PROVISION OF WATER TO THE POOR IN AFRICA the different customers they serve, coverage numbers “hide” the breakdown by type of consumer. This is very important when it comes to understanding the price structure of the market, for the standpipe operator usually charges the direct consumer and the reseller differently. In peri-urban areas of Accra, although most water is sold primarily through standpipes, 20 percent of that water is resold by cart operators (Sarpong and Ambrampah 2006). Likewise, standpipes in Khartoum sell most of their water (80 percent) to cart operators, who then resell it to households (Elamin and Gadir 2006). Similarly, in Ouagadougou, more than 80 percent of water sold at standpipes is bought by carters and not by individuals (Collignon and Vézina 2000). In Luanda, Angola, most of the water delivered in peri-urban areas, where the majority of the population lives, is brought in by trucks that sell water obtained either from the piped water system or directly from the river. The water trucks then sell the water to an estimated 10,000 nonmobile water vendors, primarily households that have built water storage tanks; these households in turn sell the water to the rest of the population. In peri-urban areas of Luanda, 70 percent of the dwellers purchased their water from water vendors (Development Workshop 1995).

Utilities reported that 19 percent of public standpipes were dysfunctional, but the real number is probably higher. Estimates of working standpipes obtained from independent studies gave much lower rates—with an average of 42 percent of standpipes in working order, versus the utility generated estimate of 81 percent (table 1.4). This raises reasonable doubts about the accuracy of the numbers reported by utilities on the status of standpipes.<sup>10</sup> Further, many utilities do not have an updated inventory of existing public standpipes and their current operating conditions, reflecting a low level of monitoring of this generally low-revenuegenerating service for the utility—and an absence of regulation. Recent studies conclude that standpipes in many cities have been poorly maintained, with a decline in the number of standpipes in use as well as in the quality of their service (hours of operation and pressure) over time. For future research, it will be very important to understand the capacity that utilities have to deal with these issues, in terms of financial and human resources. Finally, the information base is weak in part because regulators often track hours of water service of the system, but not the number of standpipes in good working condition.

Support for the premise that charging for standpipe water will provide incentives to the utility or to a standpipe manager to keep it in good working order does not clearly emerge from a review of 15 city utilities. However, because of the caveats noted on utility reporting, this finding needs to taken with caution and prioritized for further scrutiny in future research. Countries with a higher conflict incidence show a somewhat lower percentage of standpipes in good working condition.

**Table 1.4   Public standpipes in good working order and free of charge in 15 cities**

|||Share in good<br>working order|Share free of|
|---|---|---|---|
|Country|Largest city|(%)|charge (%)|
|Sudan (HCI)|Great Khartoum|100|0|

10 As reported in AICD WSS data. Since water provision through standpipes is considered an “improved” source in the MDGs (a person supplied through a household connection counts the same as one supplied by a standpipe), there is an incentive for government officials and utility staff to err on the side of “inflating” coverage numbers (Cudjoe and Okonski, 2006).

8