In case of water supply, the presence of agents or middlemen has a catalytic impact in

providing better services due to their personal interests.

Estimation of Bribe Amount

Out of the total BPL households in the country it is estimated that around 6.71 lakhshouseholds paid bribe to avail water service in the last one year the total amount of bribe

paid by BPL households to the water service during the past year is estimated to bearound Rs 23.94 crore. In other words, on an average a BPL household had shelled out

Rs 357 as bribe to avail water service.

The amount of paid bribe ranges from as low as Rs 10, paid at the time of bill payment in

Karnataka to as high as Rs 3700, paid for installation of hand pumps in Uttar Pradesh.Since in rural areas the source is shared by community, most of the times it is the

community, not individual household who interact with the service. Thus in the rural

areas more than one household share the bribe paid for installation or repair of handpumps.

In Punjab, Haryana, Manipur, and Uttar Pradesh the average amount of bribe is quitehigh, ranging from Rs.700 to 2350. The minimum bribe paid in Uttar Pradesh amounts toRs. 1000 also for installation and maintenance of hand pumps.

The reasons for paying bribe are:

9


10/15

Reasons for Paying Bribe by BPL HHsBribe Paid (Rs)

Range Average

Installation/Maintenance of hand pumps 30-3700 509

Bill payment 10-500 101

Regularization of unauthorized water connection 20-1500 350

Water meter installation 30-1000 228Supply of water tankers 35-1000 194

Repair of water pipe 20-500 149

Irrigation Water 20-600 179

Perception on Measures Taken to Improve Service Delivery

When asked if initiatives taken against corruption by the water service were successful,

about 16 per cent of the BPL households replied in the affirmative, while the rest either

disagreed or showed their unawareness about any such initiatives.

(in %)

Measures Taken toAll India States by Targets Achieved

Better Low

Check against corruption 16 21 11

Make information easily available 24 30 18

Improve Grievance Redressal 22 26 18

Easy access to information about procedures and processes to avail the services is a

prerequisite to improve service delivery and make it user friendly. However, three out of

four households interacting with the service felt that information on document required orwhen meter will be installed or repaired is not easily available.

To add to the problem on approaching the concerned staff someone with grievance, there

is less chance of listening to their woes. In Delhi, Bihar & Chandigarh, percentage ofBPL households who acknowledged improvement in grievance redressal system in the

water supply system was relatively more.

10


11/15

Where do states stand?

Comparison of states performance on the basis of targets achieved during 2005-2007

vis--vis BPL households perception and experience about corruption (as shown

in the matrix below) shows no correlation between the extent of achievement of

official targets and corruption experienced by BPL households.

Performance

in terms

of

targets

of water

supply

achieved

Extent of Corruption experienced by BPL households

Alarming Very High High Moderate

Low Nagaland,Jammu &

Kashmir,Tamil Nadu

Goa,Jharkha

nd,Meghal

aya

Kerala, Bihar,Maharas

htra,Arunach

al

Pradesh,West

Bengal

Uttarakhand,Rajasthan,

Andhra Pradesh,Tripura, Punjab

Better Assam MadhyaPradesh,

Chattisg

arh,Orissa

Haryana,Manipur

, Uttar

Pradesh,Pondich

ery

Mizoram, Chandigarh,Karnataka,

Gujarat, Delhi,

HimachalPradesh, Sikkim

Among better-achieved states the level of corruption is found to be alarming in the states

of Jammu & Kashmir, Tamil Nadu and Nagaland while within the category with lower

coverage of habitation, only Assam has an alarming level of corruption.

Higher achievement and very high extent of corruption co-exist in states such as

Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir, Tamil Nadu, Meghalaya, Goa and Jharkhand. This fact isalso supported by the fact that average amount of bribe paid in better achieved states is

far more than that of low achieved states. Higher achievement in terms of coverage ofmore habitation for water supply does not mean that BPL households get the benefits outof it. Apparently they are not the priorities and their woes continue.

11


12/15

Service Providers Perspective

Regarding Complaints and Problems: The concerned officials of the water services

across the country admitted that their department regularly receives complaints on issueslike unavailability of clean and regular water supply, lack of hand pumps or tube wells

due to limited coverage of the water supply programmes and leakage & burst of water

pipes. Faulty meter readings, excess bill and procedural delay are other commoncomplaints.

Blockage in pipe due to high iron content is a common problem in Tripura while inMeghalaya due to hostile terrain the supply of water is inadequate. In Punjab, BPL

households include complaint regarding accumulation of water in low-lying areas during

rainy season.

They opined that many a times, due to lack of information and complete documentation,

household has to make repeated visits for getting a new connection or for repair/

installation of a meter and hand pump.

Regarding Pro-poor Initiatives: In order to provide easy and better services for BPL

population most states have taken some pro-poor initiatives which include supply of

water tankers, free or subsidized connections, panchayat collaboration to serve peoplebetter, village to village publicity of schemes, recruitment of more staff, opening of new

counters & complain booths, accelerated & additional water supply, extension of waterlines, construction of water tanks and increase in the number of technical staffs.

Introduction of Swajal Dhara in 26 states started assuring 24 hours water supply by

institutionalising community participation for the sustainability of drinking water supplysystems and sources in rural areas. Underway water facility along with rainwater

harvesting is getting popular in Maharashtra.

To provide potable drinking water, new water treatment plants have been set up in

Jharkhand. Special squad of engineers has been formed to look after the technicalities ofwater supply system in Rajasthan. Frequent field visit and lab testing of water areundertaken to maintain the quality of supplied water in Bihar.

Single-window-system in Punjab is one of the unique initiatives to fasten the process

whereas in Karnataka, Sikkim, and Arunachal Pradesh the concerned department has nottaken any initiative.

12


13/15

Citizens charter is available in the Central Water Commission (CWC) offices and in

departments of drinking water supply of respective states as well as in the websites.

Regarding Extent of Corruption: Despite the fact that people faced so many problems

in getting full and prompt services, receiving complaint from people was negligible inmost of the states. In states of West Bengal, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh,

Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Bihar, Delhi, Uttarakhand, Punjab,Haryana, Tripura, J&K and Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Arunachal, and Pondicherry theofficials did not receive any written complaint.

Meghalaya, Orissa, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Chandigarh are among the states

where very few verbal complaints had been received. While officials in Mizoram andGoa reported to have received very few written complaints in Rajasthan the office staffs

had received as high as 50 written complaints in past 3 month.

Regarding Measures to curb Corruption: Concerned officials in states of West Bengal,

Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Orissa and Bihar informed about the formation of vigilance

committees at village levelto monitor the functioning of water service.

Social audit was conducted in Punjab; vigilance awareness week was celebrated in

Meghalaya. In Kerala, special periodical training to was provided for the staff to curb

corruption. Separate division is operating in Jammu & Kashmir to look into the status ofcorruption on 24 hr basis. While Jharkhand started computerized billing to keep work

procedure systematic, in Rajasthan linemen are assigned to check pipes.

Surprisingly, call centres have been operating in highly corrupt states of Madhya Pradesh

and Jharkhand for fastening the redressal mechanism. Single window system is a measure

to stop interaction with various divisions in Andhra Pradesh, towards reducing the

chances of getting into unofficial means to get the work done.

Although there are targeted programmes for rural community, BPL households dont get priorities. However, officials felt that more efforts need to be made to help curb

corruption and that in order to do the same, people should be sensitised about the

provisions of water service by organising regular campaigns at village level. This could

be done by involving local panchayats and Civil Society groups working in the area.

Over and above, the service providers felt that strict, timely and unbiased action against

corrupt officials and staff of the department would help in checking corruption. Furtherstrengthening of departments vigilance cell was another suggestion made by service

providers. Some officials opined that the number of staff should be increased for betterand efficient service delivery.

13


14/15

Suggestions to Improve Service Delivery under Water Service

Besides improving and fully implementing the programmes, states could consider some

measures for raising awareness against corruption, information dissemination, repairing

leakages, correct meter installation and improving better compliance of rules andregulations.

Supply of water tankers: supply of water tankers in low availability areas or in thesummers should be decentralised and local philanthropists should be roped in to attend to

local needs.

Articulation of problem: BPL users need to be articulated/ they should communicatetheir problems properly and promptly. Till this culture comes into practice, particularly

among BPL households, improvement in redressal cannot be much different. Users more

often remain passive for even reasons including fear of not being attended to.

Getting organized: BPL people need to be more organized. In rural areas, water users

committees should be more organized and well informed about their rights.

Campaigns: Illiteracy and lack of individual efficacy opens the door for harassment and

corruption. Since most BPL households access only community water supply outlets,

special campaigns in areas selected on the basis of low community pump density shouldbe organized for sanctioning /installation of hand pumps. During such campaigns, special

assistance should be offered to BPL communities for filling up of forms and completing

other procedures.

Since water is a basic and life saving need, an annual fortnightly campaign in each of the

districts for providing water services would go to narrow the distance between the

services and the users and over time, would increase awareness.

Regularization: For dealing with regularisation of illegal connections, where suchinstances are more special campaigns for regularization should be held, may be with offer

of some concessions.

Involvement of local panchayats: the responsibility of maintenance of hand pumpsshould be decentralised and handed over to the local panchayats or to civil society

groups.

Recruiting adequate and responsible staffs: lack of staff and absence of staff make the

situation much worse. There are lots of vacant positions, which act as one ofbarriers to provide better or prompt services.

14


15/15

HIGHLIGHTS

1. It is estimated that around 14% BPL households (75.14 lakhs) interacted with the

Water Supply Service during the last one year and of them 9% that accounts toaround 6.71 lakhs households paid bribe.

2. The total amount of bribe paid by these BPL households in the Water serviceduring the last one year adds up to little less than Rs 24 crore.

3. In an around 14 percent of the BPL households either paid bribe or used a contact

to avail one or the other services of the Water service during the last one year.

4. Among reasons cited for paying bribe, installation/maintenance of hand pumps

was reported by majority (49%) of the BPL households.

5. Among households interacting with water service for reasons other than paying

their monthly bill, around 80 percent had to visit three times or more to availservices like installation/maintenance of hand pump, supply of water tanker and

irrigation water among others.

6. More than two-fifth of these BPL households think that corruption exists in thewater service. In fact, around one-fourth of the BPL households felt that

corruption had increased in the water service during the past year, while another

50 percent did not notice any change in the corruption level in the service.

7. During the last one year four out of five BPL households, who paid bribe to avail

services in Water service, paid it directly to the concerned official/staff.

8. Around one-sixth of BPL households (16%) felt that measures have been taken

by the local governments to check corruption in Water Supply services.

9. On grievance redressal measures taken within the water service, six out of tenBPL households opined that the situation has not changed at all in the last one

year while 18 per cent felt that it had in fact deteriorated further.

10. Most of the states experiencing very high and alarming levels of corruption

belong to the category that claims achieving targets.

15

water supply service in india: corruption as perceived by the bpl population

Documents