Global WOPs Alliance

1. Global WOPs Alliance Development of a geo-referenced utility benchmarking system Josses Mugabi & Faraj El-Awar 24 November 2008

2. Outline • What we want to achieve • Benchmarking as a facilitator of WOPs • Existing benchmarking initiatives • Why a geo-referenced system? • The “GRUBS” concept • Next steps and questions for discussion

3. What we want to achieve • Present some preliminary thoughts on developing a geo-referenced benchmarking tool for utilities and regional WOPs • Generate discussion on the: • potential application of the tool and how it can designed to best respond to the needs of water operators and WOPs worldwide; and • way forward and plans for advancing the initiative (i.e. scoping study, system development and pilot implementation)

4. Global WOPs Mission • To promote improved performance of operators of water utilities through mechanisms for direct partnerships and networking…. • Translation: • to provide utility operators with a platform that would enable them to improve performance through systematic knowledge sharing, peer-support and emulation • So what kind of benchmarking tool would be better placed to meet these goals?

5. Benchmarking- a key facilitator for WOPs Partnerships Stronger Utilities Performance gap

6. But for benchmarking to be useful to WOPs ……… • Data and results must be fed back to water utility managers to allow them to take advantage of the power of benchmarking • Flexible and easy-to-use tools (e.g. graphs, maps and diagrams, comparative assessments etc) • Need for a system that encourages partnerships, self-discovery and awareness in a non-threatening environment

7. Existing/past initiatives • International Benchmarking Network (IB-Net) • South East Asian Water Utilities Network (SEAWUN) • Service Provider’s Performance Indicators and Benchmarking Network (SPBNET) • The ADB water utilities data books • And many others…..

8. Limitations/Opportunities • Limitations of exiting/past initiatives: • Limited analytical capability • Limited feedback to water utility managers • Largely static systems • No GIS functionality • Opportunities • Fairly large datasets • Standard indicators • Integration

9. The “GRUBS” concept

10. Rationale for a geo-referenced system • Harness the power GIS • spatial visualization of utility performance data (e.g. choropleth maps) • spatial analysis (e.g. neighborhood relationships, clustering) • Integrate GIS functionality, clustering model and statistical analysis • capture heterogeneity, trends • Increase knowledge of the determinants of utility performance • Improve communication about performance differenced between utilities

11. Integration into GRUBS has advantages for WOPS… • Minimise costs to individual utilities looking for partners to emulate • Allow local utility data to be uploaded to regional and global WOP hubs • Encourage greater data consistency • Enable more advanced analysis to better understand the determinants of utility performance • Improve visualisation and spatial analysis of benchmarking data • Web-based

12. Simplified Schematic of the GRUBS Web Platform Server-side application GIS application and clustering model Internet map server Client-side interface and visualisation Web server Requests Web browser Results

13. GRUBS Conceptual Model Analytical work Visualisation 1.Compare based on partial indicators Online charts, tables& maps Automatic update? Data sources IB-NET SEAWUN SPBNET ADB data books Regulators Others Online charts, tables& maps 2.Compare based on overall efficiency index GRUBS Web Platform Online charts, tables& maps Data conversion tool 3.Cluster utilities with similar performance based on 1or 2 Digitised utility boundaries New data/ updated data from utilities

14. Analytical framework for finding partners … • Network-based view of performance differences • Statistical significance testing on performance differences: • Partial indicators • Overall efficiency indicator • Replace ranked lists by blocks of utilities indistinguishable in terms of performance

15. Visualisation • Simple and complex choropleth map displays • GIS tools in-built within GRUBS would provide means to build these maps automatically • Spatial models – integrating groups of utilities that have similar performance on a specific indicator or on overall measure of technical efficiency, using a clustering algorithm

16. Proportion of Utilities Making the “Best Performer” Groups

17. 0-15% 15-40% >40%

18. Summary of minimum technical requirements • User-friendly • Easy import of data from other sources • Decentralised input-centralised reporting • Advanced GIS for easy illustration and visualisation • Accessible locally and remotely • Minimal licensing and development costs • Support open source and international standards

19. Next steps (1) - brainstorm • How can we capture the added value of a geo-referenced system? What are the potential applications? • How are we going to address the problem of data collection/capture? • How could this be rolled out? • Any other issues?

20. Next steps (2) – scoping study • Assessment of existing databases • demand for the new system from utilities and regional WOPs • Possible sources of funding for GRUBS and possible management arrangements • Technical feasibility of the GRUBS platform • Role of different partners in the development and management of GRUBS.

21. Next steps (3) – system development • Specify server requirements • Build a powerful internet map server, with digitised maps of utility boundaries and specify formats for storing geographically referenced features • Developing a customised GIS application with a fully integrated clustering algorithm and software module for deploying applications on the internet, as well as data conversion tools.

22. Next steps (4) – pilot implementation • Analytical framework to be pilot-tested using recent WOP-Africa performance data • Data capture systems to be pilot-tested by linking GRUBS to a GIS-based utility MIS being developed in Zanzibar as part of the h2.0 initiative

23. Working Group Questions • How can we develop the next generation IBNET-plus? • Knowledge-management – how can the global wop alliance be a facilitator for WOPs? • Developing an innovative micro-level water-operator benchmarking system; and linking with other databases (socio-economic, habitat, citizen appraisal data)?