1 / 11

Trends in the Performance Indicators of the WSS Utilities in the Russian Federation

Trends in the Performance Indicators of the WSS Utilities in the Russian Federation Dmitriy Khomchenko The Institute for Urban Economics Helsinki , Finland , 24-25 May 2007. Objectives of Work Carried Out:

kordell
Télécharger la présentation

Trends in the Performance Indicators of the WSS Utilities in the Russian Federation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Trends in the Performance Indicators of the WSS Utilities in theRussian Federation Dmitriy Khomchenko The Institute for Urban Economics Helsinki, Finland, 24-25 May 2007

  2. Objectives of Work Carried Out: • Collection and processing of technical and financial data on performance of the WSS utilities in the RF in 2000-2005 • Capacity building in the collection of technical and financial data by transferring the World Bank methodology (IBNET) Information Sources: • Sample of 48 WSS utilities in Perm and Krasnodar Krays of the RF • Official statistics (forms 1-water supply, 1-sanitation and 22-housing and community amenities (consolidated))

  3. Analysis of WSS Utilities’ Operational and Technical Indicators (1) • Out of total water sales, more than 60 percent is supplied by municipal utilities; about 25 percent, by state-owned utilities; and the rest, by private utilities and those with mixed ownership • Average water production and consumption in Russia reduced by almost one third to 402 l/day and 328 lcd, respectively, in 2000-2005 • In 2005,useful life of 35 percent of the water networks and 29 percent of the sanitation networks was over and they had to be replaced; in the capital cities of the Russian regions, 41 percent of the water networks had to be replaced.

  4. 91% 91% 91% 93% 100% 84% 81% 90% 80% 80% 79% 78% 78% 78% 78% 76% 75% 74% 73% 72% 80% 2000 70% 2001 60% 2002 2003 50% 2004 40% 2005 30% 20% 10% 0% Russia Krasnodar Kray Perm Kray 120% 100% 99% 99% 99% 99% 98% 97% 94% 94% 93% 93% 100% 1995 83% 2000 80% 2001 2002 60% 38% 2003 40% 29% 29% 29% 28% 2005 22% 20% 0% Cities Urban villages Rural localities Water Service Coverage [sample] [statements]

  5. 40% 37% 33% 35% 32% 31% 31% 30% 29% 29% 29% 28% 27% 30% 2001 25% 24% 23% 2002 23% 25% 2003 20% 2004 15% 2005 10% 5% 0% Entire sample Krasnodar Kray Perm Kray 50% 45% 40% 2000 35% 2001 28.3% 27.5% 26.5% 30% 2002 23.0% 22.2% 2003 20.5% 25% 19.8% 19.7% 18.4% 18.5% 18.1% 17.7% 16.7% 16.1% 2004 20% 15.3% 13.6% 2005 15% 7.6% 7.3% 10% 5% 0% Russia Krasnodar Kray Perm Kray Non-Revenue Water: Share in Total Water Supply to the Network [Sample] Non-Revenue Water [Statistical Statements]

  6. Analysis of WSS Utilities’ Operational and Technical Indicators (2) • Water losses in the water supply networks went up from 15.3 percent to 18.5 percent of the total water supply to the network in 2000-2005 • High accident rate • Prevalence of water meters increased (61 percent of connections)

  7. 47% 50% 40% 38% 40% 35% 35% 35% 34% 34% 34% 33% 33% 2001 32% 31% 29% 28% 2002 30% 2003 2004 20% 2005 10% 0% Russia Krasnodar Kray Perm Kray Share of Networks in Need of Replacement in Total Length of Water Lines and Street Water Supply Networks [Statements]

  8. Analysis of Financial Indicators (1) • While in 2000 average household tariff in Russia accounted for more than 50 percentof the economically sound tariff (EST), in 2005 the household tariff went up to87 percentof the EST • Commercial-user-tariff-to-household-tariff-ratio went down from 3.9to1.7 • WSS utilities’ costs increased 3-fold from $0.16 to $0.44 per cub. m of water sold and from $0.11 to $0.32 per cub. m of water produced in 2000-2005

  9. 0.45 0.41 0.38 0.40 0.34 0.35 0.29 0.31 0.30 0.24 0.23 0.25 0.19 0.18 0.26 0.20 0.15 0.19 0.15 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.00 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Household tariff Economically justified tariff Tariff for other consumers Average Water Tariff in Russia [Statements]

  10. Analysis of Financial Indicators (2) • Length of collection of payments for provided services in Russia as a whole went down from 151 days in 2000 to 89 days in 2005 • Collection rate in the Perm and Krasnodar Krays has steadily accounted for 97-98 percent of the bills issued over the past three years.

  11. Conclusions During the analyzed period both negative and positive developments were identified in the WSS in Russia, including: • Degradation of fixed assets, network deterioration, chronic lack of investment • Stabilization of utilities’ financial position, improved payment discipline

More Related