|Bangladesh<sup>b</sup>|13.6|2.8|41.3|4.7|3,319|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Mali|11.1|2.2|29.6|0.9|1,971|
|Uganda|8.7|1.8|29.1|0.9|1,687|
|Ethiopia|19.8|3.5|63.9|2.4|1,608|
|Niger|9.1|0.8|49.7|0.1|914|

_Source:_ Original calculations using data from several household surveys. _Note:_ These are countrywide figures. Poor households are defined as belonging to the first four deciles of the expenditure (or income) distribution in each country. All figures are calculated using sample weights. Water connection is derived from questions about main source of drinking water—but some countries have information about sources of water for other uses (like Bangladesh), which are then also used to construct water connection. More information can be found in the appendix. Column 5 refers to GDP per capita, PPP (constant 2011 international U.S. dollars). GDP = gross domestic product; PPP = purchasing power parity.

a The figures for rural Vietnam, using the 2015 Vietnam Household Registration Survey (VHRS), are much higher than the figures presented in JMP, using the Household Living Standards Survey (HLSS) 2012 that shows a rural rate of 13 percent. This is likely due to differences in the regional coverage of each survey. The VHRS 2015 has a sample that is representative of the population in five provinces—Ho Chi Minh City, Ha Noi, Da Nang, Binh Duong, and Dak Nong— while the HLSS 2012 is supposed to be nationally representative.

bThe figures for urban and total are higher than the figures published in JMP for the latest year. The data for Bangladesh used in this analysis differ from the data used in JMP. We use the Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2016, and the figures presented here are consistent with the official figures published in the Preliminary Report on Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2016, page xiii (BBS 2016).

Table 2 summarizes the number of providers (as listed in the IBNET dataset) whose service areas are also covered in the household surveys, the average cost-reflective tariffs, and imputed unit prices (conditional on the reporting of positive expenditure on water). (More information about IBNET data for each country can be found in the appendix.) Most countries in the sample try to target subsidies using increasing block tariff structures, though two African countries, Nigeria and Uganda, have fixed rates. In Bangladesh, some service providers charge a flat consumption rate while others use increasing block tariffs. El Salvador is the only country that has a volumedifferentiated tariff structure. Some countries or providers also place a value-added tax on tariffs. For the analysis carried out in the following section, we use all the households surveyed in each country, and information from the utilities serving them. As explained earlier in this section, when a household is located in an area or region with no available tariff structure, we use information from other households in that country to impute quantities and unit prices paid.

Remarkably, all countries show higher cost-reflective tariffs than the average unit price paid by all households that report paying a positive amount for piped water. This already shows that all countries operate in a way that on average subsidizes residential consumers. However, six of the ten countries show a unit price higher than the estimated CRTOpex, suggesting that they can cover at least operating expenditures.

**Table 2. Tariff data and estimated unit costs and prices**

|Country|Number of<br>providers<br>covered in|Type of tariff<br>structure|Estimated cost-<br>reflective tariff<br>(unit cost/m<sup>3</sup>)|Estimated OPEX<br>cost-reflective<br>tariff (unit|Estimated<br>effective<br>average|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||the||CRT|cost/m<sup>3</sup>) CRTopex|price/m<sup>3</sup>|
||analysis<sup>a</sup>||($2017)|($2017)|($2017)|

6