Piped water supply systems in the pourashavas constitute a part of crucial infrastructure which supports an improved standard of living for migrants in urban areas. However, only 136 of the 329 pourashavas provide piped water supply services.<sup>10</sup> These pourashavas are legally responsible for providing water supply services to the people, including the poor within their jurisdiction. Hence, an assessment of the performance of pourashavas providing this service is an important precursor to any policy prescription to improve the service.

# _Water sector institutional framework_

The Local Government Division (LGD) of the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development, and Cooperatives (MoLGRD&C) has responsibility for the water and sanitation sector planning and strategic development at the national level.

The technical support agencies – The Department of Public Health Engineering (DPHE) and the Local Government Engineering Department (LGED), and water service providers – Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (WASAs), City Corporations, and pourashavas – are under the administrative control of the LGD. The WASAs are dedicated bodies created for providing water supply, sewerage, and drainage services in the cities of Dhaka, Chittagong, Rajshahi, and Khulna. The DPHE is responsible for implementing publicly funded water supply projects in all rural areas and urban areas outside the WASAs. This includes the 11 City Corporations and the 329 pourashavas. The LGED is responsible for implementing urban infrastructure in the pourashavas.

DPHE is responsible for investments in publicly‐funded water supply systems while all operations and maintenance responsibility falls upon the pourashavas along with the day‐to‐day operations of the water distribution systems. Pourashavas also carry out small extensions of the piped water system when possible. Following the Local Government (Amendment) Act, 2010, local government institutions such as the pourashavas in urban areas are expected to take on greater responsibilities for water supply and sanitation. However, weak technical and financial capacities in the pourashavas keep the DPHE as the main agency responsible for the design and implementation of piped water supply, while handing over the responsibility for operations and maintenance to the pourashavas. This leads to lack of ownership among the pourashavas resulting in poor service delivery.

Accelerated urbanization, fewer investment projects in general for municipalities outside the large cities, institutional constraints in expanding water supply to all, and fiscal constraints due to poor collection are some of the challenges faced by urban water service providers. This paper examines the trends in performance outcomes of pourashavas and investigates the areas where they are performing especially poorly.

# **Data and Methodology**

For this report, a sample of pourashavas, WASAs, and city corporations available from IBNET for the period 2011‐2016 was analyzed on various self‐reported indicators. In 2016, 48 pourashavas, four WASAs and five city corporations (a total of 57 service providers) reported their data compared to 2010 when 22 pourashavas, four WASAs and three City Corporations (a total of 29 service providers) reported their data. The sample of pourashavas analyzed are mainly Class A pourashavas with a few Class B pourashavas. Class A pourashavas are those with income of more than BDT 6 million (~US$ 73,000), class B are those with income more than BDT 2.5 million (~US$ 30,000) and up to BDT 6 million, and class C are those with income more than BDT 1 million (~US$ 12,000) and up to BDT 2.5 million.<sup>11</sup> Most service providers did not

> 10 (Department of Public Health Engineering, n.d.)

> 11 (Ministry of Local Government Rural Development & Cooperatives, 2017)

3