Social sustainability in the urban water sector: current ......Urban water supply is the highest priority among other uses4. Municipal governments are responsible for providing urban

Social sustainability in the urbanwater sector: current situation

and recommendationsTowards drafting a Best Practices Guidance,

the harmonisation of criteria and their widespread use in the different management areas

FOREWORD

Given the vital and essential nature of water, and due to the essence of a public service, urban waterservice providers in charge of its management —local entities and public, private and public-privatecompanies1— have shown their concern for responding appropriately to the socio-economic needs of

users, and have been applying mechanisms to help groups with difficulties regarding their obligations of paymentfor services. In that sense, the current economic situation has seen increased efforts by the sector to improveand intensify its sensitivity towards those groups that are most disadvantaged, collaborating to spread andencourage such mechanisms.

In this context, at the end of 2014, the Spanish Association of Water Supply and Sanitation (Asociación Españolade Abastecimientos de Agua y Saneamiento, AEAS) and the Spanish Association of Urban Water ServicesManagement Companies (Asociación Española de Empresas Gestoras de Servicios de Agua Urbana, AGA) signedan agreement with the Ecology and Development Foundation (Fundación Ecología y Desarrollo, ECODES), in orderto analyse the sector’s situation in relation to social assistance actions in the urban water sector, and proposenew initiatives to allow the consolidation and enhancement of existing practices.

The agreement considers, firstly, preparing a consultant report on the surveys carried out by AEAS and AGAon mechanisms of social action. To do this, the associations provided all existing information to ECODES(questionnaire model, collected answers, analysis of answers and conclusions). ECODES reviewed theinformation provided, drafted a report with ‘recommendations on the methodology used to obtaininformation’ and provided comments and recommendations on the questionnaire used and the procedureused to analyse the information.

Secondly, ECODES drafted some recommendations for a social sustainability strategy concerning urban waterservices. To draft this report, AEAS and AGA facilitated all information available at the national level onmechanisms of social action, as well as international experiences available through the European Federationof National Associations of Water Services (EurEau). ECODES, on its side, analysed the information provided,added its own sources of information, organised two discussion workshops to examine preliminary conclusionswith the most relevant stakeholders and, finally, provided some final recommendations.

The workshops were held in Zaragoza on March 17th, and in Madrid on April 8th, 2015. In this way, water serviceproviders (municipal services and public, private and public-private companies), social services from somemunicipalities, consumer associations, social entities, NGOs and interested third parties had the opportunity toparticipate. A list of participants is presented in ANNEX 1. We would like to thank all of them for theirparticipation and contribution to this debate.

1 In the public-private model, both public and private entities hold shares in the company

[ 2 ]

SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY IN THE URBAN WATER SECTOR: CURRENT SITUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

[ 3 ]

From AEAS, AGA and ECODES, we have tried to take into account all the ideas brought forward duringthe workshops in the drafting of this document.

This document presents the final considerations by AEAS and AGA of this whole process. The work wouldnot have been possible without the contribution of ECODES; they offered their most social view, closeto the issues citizens face. ECODES also provided comments and recommendations on thequestionnaire on mechanisms of social action used by AEAS and AGA in their ‘Biennial survey onwater supply and sanitation services’. These recommendations will be included in the next survey.

*Note from the authors:

The data and examples included in this document were current up to the first trimester of 2015. Because of enhancement

actions, both by service providers and by public administrations, these may have evolved since.

Participants in the workshop held in Zaragoza. Talk by Joaquín García Lucea

(Municipality of Zaragoza).

Presentation by Carmen Piñán

(Agbar Group).

Víctor Viñuales (Ecodes) introduces

the workshop.

Presentation by Guillermo Cao

(EMASA).

[ 4 ]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

RATIONALE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1. CONSIDERATIONS ON URBAN WATER IN SPAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2. INFORMATION ON THE URBAN WATER SECTOR IN SPAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.1. General information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.2. Current situation of social actions applied to urban water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3. BALANCE BETWEEN THE AFFORDABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF THE SERVICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

4. BASIC LINES OF SOCIAL ACTION IN URBAN WATER SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

- Competence framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

- The human right to water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

- Affordability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

- Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

- Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

5. RECOMMENDATIONS BY ECODES ON SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY ACTIONS

IN THE URBAN WATER SECTOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

- The situation in Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

- Basic principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

- Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

6. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

ANNEX 1. ENTITIES INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION WORKSHOPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

ANNEX 2. EXAMPLES OF MECHANISMS OF SOCIAL ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

- Zaragoza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

- Barcelona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

- Málaga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

- Madrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

ANNEX 3. PROCEDURE TO INTERRUPT THE WATER SUPPLY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

ANNEX 4. ADVANTAGES AND DRAWBACKS OF ECONOMIC SUPPORT METHODS CURRENTLY IN USE . . . 29

ANNEX 5. RATIONALE PROVIDED BY ECODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

BIBILIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

[ 5 ]

The economic crisis has caused the deterioration of living conditions for many citizens, increasingthe number of people in need. Although in Spain water has not been identified by specialists insocial issues as a real problem, several public opinion sectors have coined the term ‘water eviction’

and ‘water poverty’ to refer to hypothetical or specific cases of lack of supply of this resource which isessential for life, using a comparison with the banking sector and the energy sector, respectively.

The reality of urban water services is very different from the abovementioned sectors. Whether becauseof waters’ idiosyncrasy or because it is a vital resource, the situation with water and urban water serviceshas been, and currently is, different. Local authorities and the entities that provide such services (watersupply, sewerage and treatment) have been taking into account the socio-economic reality of the placeswhere they operate for years. However, the new current crisis situation has triggered the interest of entitiesand municipalities in increasing and improving how these circumstances are taken into consideration withregards to water tariffs and the management of urban water services.

The purpose of this document, which is an outcome of the work done under the agreement betweenAEAS-AGA and ECODES, is to outline the situation of the sector, present some basic criteria or lines anddraw up conclusions on the future of social policies in the urban water sector. This work is the productof a brainstorming process, integrating the input of different stakeholders, who were invited to contributewith their experience and knowledge (see ANNEX 1). Therefore, from AEAS and AGA we would like tothank the associations, companies, public administrations, NGOs and foundations who have collaboratedin the debate.

The water sector wants to continue being proactive and keep up-to-date constantly. Even though thissector is clearly different from the energy or banking sectors, service providers (municipal services andpublic, private and public-private companies) consider necessary to lead the adaptation to constantchanges in socio-economic conditions, enhancing both the service and the relationship with users, whoare at the same time the ultimate owners of the service, that is, the citizens.

RATIONALE

[ 6 ]

First, the document lays out basic considerations concerning urban water in Spain. Afterwards, itoutlines the most relevant information on the sector and the current situation regarding socialassistance measures applied in practice, which we refer to as mechanisms of social action. Next,

we justify the necessary balance between the affordability of services and the economic sustainability ofthe sector. Subsequently, we outline the 15 criteria considered by AEAS and AGA as basic lines for socialaction in the urban water sector. After that, we detail the recommendations drafted by ECODES as anoutcome of the collaboration agreement with AEAS-AGA. And, finally, the conclusions of the work arepresented.

STRUCTUREOF THE

DOCUMENT

[ 7 ]

1CONSIDERATIONS ON URBAN WATER IN SPAIN

Water is an essential resource for life, and a recognized Human Right2.

It is a scarce resource which is unevenly distributed through time and throughout the territory.

Water in Spain is of public ownership, and its use and consumption are subject to the generalinterest3.

Urban water supply is the highest priority among other uses4.

Municipal governments are responsible for providing urban water services (water supply, sewerageand treatment)5.

Municipal governments are responsible for establishing the management model for urban waterservices, which must be based on criteria of sustainability and efficiency6.

In general, urban water services have tariffs which comprise two parts (a fixed one, or servicecharge, and a variable one, dependent on consumption) and are progressive (follow a block systemof consumption with increasing prices), to promote a rational consumption of the resource.

2 Article 1 of Resolution 64/292 of 2010, of the United Nations General Assembly, endorsed and supported by Spain.3 Article 3 of Royal Decree 1/2001, Consolidated Text of Spanish Water Law. 4 Article 60 of Royal Decree 1/2001, Consolidated Text of Spanish Water Law.5 Article 8 of Law 27/2013, on the Rationalisation and Sustainability of the Local Administration.6 Article 21 of Law 27/2013, on the Rationalisation and Sustainability of the Local Administration.

[ 8 ]

2INFORMATION ON THE URBAN WATER SECTOR IN SPAIN

2.1. GENERAL INFORMATION

In Spain, 50% of urban water services are managed by public companies and local entities, and the other50% are managed by private and public-private companies7. From AEAS and AGA, we recognise that thissituation reflects a healthy public-private balance, which leads to important mutual benefits (exchangingthe interest in innovation, efficiency and new technologies with citizen awareness and a focus on publicservice). Thus, the urban water sector includes Spanish companies—both public and private—whichare considered world leaders in the sector and are internationally renowned.

The cost of water in Spain represents, on average, 0.9% of the household income8. Considering thepurchasing power in each country, the economic effort of Spanish citizens to pay for the water bill is, onaverage, 37% lower than the average in Europe9. This is not the case with other urban services such aselectricity and telephone, where the economic effort is higher for Spanish citizens (23% and 25%respectively) than the average for European citizens. In this manner, according to the Spanish NationalStatistics Institute (INE), Spanish households spend in each of electricity and telephone services anamount equal to four times the amount spent in urban water services10.

Access to water supply and sanitation services in Spain is universal, and the quality of the water suppliedis high, complying with legally established parameters11. Currently, the main instances of non-compliancein terms of water are due to a lack of treatment of waste water in some small towns, and low performanceconcerning nutrient elimination in waste water treatment plants located in areas designated as sensitive.

7 (AEAS-AGA, 2014). XIII National survey on drinking water supply and sanitation in Spain. 8 (National Statistics Institute of Spain, INE, 2014). Survey on family budgets.9 (AQUAPAPERS No. 1, 2013). Study on water pricing in Spain.10 (INE, 2011). Survey on family budgets. In: AQUAPAPERS No. 1, 2013. Study on water pricing in Spain.11 Royal Decree 140/2003, setting health criteria for the quality of water for human consumption.


[ 9 ]

2.2. CURRENT SITUATION OF SOCIAL ACTIONS APPLIED TO URBAN WATER

Social assistance actions in the urban water sector are implemented through what are known asMechanisms of Social Action. These mechanisms are processes or administrative tools which allowoffering special conditions, more favourable, to certain groups or households, to try to solve situationsof poverty, inequality or social exclusion.

Aids and grants to help paying the water bill have existed in our services for years. However, in the past,they consisted in discounts targeted mainly to specific groups (retired people, large families or similar).As a result of the economic crisis in recent years, aid motivated by economic income has increased.This assistance has been applied through tariff structures set in municipal by-laws or legal regulations(classical mechanisms of social action), as well as through newly created mechanisms, known asSolidarity Funds. These funds are an alternative mechanism of social action, not associated with the tariffstructure itself, and based essentially on income criteria. They can draw from different budgetary sources,and can be implemented by themselves or as a complement to the traditional discounts contemplatedin the tariff structure.

The local public administration is, mainly, responsible for determining who will benefit from thesemechanisms of social action. In this way, and according to their legal responsibility, municipal andregional governments are in charge of determination of beneficiaries.

Because they are within the competence of municipalities, mechanisms of social action can be veryheterogeneous. Therefore, access criteria, as well as the amount of the assistance and the method ofapplying them are established according to the criteria of each municipality. In general, access criteriato these mechanisms comprise essentially large households or families, specific groups (retired people,the unemployed, people with disabilities, etc.) and those with low incomes (these have been included,in particular, in more recent initiatives).

The two current mechanisms of social action (discounts in the tariffs and solidarity funds) are quitewidespread. According to a survey carried out by AEAS-AGA, encompassing a sample of water servicesinvolving slightly over 15 million people, more than 90% of them lived in municipalities with some typeof mechanism of social action. Out of those, 63% lived in municipalities with discounts established inthe tariff structure itself, 13% in municipalities where solidarity funds had been implemented and 24%in municipalities with both mechanisms12.

According to the survey data, about 1.2% of users were benefiting from one of these assistancemechanisms. Examples of specific cities can be seen in ANNEX 2.

12 (AEAS-AGA, 2014). Survey on mechanisms of social action.

[ 10 ]

The different stages of urban water services entail some operating costs (abstraction, drinking watertreatment, distribution, sewerage and waste water treatment). These costs depend on many factors:origin and quality of water, distance to the source, treatment requirements to achieve water suitable

for human consumption, waste water treatment, urban drainage, land relief or the age and condition ofthe network, for example. We should add to those the costs of investing in new construction andrenovation schemes, as well as resource and environmental costs (as established in the Water FrameworkDirective13); the two latter ones are rarely quantified nowadays.

The sustainability of the service depends on the recovery of those costs, as per the principle establishedin the Water Framework Directive. The recovery is achieved through three types of contributions fromusers and from society at large: water tariff, taxes (national, regional and local), and European funds.

Every citizen is required to contribute to the payment of a bill which is affordable, as long as theconsumption is reasonable. The mechanisms of social action are the tools conceived to ensure theaffordability of the service for economically disadvantaged groups. The UN recommends that the amounta household spends on the water bill should not be higher than 3% of its income14.

Discounts to large families or households cannot be considered as mechanisms of social actionthemselves. When water tariffs are structured in consumption blocks with increasing prices, taking intoaccount the number of people that live in the same household is done according to a fairness criterion.Otherwise, higher water rates would be charged to large households.

We need to reach a balance between the affordability of the service and its sustainability.

13 DIRECTIVE 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.14 UNDP, 2006. Human Development Report 2006. Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis. Availablefrom http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/267/hdr06-complete.pdf

3BALANCE BETWEEN THE AFFORDABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF THE SERVICE

[ 11 ]

AEAS and AGA, through the process carried out jointly with ECODES, have put together, after areflexion process with other actors and stakeholders, 15 basic lines of social action in urban water.To understand them better, we organise them into the following areas: competence framework,

human right to water, affordability, communication and regulation.

COMPETENCE FRAMEWORK

1. Public authorities are responsible for ensuring the social protection of citizens. The Spanish Constitutionestablishes that public authorities are responsible for ensuring the social and economic protection ofcitizens15 and for promoting the social and economic improvement of Spanish citizens16. Providing asolution for people in need is a priority of the State, which should be developed at the national,regional, and local levels.

2. Social services and the different social entities are responsible for determining the beneficiaries of socialpolicies regarding urban water. Social services and the different social entities work every day toeradicate poverty (they are the specialists). Therefore, they should be in charge of defining whichgroups, households or people need help through mechanisms of social action. As well, they are bestprepared to guide and coordinate their implementation.

In addition, we should take into account and highlight the role of the different social entities providingassistance to people or households in need as a result of the current economic situation. Thesecitizens, known as the ‘new poor’, require new strategies and forms of communication that are effectiveand prevent social stigma.

3. Service providers must maintain and intensify their collaboration with social services and social entities inthe search of solutions for users living in poverty. Service providers (municipal services, local entities andpublic, private and public-private companies) are professional organisations dedicated, exclusively, to

15 Article 39.1. Spanish Constitution. Official Spanish Gazette, No. 311, of 29/12/1978.16 Article 40.1. Spanish Constitution. Official Spanish Gazette, No. 311, of 29/12/1978.

4BASIC LINES OF SOCIAL ACTION IN URBAN WATER SERVICES


[ 12 ]

provide urban water services. In the current situation, it would be advisable to increase their support—in different ways— to the work done by social services and social entities (contributing theirknowledge of the service, through economic analyses, the complementary allocation of resources, andtheir management techniques, corporate social responsibility, etc.).

THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER

4. Households should not be left without a water supply or with a restricted flow, due to economic reasons. Thewater tariff should be affordable for everyone, and no household should be left without this service dueto a justified inability to pay for it. When the user cannot afford the payment of the service (partiallyor totally), mechanisms of social action are one of the tools that public authorities can use to ensureaffordability.

5. Water should be affordable, not free of charge. Urban water services entail operating costs such asabstraction, drinking water treatment, distribution, sewerage and waste water treatment. We shouldadd to those the costs of investing in new construction and renovation schemes, as well as resourceand environmental costs. Ensuring the sustainability of the service for future generations requires aneffort from everyone. Nevertheless, the contribution to the water tariffs from citizens in need shouldmatch their income, without going over a certain threshold17.

6. The procedure of interrupting the water supply should be a tool to ensure that those citizens who can payfor the services, do pay for them. Access to water is a recognised Human Right and, therefore, theprocedure of interrupting or cutting off the water supply should not mean that those who cannot payfor it are left without water. However, the current procedure is an effective tool to ensure payment bycitizens who can pay for the services, that is, the vast majority.

Ensuring universal access to water is not at odds with the existence of a procedure to interrupt thesupply. This procedure, which guarantees user rights, as it requires approval by the competentauthorities, has been traditionally used because it is effective and simple. An alternative is to start legalproceedings to urge payment by those users who do have the economic means to do so. However,these proceedings are slower and more costly for citizens in general, increasing the bureaucratic,financial and legal administration costs. ANNEX 3 provides further information.

17 The UN recommends that worldwide water rates should not be higher than the threshold of 3% of thehousehold income (UNDP, 2006).


[ 13 ]

AFFORDABILITY

7. Mechanisms of social action should take into account essentially income criteria. Some of the currentmechanisms of social action, mainly those considered in the tariff structure, are not determined bystrictly economic criteria; instead, they provide discounts to specific groups (the unemployed, retiredpeople, people with disabilities, etc.). The efforts of society to eradicate poverty should focus onthose households who are in need.

Discounts based on the number of people in the household are based on a fairness criterion whenthe tariff is structured in consumption blocks with increasing prices. Therefore, they cannot beconsidered as a mechanism of social action.

8. Current mechanisms of social action have the purpose of ensuring the affordability of the service.Nowadays there are two types of economic support by mechanisms of social action: discountsincluded in the tariff structure and solidarity funds. The first one consists of reduced prices in watertariffs for specific groups. In this case, the tariff structure itself funds those discounts through thecontribution of the remaining users. The second one, involves assistance to households in economicneed, duly justified, so they can make the payments. In this case, the service provider and themunicipalities themselves, and even third parties as donors, contribute to the funds through acombination of resources from budgetary sources (mainly municipalities), the water tariff itself andother financial sources (social entities). Both mechanisms can be used either by themselves ortogether.

The purpose of these mechanisms is to ensure the affordability of water services for households ineconomic need duly justified. Given that this matter is of municipal competency there is no generalsolution that applies across the board. Hence, this document only sets out a brief analysis of theadvantages and drawbacks of each mechanism identified in the course of this work. See ANNEX 4.

9. From the analysis of real life data we infer that the alternative of applying a criterion of an ‘essentialminimum’ completely free of charge does not entail, in itself, a widespread improvement. If this criterionis used, it should be aimed to those households with extreme and justified financial need. We shouldtake into account that, in many municipalities, and given an average consumption, currentmechanisms may be more favourable than applying the mentioned criterion.

10. Social coverage for those groups identified as vulnerable could be extended to measures that promote arational and efficient consumption. A fraction of the funds earmarked for social action could be usedfor strategies to promote efficient use and consumption of water, so that, whenever useful andnecessary, we favour a more rational and efficient use, facilitating the affordability of the service. Wecould try to include these strategies in future rehabilitation programmes to take place in Spain, drivenby different European and national funds.


[ 14 ]

COMMUNICATION

11. Strategies of communication with the users of mechanisms of social action have a significant potential forimprovement. Continuing to improve communication strategies by authorities and service providers isessential. It is crucial that users in economic need know about the availability of mechanisms ofsocial action. Hence, we should continue to be proactive and broaden our horizons. It is no longerenough to target just the customers; rather, information should also reach social services and socialentities. They are the ones who work with the people that need to use these tools and, therefore, itis essential for them to know about their existence.

Likewise, we should take into account the needs of those known as the ‘new poor’. This new currentsituation requires new strategies and forms of communication that are effective and prevent socialstigma. Therefore, in this case, communication strategies have to seek the collaboration of thedifferent social entities that work complementing traditional social assistance structures.

12. Service providers, social services, social entities and competent authorities should enhance cooperationto continue to improve the responsiveness and accessibility of mechanisms of social action. Cooperationbetween the parties involved is necessary to identify any problems with affordability of the serviceand potential beneficiaries of mechanisms of social action, as well as to approve and administer theassistance. Enhancing this cooperation would facilitate the procedures, so that a household whocannot pay the bill may receive assistance quickly, avoiding warnings about service interruption orlegal proceedings.

It is essential to continue reducing the formal requirements needed to access the application forassistance from mechanisms of social action. All procedures should be facilitated, so that, ensuringthe affordability of the service and following criteria of solidarity, equality and fairness, all householdsstay within the system of paying for the use of water services. To do this, water service providers mayprovide regular support and assistance to social services and social entities to facilitate any requiredprocedures, by contributing knowledge, resources and/or expertise.

13. Transparency and information availability are key aspects that should continue to improve in order tofacilitate public participation. Transparency and information availability are associated to goodgovernance in the management of water services. Hence, information on the monetary allocation ofmechanisms of social action, the way they are financed or access criteria should be public andtransparent, based on robust and accessible socio-economic studies.

As well, it is advisable that service providers continue their efforts to improve data collection and theirsubsequent accessibility and availability as information. To do that, it would be useful to undertake


[ 15 ]

a prior exercise harmonising certain criteria at the level of the urban water sector (e.g. affordability,interruption procedure, economic indicators, etc.).

A special effort should be put towards informing about and explaining the causes and objectives ofsome management measures and tools which are particularly controversial or unpopular, such as theprocedure to interrupt or cut off the water supply. Effective communication is essential so that societymay understand these measures as something necessary for the efficient management of the service.

REGULATION

14. Standardisation of mechanisms of social action within integrated water cycle services. In general, thedifferent activities (water supply and sanitation) are not always integrated and the managers involvedcan be many. Ideally, mechanisms of social action should be applied to the entire urban water cyclewith the same access criteria, independently of which authority sets the tariff and of the entityproviding the service or collecting the payment. To do that, the different competent authorities andservice providers should have the goodwill to coordinate themselves and achieve a consensus.

The bill for the complete water cycle should be affordable, not just a portion of it. Therefore,harmonisation within the urban water cycle is necessary and should be encouraged. That is,harmonisation of access criteria as well as the way in which they are applied.

15. Need for a regulatory body. The creation of an independent regulatory body or entity, with authority toestablish a range of criteria for the tariff structure and the mechanisms of social action, would assistin the harmonisation of the urban water sector in Spain. A certain degree of standardisation wouldbe necessary to establish the mechanisms of social action and the tariff structure, while respectingthe competencies of municipalities. Such criteria should take into account the particularities and thesocio-economic level of each municipality or management area.

[ 16 ]

As an outcome of the work done under the agreement signed at the end of 2014, ECODES presentedto AEAS-AGA a series of recommendations on social actions and mechanisms of social actionapplied in the urban water sector. The conclusions of this work done by ECODES are outlined next

and a rationale is presented in ANNEX 5.

THE SITUATION IN SPAIN

On average, the price of water in Spain amounts to 0.9% of families’ incomes, well below the price ofelectricity (2.6%) and telephone services (2.7%).

The current water tariff does not cover all the costs. The financial crisis has led to an increase in the number of families with problems to

pay the water bill, although there are not official data. The measures adopted by municipalities vary widely.

BASIC PRINCIPLES

Guarantee the Human Right to water: water should be affordable, nor free of charge. Maintain the principle of cost recovery established in the Water Framework Directive. Ensure the affordability of tariffs of integrated water cycle services through mechanisms

of social action. Apply efficiency strategies. Improve communication strategies with social agents and the main stakeholders in

municipal and national water policies.

5RECOMMENDATIONS BY ECODES ON SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY ACTIONS IN THE URBAN WATER SECTOR


[ 17 ]

RECOMMENDATIONS

Guarantee the Human Right to water: water should be affordable, nor free of charge

1. All citizens should take responsibility for water supply and sanitation.2. Households should not be left without a water supply or with a restricted flow due to

economic reasons.

Maintain the principle of cost recovery established under the Water Framework Directive

3. There should not be a minimum volume of consumption free of charge.4. Measures should be put in place to cover the costs that families with fewer economic

resources cannot afford. Those costs could be redistributed among remaining users,considering the application of social rates, or through the creation of a residual social fundto cover outstanding debts that have been justified.

Ensure the affordability of the tariff of integrated water cycle services through mechanisms of social action

5. Establish objective criteria for low income families to access reductions in the bill: establishdiscounts based on per capita income, instead of discounts based on user categories(retired, unemployed, etc.)

6. Establish reductions in the bill for water supply and sanitation, so that this expense has animpact on available family income similar to the impact it has on an average Spanishhousehold.

7. Facilitate access to discounts: avoid excessive bureaucratic burden and leave assistancemeasures as a residual alternative.

8. Include reductions in both fixed and variable fees.9. Apply them to the entire water cycle: water supply and sanitation.

10. Apply them as well to preliminary costs associated with initiating the services (connectionfees, deposits, etc.).

11. Include in the tariffs a percentage to set up a solidarity fund: define such percentage basedon the needs in each municipality (number of people affected, and the magnitude of the costsinvolved). The amount collected through this percentage would be allocated to:

a. Preventing water service interruptions for families in extreme cases.b. Help families with easy payment terms or through the distribution of cheques for

the payment of the water bill.c. Help with the modernisation of water facilities for the conservation and efficiency

of consumption of low income families.d. Start up solidarity programmes to support universal access to drinking water and

sanitation at the international level.


[ 18 ]

Apply efficiency strategies

12. Help families who receive discounts in the water bill to reduce their consumption, throughthe use of technological measures and changes in habits, strengthening the usual demandmanagement campaigns, and using specific campaigns for these families.

13. Do not offer discounts to large volume users, promote efficiency.

Improve communication strategies with social agents and the main stakeholders in municipal and nationalwater policy

14. Water supply companies should improve their measures to raise awareness about thesemechanisms of social action, so that users know about them.

15. Water supply companies should increase communication and cooperation with public andprivate social entities, to facilitate access to these measures and identify adequately whoshould benefit from them.

16. Prepare a data base with the main stakeholders in municipal and national water policy.17. Develop structures to favour dialogue between social agents and the main stakeholders.18. Improve information transparency, communication and availability.

[ 19 ]

Water is a Human Right of which households should never be deprived because of their inability to pay,when duly justified. However, this Human Right to water implies the need to contribute to maintaining theservices, through the payment of affordable water prices18. Water supply and sanitation services entailcosts. The sustainability of these services depends on the recovery of their costs, as per the principleestablished in the Water Framework Directive. Therefore, every citizen is required to contribute to thepayment of a bill which is affordable, as it is an essential resource. Mechanisms of social action arethe tools conceived to ensure affordability for disadvantaged groups.

The broad coverage of mechanisms of social action shows the sensitivity of those responsible for urbanwater services towards disadvantaged groups. Due to the vital and essential nature of water, and sinceit is a publicly owned resource, the authorities and urban water service providers responsible for themanagement of the resources—whether local entities or public, private, and public-privatecompanies—have been considering mechanisms of social action for years. The objective of thesemechanisms is to ensure social fairness and solidarity; currently, they comprise discounts in watertariffs and/or solidarity funds. According to a survey done by AEAS-AGA, encompassing a sample ofwater services provided to a population of over 15 million people, more than 90% of them lived inmunicipalities with one or both types of mechanisms; the number of people benefiting from themreached 1.2% of users.

The economic situation in the past few years and the increased number of families with difficulties to payfor their water bill suggests the need of improving and standardising social assistance for water services.In spite of the broad coverage of existing mechanisms of social action, the difficult economic situationmeans it is necessary to continue improving the social initiatives of urban water services. Municipalitiesand service providers should continue to enhance the design, management and implementation ofmechanisms of social action, as they are the best alternative.

18 The UN recommends that worldwide water rates should not be higher than the threshold of 3% of the householdincome. (UNDP, 2006).

6CONCLUSIONS


[ 20 ]

Mechanisms of social action should take into account primarily income criteria, and their design andapplication should be based on socio-economic analyses that consider the particularities of eachmunicipality or management area.Mechanisms of social action should consider primarily income criteria,with the sole purpose of ensuring the affordability of the service. All mechanisms of social action haveadvantages and drawbacks, hence their selection, design and application should be based on socio-economic analyses that consider the particularities of each municipality or management area. As well,the application of these mechanisms could be coupled with strategies to improve consumptionefficiency in households, as a complementary and educational measure.

Although social services and social entities are responsible for determining who will benefit from socialassistance concerning urban water services, it would be advisable for service providers to maintain andincrease collaboration in the search for solutions for users who are living in poverty. To do this, waterservice providers should provide regular support and assistance to social services and social entitiesto facilitate any required procedures, by contributing knowledge, resources and/or expertise.

Service providers should continue to improve transparency, communication efficiency and availability ofinformation. The Spanish society does not only demand quality water 24 hours per day, 365 days peryear. It also demands transparency and information. Therefore, service providers should continue toimprove communication and making it more efficient. The new economic situation requires newcommunication strategies to complement existing ones. As well, it is essential to strive towards aharmonisation of criteria and standardise data, to obtain information that is both valid and useful atthe sector level. The availability of information should be complemented by educational effortsconcerning controversial issues, such as water supply interruptions. Hence, urban water serviceproviders should continue to be proactive and adapt to the pace of society, providing information andcommunicating with transparency.

The procedure of interrupting or cutting off the water supply is a tool that seeks to ensure that those userswho can pay for the services, do pay for them. It is considered the most suitable method to ensure thesustainability in the management of the service. Access to water is a recognised Human Right and,therefore, the procedure of interrupting or cutting off the water supply should not mean leaving withoutwater those users who justify that they cannot pay for it. However, the current procedure, whichguarantees user rights, as it requires approval by the competent authorities, is an effective tool toensure payment by citizens who can pay for the services, that is, the vast majority. Mechanisms ofsocial action should have as an objective avoiding any potential administrative errors, so that nohousehold with proven difficulties to pay for the water bill is left without water supply.


[ 21 ]

Service providers, social services, social entities and competent authorities should enhance cooperation tocontinue to improve the implementation, flexibility and accessibility of mechanisms of social action.Mechanisms of social action should be applied to the entire water cycle with the same access criteria,independently of which authority sets the tariff and of the entity providing the service. The differentcompetent authorities and service providers should coordinate themselves and achieve a consensus.

It is considered necessary to harmonise criteria in the urban water sector in Spain. The creation of anindependent regulatory body or entity, with authority to establish a range of criteria for the tariff structureand the mechanisms of social action, would assist in this matter. Although the mission of a generalregulatory body for urban water services would encompass broader strategic issues, it would definitelyfavour harmonisation of criteria as well as procedures pertaining to mechanisms of social action andtariff structures.

It is strongly recommended preparing a Best Practices Guide for the design, management and implementationof mechanisms of social action in the urban water sector. This document could serve as the basis for amanual that analyses further in depth the selection, design, management and implementation of suchmechanisms. The objective would be to establish a flexible framework that is useful for competentauthorities and service providers, and that develops further the strategies for social assistance in theurban water sector. The key elements to develop this guide should focus mainly on:

- Criteria to determine potential beneficiaries (essentially income, plus other criteria should beassessed)

- Procedures (responsive, simple and efficient) to validate individually each beneficiary- Magnitude of the discount or assistance provided (based on affordability)- Methods to provide economic support (tariff structure, solidarity funds or others)- Establishment of sustainable objectives and monitoring of their compliance

From AEAS and AGA we encourage the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FederaciónEspañola de Municipios y Provincias, FEMP), the Regional Governments and the Ministry of Health,Social Services and Equality to work jointly with service providers and the different social entities toprepare a Best Practices Guide.

[ 22 ]

In order to have broad and universal participation, many groups were invited (social entities, consumerassociations, specialised university chairs, NGOs and different public authorities), although obviously,due to conflicting schedules, some of them were unable to attend. The entities that have participat-

ed in one of the workshops are outlined next, in alphabetical order. We would like to thank them for theircollaboration, very much appreciated.

PARTICIPANTS

Aigües de Mataró [Mataró Water Company]

Aguas de Jávea (AMJASA) [Jávea Water Company]

Aguas del Añarbe [Añarbe Water Company]

Anna Bolaños (Independent Consultant)

Asociación de Ciencias Ambientales (ACA) [Environmental Science Association]

City of Zaragoza

Canal de Isabel II Gestión (Madrid Water Company)

ENTITIES INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION WORKSHOPS

ANNEX 1


[ 23 ]

Spanish Red Cross

Empresa Municipal de Aguas de Córdoba (EMACSA) [Córdoba Municipal Water Company]

Empresa Municipal de Aguas de Málaga (EMACSA) [Málaga Municipal Water Company]

FACUA

FCC Aqualia

Federación Aragonesa de Barrios (FABZ) [Federation of Neighbourhoods of Aragón]

Fundación Nueva Cultura del Agua (FNCA) [New Water Culture Foundation]

Government of Aragón

Agbar Group

Instituto Aragonés del Agua (IAA) [Aragón Water Institute]

Unión de Consumidores de Aragón (UCA) [Aragón Consumers Association]

University of Zaragoza (UNIZAR)

[ 24 ]

We present next a brief summary of mechanisms of social action in use at the beginning of 2015in four Spanish cities. They are shown in the order in which they were presented during theworkshops held in March and April of 2015. We need to keep in mind that these mechanisms

may have evolved, and in some cases they actually have, since they were presented at the workshops.

ZARAGOZA

The City of Zaragoza contemplates a mechanism of social action consisting of a discount included in thetariff structure. Within this mechanism, two different criteria are used (income and energy efficiency),as follows:

1. Income based. There are two types of discounts (type 1 and type 2) applied to both the fixed and thevariable fees in water supply and sanitation tariffs, if the value of any goods, assets or properties(except for the usual residence) does not exceed 3.5 times the minimum monthly wage.

Type 1. Households with up to 4 members, with total income below the minimum monthly wagex 1.10. Type 2. Households with up to 5 members, with total income above that for type 1, and belowthe minimum monthly wage x 1.66.

In both cases, when household members are 6 or more, income is calculated in terms of per capitaincome.

2. Based on water conservation or efficient use. A discount of 10% is automatically applied to the variablecharge.

There is also a rate based on the number of people living in the same household when there are 6 or more,in order to address fairness issues when rates are structured in consumption blocks with increasingprices.

EXAMPLES OF MECHANISMS OF SOCIAL ACTION

ANNEX 2


[ 25 ]

BARCELONA

The City of Barcelona contemplates both types of mechanisms of social action: a solidarity fund and adiscount included in the tariff structure. Within the second mechanism, income criteria are used (bothfor water supply, with a social tariff, and for water treatment, with a social fee).

1. Solidarity fund of Aigües de Barcelona: The assistance of the solidarity fund contemplates a guaranteedwater supply for beneficiaries, as well as a discount, which is applied directly to the water bill (to theservice fee and to the consumption of water). The beneficiaries are designated by municipal socialservices and by social action organisations (Cáritas, the Red Cross, etc.). The mechanism to grant theassistance has been assessed by Ivalua (Instituto de Evaluación de Políticas Públicas de Cataluña[Institute for the Assessment of Public Policies of Catalonia]).

2. Social tariff. It involves a discount in the service fee and in the consumption fee for the first block. Itis not applied if consumption reaches the third block (>9m3/month). Those benefiting from it areretired people over 60 years old receiving a minimum pension, people receiving a permanent disabilityor a widow’s/widower’s pension, and those families where all members are unemployed.

3. Social fee. Discount in the first consumption block (>9m3/month). It is not applied if consumptionreaches the third block (>9m3/month). The beneficiaries are retired people over 60 years old receivinga minimum pension, as well as people receiving a permanent disability or a widow’s/widower’s pension,and those families where all members are unemployed.

There is also a discount based on the number of people living in the same household, in order to addressfairness issues when rates are structured in consumption blocks with increasing prices. Accordingly, inthese cases a larger volume is considered for consumption blocks in water tariffs, in the water treatmentfee and in the sewerage fee.

MÁLAGA

The City of Málaga contemplates a mechanism of social action consisting of a solidarity fund.

1. Based on disposable income. EMASA has created and assigned funds to a solidarity fund for familieswhich are at risk of social exclusion due to economic problems, with the purpose of paying for debts.The economic assistance, whose beneficiaries are determined by social services, comprises, on onehand, a direct non-refundable subsidy of up to 1,000 € per family to pay completely for outstandingbills (this subsidy may be used to pay for any portion of the bill, including charges by the serviceprovider as well as any charges by third parties, such as national or regional taxes or fees).


[ 26 ]

On the other hand, for any remaining debts which cannot be paid for with the direct subsidy, there isalso a financing mechanism with very favourable terms (with zero interest and adapted to the capacityto pay of the family, as per the reports of social services), which ensures families have a personalisedpayment plan adapted to their capacity to pay.

In 2016 the social fund (direct non-refundable subsidies) will receive an allocation of 500,000 euros;and the loans susceptible of being paid by the fund will be expanded, to allow addressing not onlyany outstanding debts but also current bills.

As well, the new water rate in Málaga links consumption blocks to the number of dwellers. This newmethodology solves the fairness problem when rates are structured in consumption blocks with increasingprices, hence avoiding the need for a discount for large families.

MADRID

The City of Madrid contemplates a mechanism of social action consisting of a discount included in thetariff structure. Within this mechanism, two different criteria can be identified (income and consumptionsavings), as follows:

1. Based on reduced consumption. A discount in the variable charge for water conveyance and distributionif there is a reduction in consumption from the previous year.

2. Exemption due to social reasons. The variable fee of the tariff is without charge when the consumptionis below 12.5 m3/month, as well as 50% of the fixed or service fee. In Madrid, people receiving thisrate reduction pay less than 4 €/month (including VAT) for water supply and sanitation services.

The beneficiaries are those people with a service contract who can prove, with a written certificateissued by their social worker and approved by the competent department of the regional government,that they cannot pay for their water consumption bill. As well, all families receiving from the RegionalGovernment of Madrid a type of welfare payment known as “Renta Mínima de Inserción” [minimuminclusion income], amounting to some 25,000 families in 2015, receive this discount.

There is also a discount based on the number of people living in the same household, in order to addressfairness issues when rates are structured in consumption blocks with increasing prices. This discountconsists of extending the price of the first block to the second one, and a discount on the variable portionwith a reduced price for large families and households.

[ 27 ]

The procedure to interrupt or cut off the water supply, in itself, is not a measure that prevents orlimits the Human Right to water. The cut-off is a tool that allows the efficient management of theservice, since it works to ensure payment by those who can pay for their water bill, that is, the vast

majority of citizens.

Three types of users may be differentiated:

Users who pay Users who cannot pay Users who do not want to pay

In order to ensure the sustainability and quality of the service, it is essential to have a tool so that userswho do not want to pay, end up paying. If the cut-off procedure was not used, this would have to be donevia legal proceedings or collection procedures, which are generally slower and more costly for citizens,because they increase the bureaucratic, financial and legal administration costs.

As this document has outlined earlier, service providers (whether municipal services, local entities orpublic, private or public-private companies) see the current system as guaranteeing citizen rights while,at the same time, it allows preserving the economic sustainability of the service. We should keep in mindthat, ultimately, water supply interruption procedures require approval by the competent authorities,usually the municipal government.

Obviously, mechanisms of social action and the efficiency and responsiveness of administrative processeshave to be such that no user who truly cannot pay, receives warnings about a service cut-off or legalproceedings. The objective has been, is, and should continue to be, to improve and enhance processesto provide solutions to people or households in economic need. Whether they consist of deferredpayments, assistance with partial payment or entire payment, etc., every person in need should be ableto access these mechanisms with the necessary celerity.

PROCEDURE TO INTERRUPT THE WATER SUPPLY

ANNEX 3


[ 28 ]

Data on water supply interruptions should be considered in context. Water supply interruptions should not beidentified with leaving households without water.When data on water supply disconnections are publishedor disseminated, there is a general tendency to think that they correspond to people or families(households) that are deprived of water. This, however, is not the case. Water supply cut-offs exist becausethey are a tool that forms part of the management of the service, but they are due to many other reasons.For example:

Business customers with domestic water contracts which close down and, therefore, do notpay for the water bill.

Lease agreements which terminate and are not renewed. Changes in the bank account holder or bank account changes which are not notified. Second homes or empty homes which do not pay the water bill. Fraud Others

Mechanisms of social action should have as an objective avoiding any potential administrative errors, sothat no household with proven difficulties to pay for the water bill is left without a water supply.

[ 29 ]

ADVANTAGES AND DRAWBACKS OF ECONOMIC SUPPORTMETHODS CURRENTLY IN USE

ANNEX 4

DISCOUNTS CONTEMPLATED IN THE TARIFF STRUCTURE

SOLIDARITY FUNDS

ADVANTAGES

• The service provider has a clearregulation, so they can apply the measuredirectly, facilitating thereforeresponsiveness and practicality.

• The discounts applied are borne bytariff increases assumed by the remainingusers.

• The water tariff is the same for all users.

• They can be set up more quickly and withhigher flexibility, whether unilaterally or togetherwith specialised third parties.

• It is possible to obtain external financing (e.g.from public budgetary sources or privatedonations).

• They can be considered as an additional cost ofthe service.

• They allow paying for the entire water tariff, notjust a specific and partial tariff of one of thedifferent water services.

• Easier to communicate. More visual. They canbe more transparent.

• It is possible to include several services (e.g.water, electricity) thereby reducing bureaucraticburden.

DRAWBACKS

• It is difficult to coordinate all the publicauthorities and integrated water cycle serviceproviders involved (e.g. sanitation fees).

• The tariff structure becomes too complexfor the consumer.

• There could be a perception of differentservice prices due to social reasons orbelonging to certain groups.

• More difficult to communicate. Lessvisibility.

• Discounted prices could distort the value ofwater.

• Any variation in the conditions of socialaction requires modifying and approving aregulation or by-law

• It is necessary to sign potential agreementswith third parties.

• Higher management burden, of the fund itselfand of monitoring its implementation.

• It could be dissuasive for users wishing toavoid social stigma (labelled as people receivingassistance).

• In the case of a common fund for severalservices (water, energy, etc.), it could end upaddressing issues that have a higher impact(which are not water services).

[ 30 ]

RATIONALE PROVIDED BY ECODES

ANNEX 5

1. The urban water sector in Spain is quite unique, and cannot be compared with other utility providers,due to three primary reasons:

- The popular water culture prevailing among the Spanish population.- Water is considered as a common good in Spanish legislation.- Municipal governments have full responsibility for urban water management (there are more

than 7,000 municipal governments in our country, in charge of approving the tariffs andpolicies to be implemented).

2. The approval in 2010 of the Human Right to water and sanitation by the United Nations supports thewater culture which was already present in Spanish society. ‘Water cannot be denied to anyone’, we usedto say, and we still say. Without a legal right in effect, key institutions and social agents involved in watermanagement have acted according to the essence of the approval of that right by the UN.

3. On the 28th of July, 2010, through Resolution 64/292, the United Nations General Assembly explicitlyrecognized the Human Right to water and sanitation, and acknowledged that clean drinking water andsanitation are essential to the realisation of all Human Rights. The Resolution calls upon States to providesafe, clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and sanitation for all.

4. To ensure that human right is exercised through time, water supply and sanitation services in Spanishmunicipalities have to be adequately financed, so that the expenses of operating those services can beassumed, as well as any investments needed to ensure the efficiency of the service in the future.Therefore, as established in the Water Framework Directive, it is necessary to ensure the recovery ofcosts. This principle, on the other hand, allows encouraging an efficient use of water, decreasing carbonemissions, reducing as far as possible the ecological footprint of our cities and their citizens and reducingthe pressure we put on the biosphere that sustains us.

5. Due to the crisis, the number of families with economic problems has increased noticeably, familieswith hardly any household income to take care of large and small expenses (in general, water representsno more than 0.9% of family expenses). Therefore, it is necessary to expand and improve the instrumentsthat already existed to ensure that the water supply is not cut off at any household due to their inabilityto pay, when justified. To do this, it is essential to differentiate cases where water is used as an economicgood to do business, from cases where water is used for family consumption in their usual residence.


[ 31 ]

6. Different Spanish municipalities are developing a series of strategies to ensure the Human Right towater and prevent the interruption of the supply. Some strategies focus on reductions on the water billbased on per capita income; others have set up specific solidarity funds aimed towards subsidising thewater costs of families with problems, etc. Everything works, if it is effective and efficient, when it comesto ensure the bigger goal, formulated by the human right to water and sanitation, of every person havinga guaranteed water supply in their home. Current mechanisms, either formally or informally, are solvingthe immense majority of social situations that come up. Nevertheless, we encourage municipalities andservice providers to increase their activity until they reach 100% success in this task. No householdwhich is a usual residence should be deprived of water if the inability to pay is justified.

7. From our point of view, as a way to address effectively several good purposes at the same time, and ina similar way as it is done in other countries, we encourage municipalities and service providers to considerthe creation, within the tariffs, of a service sustainability and solidarity fund, with several objectives:

- Prevent water cut-offs in cases of evident inability to pay.- Offer favourable payment terms to families going through economic difficulties. - Help with the modernisation of water facilities to enable conservation and efficiency in low

income households.- Establish permanent programmes for the sustainable use of water (efficiency, preventing

pollution, etc.). - Finance development cooperation projects to support the human right to water and sanitationin impoverished countries.

[ 32 ]

BIBLIOGRAPHICREFERENCES

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

Basic legislation

Spanish Constitution. BOE (Official Spanish Gazette) No. 311, of 29/12/1978.Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.Royal Decree 1/2001, Consolidated Text of Spanish Water Law. Royal Decree 140/2003, setting health criteria for the quality of water for human consumption.Law 27/2013, on the Rationalisation and Sustainability of the Local Administration.

Other sources

(AEAS-AGA, 2014). XIII National Survey on Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation in Spain. (AEAS-AGA, 2014). Survey on Mechanisms of Social Action.(AQUALOGY FOUNDATION, 2013). AQUAPAPERS No. 1. Study on water pricing in Spain.(Spanish National Statistics Institute, INE, 2014). Survey on family budgets.(UN, 2010). Resolution 64/292 of 2010, of the United Nations General Assembly. (UNDP, 2006). Human Development Report 2006. Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global watercrisis. Available from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/267/hdr06-complete.pdf

Miscellaneous

Tax ordinances and regulations in provincial and regional Official Gazettes.

Documents

Social sustainability in the urban water sector: current ......Urban water supply is the highest priority among other uses4. Municipal governments are responsible for providing urban