metadata: authors: 0: author: Andres,Luis Alberto
1: author: Chellaraj,Gnanaraj
2: author: Das Gupta,Basab
3: author: Grabinsky,Jonathan
4: author: Joseph,George
count: Nigeria
docna: 0: docna: An evaluation of the contributing factors of
            water scheme failures in Nigeria
docty: Policy Research Working Paper
subtopic: Hydrology,Engineering,Health and Sanitation,Sanitation and Sewerage,Environmental Engineering,Sanitary Environmental Engineering,Rural Water Supply and Sanitation,Water Supply and Sanitation Economics,Rural Water,Water and Human Health,Small Private Water Supply Providers,Rural & Small Town Water & Sanitation,Town Water Supply and Sanitation,Inequality,Global Environment
teratopic: Science and Technology Development,Rural Development,Environment,Health, Nutrition and Population,Poverty Reduction,Water Resources,Water Supply and Sanitation
abstracts: cdata!: This paper utilizes information from the
            2015 Nigeria National Water and Sanitation Survey to
            identify the extent and timing of the failure of water
            schemes in the country and the factors affecting it. Around
            46 percent of all the water schemes in Nigeria are
            nonfunctional, and approximately 30 percent are likely to
            fail in the first year. The results indicate that during the
            first year of operation, factors that can be controlled in
            the design, implementation, and operational stages
            contribute to the failure of 61 percent of the water
            schemes. As water schemes age, their likelihood of failure
            is best predicted by factors that cannot be modified. The
            influence of operational factors, such as repairs and
            maintenance, decreases slightly over time.
geo_reg_key: 517191,1927320
repnme: repnme: An evaluation of the contributing factors
            of water scheme failures in Nigeria
display_title: An evaluation of the contributing
            factors of water scheme failures in Nigeria
listing_relative_url: /research/2018/03/29739175/evaluation-contributing-factors-water-scheme-failures-nigeria
topicv3: Sanitation m1326453 2000,Water m1326522 137,Poverty m1326687 695,Rural Water Supply m1327209 143,Environment, Natural Resources and Blue
            Economy m1327391 566
publishtoextweb_dt: 2018-03-21T00:00:00Z
historic_topic: Science and Technology Development,Rural Development,Environment,Health, Nutrition and Population,Poverty Reduction,Water Resources,Water Supply and Sanitation
no_of_pages: 32
author_keys: 0: author_key: 676776
1: author_key: 96206
2: author_key: 912994
model_extractions: WPS8371 Policy Research Working Paper 8371 An Evaluation of the Contributing Factors of Water Scheme Failures in Nigeria _Luis Andres Gnanaraj Chellaraj Basab Das Gupta Jonathan Grabinsky George Joseph_ Water Global Practice March 2018
Policy Research Working Paper 8371

# **Abstract**

This paper utilizes information from the 2015 Nigeria National Water and Sanitation Survey to identify the extent and timing of the failure of water schemes in the country and the factors affecting it. Around 46 percent of all the water schemes in Nigeria are nonfunctional, and approximately 30 percent are likely to fail in the first year. The results indicate that during the first year of operation, factors that can be controlled in the design, implementation, and operational stages contribute to the failure of 61 percent of the water schemes. As water schemes age, their likelihood of failure is best predicted by factors that cannot be modified. The influence of operational factors, such as repairs and maintenance, decreases slightly over time.

This paper is a product of the Water Global Practice. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://econ.worldbank.org. The authors may be contacted at Landres@worldbank.org.

_The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent._ Produced by the Research Support Team
# **An Evaluation of the Contributing Factors of Water Scheme Failures in Nigeria**<sup>**1**</sup>

## **Luis Andres, Gnanaraj Chellaraj, Basab Das Gupta, Jonathan Grabinsky, and George Joseph**

**JEL Classification: D02, O18, Q25**

**Key words: Water schemes, Nigeria, Functionality**

> 1 Luis A. Andres: World Bank Water Global Practice, landres@worldbank.org [Corresponding author]. Gnararaj Chellaraj: World Bank Water Global Practice, gchellaraj@worldbank.org . Basab Dasgupta: Social Impact, Impact Evaluation Division, bdasgupta@socialimpact.com . Jonathan Grabinsky Zabludovsky: World Bank Water Global Practice, jonathan.grabinsky@gmail.com . George Joseph: World Bank Water Global Practice, gjoseph@worldbank.org. Senior authorship is not assigned.

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the view of the World Bank, its executive directors, or the countries they represent. The findings, interpretations, and any remaining errors in this paper are entirely those of the authors.
# **1. Background**

The non-functionality of water schemes is a major problem in many developing countries, and this trend is particularly pronounced in Sub-Saharan Africa. In some cases, breakdowns occur within the first year after implementation. Surprisingly, however, the causes of such failures have rarely been analyzed in a systematic way—a gap this study intends to fill. In this paper, we utilize information from the 2015 Nigeria National Water and Sanitation Survey (NWSS) to identify the reasons for the failure of water schemes<sup>2</sup> in the country. We seek to understand the interactions between various factors: (1) the extent and (2) timing of the failures; and (3) the type of scheme in question, including (4) its technology, (5) geographic location, (6) underlying hydrogeology, (7) type of promoter, and (8) management setup.

The non-functionality of water schemes has taken on considerable importance in recent years, with global freshwater ecosystems undergoing rapid change: amid urbanization and an overall increase in pollution, clean water will be increasingly unavailable, particularly in developing economies (Steele, forthcoming; Hoekstra et al., 2012). A lack of functional infrastructure, including for drinking water and sanitation, could constrain economic growth (Agenor, 2010; Barbier, 2004). Recent evidence also indicates that infrastructure—including water and sanitation—is likely to offset moderate macroeconomic shortcomings at the initial stages of development (Moller and Wacker, 2017; Gibson and Rioja, 2017). In recent years, several studies have documented the failure of water schemes in developing countries. In countries such as Ethiopia (Deneke and Hawassa, 2008) and Ghana (Fisher et al., 2015), 39% and 21% water schemes were found to be either non-functional or abandoned, respectively. The situation is similar in Mozambique (Jansz, 2011) and Kenya (Koehler et al., 2015).

In this paper, we use <mark>locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LWSS)</mark> (“Lowess Smoothing” of running-line least squares), logit regression analysis, and Shapley decomposition to analyze the reasons for the failure of water schemes in Nigeria. Our analysis indicates that, in the first year of operation, factors that can be controlled in the design, operational, and implementation stages contribute to the

> 2 Water distribution system from the point of origin to destinations such as households and farms.

2
failure of 61% of water schemes. Then, as water schemes age, the likelihood of their failure is best predicted by factors that cannot be modified, as well as by those that can be controlled during their operational stages. Conversely, as water schemes age, the share of water scheme failures linked to factors that are relevant at the design and implementation stage decreases slightly.

The paper proceeds as follows. First, we discuss the particular context of Nigeria, before offering an overview of the literature behind this study. In Section 4, we discuss the methodology and data used to analyze and predict the failure of water schemes. In Section 5, we present our results. In Section 6, we conclude.

# **2. Nigeria’s Context**

Access to water supply, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services is limited in Sub-Saharan Africa: 319 million people in the region did not have access to improved water, and 694 million lacked access to improved sanitation facilities in 2015.<sup>3</sup> Alarmingly, a large body of evidence suggests that limited or no access to WASH services adversely impacts development outcomes such as health, limits access to educational and economic opportunities, and hampers work efficiency and labor productivity (World Bank, 2016).

Nigeria, with a population of 182 million, is the largest country in Sub-Saharan Africa (World Bank, 2017). Despite the current economic recession, it has also been one of the fastest-growing economies in the region in recent years: its gross domestic product (GDP) quadrupled between 2005 and 2015. However, despite its rapid growth, the country has had limited success in reducing its persistently high poverty levels, most likely due to three factors: (1) economic growth has been accompanied by high

> 3 Improved water sources are those which, by the nature of their construction and when properly used, adequately protect the source from outside contamination, particularly fecal matter. Such sources include piped water to yards or plots, public taps or standpipes, tube wells or boreholes, protected springs, and rainwater. An improved sanitation facility is one that hygienically separates human excreta from human contact and that is unshared or is shared between two or more households.

3
rates of population growth; (2) there has been no large-scale creation of jobs and other opportunities for citizens; and (3) the inequality gap is widening—and doing so rapidly. Further, a number of other key indicators, such as measures of the accumulation of physical and human capital and households’ access to basic services, suggest that Nigeria is lagging behind other countries in the region, despite its impressive GDP growth (World Bank, 2017).

At the beginning of the millennium, Nigeria had an estimated 224 trillion liters of surface water and 50 million trillion liters of groundwater, for an estimated population of about 128 million. About 6 billion liters were consumed in 2001, which suggests an abundant water resource potential (Akujieze et al., 2003). But the country faces some significant obstacles to utilizing its water potential. The available hydrogeological base maps for the country are of poor quality, and hence not of much use in helping the government develop a water exploration and extraction plan. Furthermore, poor knowledge of the Nigerian geological terrain, lack of infrastructure facilities, and the absence of a working legislature significantly hinder the exploration, exploitation, operation, control, and management of Nigeria’s abundant groundwater resources.

Nigeria’s rates of access to WASH services are below those seen in many other Sub-Saharan African countries. Fifty-seven million people in Nigeria continue to live without access to improved water. As many as 130 million people do not meet the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) standards for sanitation. Poor sanitation in its own right costs the country 455 billion naira ($2 billion) per year. These problems persist although the country has achieved the MDGs for water (World Bank, 2017).

Nigeria’s urban areas have considerably better access to improved water services than its rural areas (World Bank, 2017). However, rapid rural-urban migration is placing significant strain on urban water supply and infrastructure. For example, the Nigerian capital city of Abuja is a key destination for rural migrants seeking better employment and a safer living environment. The city administration is trying to provide water and sanitation services to a rapidly growing number of people, across disparate neighborhoods that include informal settlements (Abubakar, 2014). A 2012 study indicated that, in southwest Nigeria, Abeokuta City’s water scheme would no longer be adequate to meet the total water 4
requirements of the entire city in 2015, including for drinking water, even operating at full capacity (Idowu et al., 2012). Lagos, too, suffers a lack of potable water (Barredo and Demicheli, 2003). A bottom-up approach that considers current urban water and transport infrastructure while modeling the city’s future land-use scenario might address the problem. Meanwhile, Oyo State has suffered water contamination due to equipment failure (Sangodoyin, 1993). Across the country, and particularly in the south, community water and sanitation programs in Nigeria face staggering challenges. Many are abandoned prematurely due to numerous institutional and economic factors. In short, the delivery and maintenance of WASH services continues to be a major problem in the country (Ademiluyi and Odugbesan, 2008).

As the global community moves toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), it is important to assess Nigeria’s current state of water and sanitation access, so that policy makers and key stakeholders can develop effective policies and interventions to address present shortcomings in access to WASH. These efforts should be targeted at the most vulnerable segments of society, specifically those that experience the greatest burdens of poverty.

# **3. Literature Review**

Literature on water infrastructure functionality in Nigeria is all but non-existent. In fact, literature on the functionality of most forms of infrastructure, even in developed countries such as the United States, is sparse at best. Significant topics, such as the impact of the community-based management model on water infrastructure functionality, call for research attention (as discussed in Whaley and Cleaver, 2017).

Researchers focused on Nigeria must look to studies of the functionality and sustainability of water infrastructure undertaken in a handful of other African countries in recent decades (Liddle and Fenner, 2017; Carter and Ross, 2016; Koehler et al., 2015; Foster, 2013; Duti, 2012; Baumann, 2009).

5
Most such surveys simplistically label the status of a water point’s functionality using a binary definition: either the water scheme was “working” or “not working” at the time of its assessment. A few list failure rates over the entire survey period, but they are the exception. A review of relevant surveys (Wilson et al., forthcoming) indicates that: (1) there is no widely agreed upon definition for functionality, and so it is difficult to compare the results of various surveys, and (2) most surveys use the binary definition of “working” or “not working,” though some refer to “partial functionality.”<sup>4</sup> Until recently, studies of the failure of water schemes in Nigeria were also basically non-existent. However, a recent study of water points (Andres et al., 2018) offers some findings relevant to schemes. Though location—both in terms of political region and underlying hydrogeology—is the major factor affecting the functionality of water points during their first year, factors that can be controlled in the design, operational, and implementation stages also contribute significantly to failure rates. Then, as water points age, their likelihood of failure is best predicted by those factors that cannot be modified, as well as technology. The presence of a water, sanitation, and hygiene committee (WASHCOM) and regular repair and maintenance decline in importance over time.

A recent study (Cronk and Bartram, 2017), using Bayesian analysis, finds that water systems in Nigeria are more likely to be functional if they are used by both livestock and humans. The authors suggest doing more to monitor systems and analyze the data gathered. Meanwhile, several studies focus on sustainability. In the urban area of Ibadan, most water schemes that involve shallow wells are unsustainable. Hence these are supplemented by rainwater and water vendors (Enabor, 1998). Another study of Nigeria suggests a pragmatic strategy that involves all stakeholders in a collaborative effort to raise the sustainability of community water and sanitation programs (Ademiluyi and Odugbesan, 2008). A study of rural water schemes in Akwa Ibom State lists several factors behind failure: a lack of maintenance, poor community participation, little or no coordination and cooperation among stakeholders, political factors, inefficient monitoring, and a lack of maintenance and oversight of public property (Ibok and Daniel, 2014).

> 4 <u>http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/514658/1/Handpump.pdf.</u>

6
For the Sub-Saharan region as a whole, the foundations of sustainability have been identified as: (1) effective community demand, (2) local financing and cost-recovery, and (3) dynamic operation and maintenance (Montgomery et al., 2009). In the Greater Afram Region of Ghana, 60% of water schemes were found to be between 8 and 18 years old and one-third of the water schemes had been rehabilitated (Fisher et al., 2015). In Mali, the sustainability of water points and schemes was supported by a “platform” approach to rural water supply management that mobilized the assets and insights of various social actors to influence decision making at all stages (Gleitsmann et al., 2007). In Ethiopia, 43% of 21 hand pumps surveyed were not working at the time of the assessment (Schweitzer et al. 2015). One study associates the sustainability of water schemes with having good records, regular meetings, financial audits, higher monthly fees, a paid caretaker, and water committees with the capacity to perform minor repairs (Alexander et al., 2015). In the South Gondar region of Ethiopia 73% of water schemes functioned properly, while 18% functioned with frequent breakdowns, and 10% did not function at all (Stawicki, 2012). In the Mirab Abuya Woerda region of Ethiopia, 37% of water schemes had been abandoned. Many of these were more than 20 years old (Deneke and Hawassa, 2008). Also in Ethiopia’s Woerda and Amhara regions, it was found that where women are involved in the day-to-day operation of water schemes, these tend to be sustainable (Beyene, 2012).

In Tanzania, the two major challenges were: (1) identifying additional external funding to implement the scheme and (2) addressing local authorities’ lack of strategic oversight to efficiently fulfill their responsibilities. Also, prior to the receipt of funds, technical support to build up capacity is vital (Gine and Perez-Foguet, 2008). WaterAid, a UK-based non-governmental organization, recommends that water schemes in Tanzania (WaterAid Tanzania, 2009): get organized to ensure sustainability, improve community participation in planning processes, capitalize on the potential of small-scale private operators to support rural schemes, consolidate progress toward securing water rights, improve monitoring and regulation mechanisms, and improve the support services offered by district water departments. For Kenya, Koehler et al. (2015) suggest enhancing the sustainability of rural water supply by pooling maintenance and financial risks at a scale now supported by advances in 7
monitoring and payment technologies. In Uganda, key barriers to sustainability included the cost (and lack) of preventive maintenance (Harvey, 2017) and a lack of accountability (DeWachter et al. 2018). In Mozambique the improved implementation of water policy along with effective capacity-building among all stakeholders would improve sustainability (Jansz, 2011). Finally, Parry-Jones et al. (2001) outline eight questions that may be asked to assess the sustainability of Sub-Saharan Africa’s water schemes: (1) are people covered by the project utilizing the facilities, (2) are the facilities in operating order, (3) are management committees functioning, (4) are extension agents meeting with committees regularly, (5) are skills and spare parts readily available, (6) is there a specific management agency within the government, (7) are there importers and manufacturers of spare parts, and (8) does each institution have adequate financial resources?

For developing countries as a whole, Koestler et al. (2010) emphasize the need to measure annual investment in water schemes’ maintenance. Another study observes that community involvement, financial conditions, government support, and efficient management and technology all play influential roles in the long-term functionality of water schemes in developing countries (Walters and Javernick-Will, 2015). For a group of developing countries, Carter et al. (1996) propose setting objectives, a checklist of program activities, and skill requirements for staff to improve sustainability. Studies of individual countries also reveal significant insights. For Nicaragua, several factors have been shown to support the sustainability of water schemes. These include demand-responsive approaches to developing, operating, managing, and maintaining rural water infrastructure; cost-recovery mechanisms; community participation in the management of water supply and sanitation (WSS) systems; efforts to build the management and oversight capacity of local community boards, and the sustained provision of post-construction technical assistance by local authorities in Nicaragua (Borja-Vega et al., 2017). For Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama (Cronk, 2017), the use of better monitoring tools has been emphasized. For Vanuatu, women play a key role in water schemes’ management, boosting their sustainability (Mommen et al., 2017). As has been noted, the problems observed in developing countries are seen in industrialized countries as well, both in terms of infrastructure and service delivery. In some 8
parts of the United States, particularly in rural areas, water schemes are absent and many houses lack indoor plumbing (RCAP, 2010; Vance, 2016; Fetterman, 1967).<sup>5</sup> In general, the adoption of improved technology promises to improve sustainability, especially as the use of groundwater resources accelerates around the world (Janke et al., 2017; Gorelick and Zheng, 2015; Ahfield and Laverty, 2011; Barlow et al., 1996; Owolabi and Omotola, 1994). Brueckner (1997) finds that over the last few decades of the 20th century, the financing of economic growth increasingly relied on land-use exactions, as new residents paid for the cost of incremental infrastructure, including water and sanitation. Hsiao and Chang (2002) show that the fixed costs associated with installation significantly impact the number and location of water points and schemes. Surprisingly, there is a marked decline in the amount of hydrogeological data being collected in many parts of the developing world, with implications for the operational performance of water schemes across Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean, among other regions (Sene and Furquharson, 1998).

One recent study indicates that aid disbursements have a positive, significant correlation to improved access to water supply and sanitation (Gopalan and Rajan, 2016). Another recent study suggests that donors need to increase aid allocation to water and sanitation in Sub-Saharan Africa (Ndikumana and Pickbourn, 2017). There is also a need to identify and address structural constraints that could limit access to water and sanitation.

# **4. Methodology and Data**

- _(a) Methodology_

First, a <mark>locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LWSS)</mark> (“Lowess Smoothing” of running-line least squares) is used to carry out a locally weighted non-parametric regression of “non-functionality”

> 5 In rural areas where the population is dispersed, such as parts of Texas along the Mexico border, the chances of not — having either indoor plumbing or any form of water scheme increases sharply. In six states Alabama, New Mexico, Arizona, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Mississippi—half of the households without these services live below the poverty level. The dire situation in the U.S. Appalachia has not changed much in the past 50 years.

9
(0,1) on age in years<sup>6</sup> (1=<age=<15) for water schemes. Second, to analyze the relative importance of each of the factors in explaining the probability of a water scheme’s failure, we used logistic regression econometric analysis and Shapley decomposition. The Shapley decomposition in particular helps to evaluate the contribution of each explanatory factor. Shorrocks (1984, 1982, 1980) reviews the Shapley (1953) decomposition, which can be applied to functionality. Let _S_ be the aggregate indicator that measures water scheme outcomes, _Xk_ , where _k =_ 1, 2, . . . _m_ is a set of factors contributing to the value of _S_ . The following equation can thus be written: where _f(.)_ is an appropriate aggregation function. The goal of all decomposition techniques is to identify contributions, _Ck_ , to each of the factors _Xk_ , so that the value of _S_ becomes equal to the sum of _m_ contributions to water scheme functionality outcomes. _X_ includes the explanatory variables of functionality outcomes used in the linear probability regression.

The reasons for early, midterm, and long-run failure were analyzed by grouping water schemes that are only a year old, those between three and six years, and those older than eight years. Schemes’ characteristics—that is, their technology, location, type of promoter, management, and maintenance and operations—are identified in each of these three age groups. Further, we group these factors affecting water schemes’ functionality into three broader categories: factors such as (1) _political region_ and _hydrogeology_ , which cannot be changed; (2) _technology, scheme size,_ and the _promoters that operate and implement these interventions_ , which are influential at the design and implementation stage (and can be taken into account when developing new points and schemes); and (3) _management_ and _maintenance_ (whether it is managed by WASHCOM and the different individuals/organizations in charge of carrying out the repairs), which are influential at the operational stage (and can be addressed for existing schemes).

_(b) Data Sources and Descriptive Statistics_

> 6 We define age by setting a baseline of 2015, which is when the survey was conducted, and subtracting the year when the water scheme was commissioned. So, the formula is: age = 2015 – year of commission.

10
In 2015, a National Water and Sanitation Survey (NWSS) of all water points and water schemes was conducted throughout Nigeria. This survey was commissioned by the Federal Ministry of Water Resources (FMWR), and data were collected across the country at the ward level. It consists of four surveys—of households, water points, water schemes, and public sanitation practices (conducted in schools and health centers). The household survey was of more than 202,000 households, while the water points and schemes surveys provided information on 90,508 “improved”<sup>7</sup> water points<sup>8</sup> and 5,100 water schemes across states and local government areas (LGAs).

In this paper, we focus on water schemes. Along with many other details, NWSS 2015 provides information on the location, type, promoters, population served, year of construction, maintenance and operation, and functionality of 5,100 water schemes, across states. The zonal distribution suggests that slightly less than 45% of all schemes are located in the northwest zone, followed by the south-central (20.2%), northeast (14.5%), and southeast (10.4%) zones. Around 5–6% of the total are in the southwest, and this share is similar in the north-central zone. Figure 1 maps the distribution of water schemes across the country. While it is evident that non-functional water schemes are distributed across the country, they are highly concentrated in the south. Just over half of all schemes are functional across Nigeria.

Table 1 provides information, by region, on the variables used in the analysis of water schemes between 1 and 15 years old. Over half of all schemes are promoted by the government at either the federal or state level. Their dominance varies by region. For example, the federal government is the primary promoter in the northeast and southeast, while state governments dominate the northwest and southcentral regions.

The number of schemes, considered alone, does not present a full picture of the overall situation in Nigeria (Table 1). We must also consider the size of each scheme and the number of beneficiaries it

> 7 For the purposes of this study, sources of improved water include tube wells and boreholes, infiltration galleries, protected springs and dug wells, rainwater harvesting sites, gravity flow systems, and pump-piped systems (using either ground or surface water).

> 8 In the functionality analysis of the water points we exclude rainwater harvesting and infiltration galleries due of their low incidence; these two sources, when combined, comprise a share of less than 1 percent. This reduces the number of observations used in the rest of the water points analysis to 89,871.

11
serves. While some schemes serve fewer than 1,000 beneficiaries, others are large enough to serve more than 50,000 beneficiaries. There are 1,034 schemes with less than 1,000 beneficiaries; 600 schemes with 1,000 to 2,000 beneficiaries; and 779 schemes with 2,000 to 5,000 beneficiaries. (The rest of the schemes are larger than these subsets.) According to the survey data, 15.6% of water schemes that are 15 years and under do not possess information on the populations that they serve. As a result, we do not include these schemes when analyzing failure by size. Smaller schemes with fewer than 1,000 beneficiaries account for the single-largest group in all regions except the northwest.

Overall, WASHCOMs, at either the national or regional level, are rare. With the exception of the South East and South South regions, where private consultants dominate, Water Works is the main entity responsible for repairs. Nationally and across all regions, the pump-piped system (PPS) is the preferred way to tap groundwater. Similarly, in most schemes, and across all regions, groundwater depth (that is, meters below ground) is shallow or very shallow. However, the volume of groundwater storage (measured by the depth of stored water in millimeters) is most often medium to high across the nation, though with regional variations. Most storage is of low to low-medium volume in the northern regions, and medium or high in the south. With the exception of the north-central, northwest, and southwest regions, groundwater productivity (measured in liters per second) is medium or high. The availability of spare parts is a major problem in all regions but the southwest: slightly more than 50% of the total observations indicate this, especially in the northern regions. Nearly 831 schemes across the nation reported that they did not know whether spare parts are available.

Two other variables crucial for our analysis, but not presented in Table 1, are the age and functionality status of the schemes in question. The survey data suggest that 54% of the total 5,100 schemes are in use and working;<sup>9</sup> the rest are non-functional. The age of a scheme is calculated as 2015 minus the year of commission, but we could not locate information on the year of commission of 1,282 schemes (25.1% of the total). For the purposes of this functionality analysis, we exclude those schemes

> 9 The numbers of functional and non-functional water schemes in the total sample differ slightly from those presented in Figure 1, which includes only those water schemes for which we have reliable latitude and longitude coordinates.

12
that were commissioned in 2015, as it is unclear whether these schemes were operational at the time of the survey. Finally, we analyze the performance of water schemes that are 15 years or less. Thus, the total number of schemes we analyze in our functionality curves is 3,325.

# **5. Results**

<mark>The results of a locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LWSS)</mark> (“Lowess Smoothing” of running-line least squares) regression of “non-functionality” (0,1) on age in years (1<age<15) for water schemes are presented in Figures 2–9.

- _(a) Functionality Analysis_

# **Overall, the likelihood that a water scheme will fail at some point over its 15-year life span**

**remains much lower in the north than in the south (Figure 2).** The solid lines in Figure 2 represent two of the three northern geo-political regions, while the dotted lines at the top represent two of the three geo-political regions in the south. In the initial couple of years, the likelihood of failure of the best performer in the south (specifically in the southeast) is at least 15% higher than that of the poorest performer in the north (the northeast). The gap more or less persists over the 15 years of a scheme’s life span. The functionality analysis for Figure 2 focuses on only four political regions—the northeast, northwest, southeast, and south-central regions—and excludes the north-central and southwest, as those two regions possess a statistically insufficient number of observations.

# **As measured by the likelihood that regional schemes will not fail over a 15-year life span,**

**the northwest is the best performer among all geo-political regions (Figure 2)** . Conversely, the south-

central region is the <mark>poorest. Interestingly, the change in the likelihood of failure—</mark> as evident from the slopes of the curves—is more or less similar across the regions.

# **Midsized schemes, serving between 5,000 and 10,000 beneficiaries, perform slightly better**

**than larger ones in the first 10 years (Figure 3).** The likelihood of failure among all small- and medium-sized schemes follows a similar pattern. For the first couple of years it ranges from 20% to 30%

13
and peaks at about 45–55% at 8–10 years of age. Beyond that age, the likelihood of failure remains largely stable.

# **PPSs that tap groundwater have a similar likelihood of failure as those that utilize surface**

**water over the first 15 years of their life span (Figure 4)** . In the initial years the failure rate is approximately 30%, and by 15 years it reaches 45–55% for both. Gravity flow systems (GFSs), on the other hand, have a rate of failure that reaches close to 70% after 8 years, and thereafter remains stable.

**Schemes promoted by an LGA or non-governmental organization (NGO) have a lower likelihood of failure than their counterparts (Figure 5).** Federal- and state-promoted schemes are almost 10% more likely to fail. Also, the failure rates of LGA schemes drop sharply after 10 years. Donor-promoted schemes perform similarly to federal and state-promoted schemes: all have an almost 55–65% likelihood of failing in their first 15 years.

**In the initial years, water schemes managed by a WASHCOM are 10% less likely to fail than those that are not, and 30% less likely to fail after 10 years (Figure 6).** More than one-third of water schemes in this study have a WASHCOM present in the community.

**The likelihood of failure is 8–10% less when spare parts are locally available, particularly within a scheme’s first 10 years (Figure 7)** . This rate is 10% in the initial five years, and after that it slowly converges to the same rate as that of water schemes for which parts are not available locally. Interestingly, this suggests that proper maintenance and availability of required spare parts can reduce the initial failures of water schemes by a significant margin.

**There is not much difference in the likelihood of failure between those schemes repaired by a private consultant and those repaired by water works, particularly in the first year and after 8 years (Figure 8).** Between 2 and 8 years of age, the schemes repaired and maintained by water works perform slightly better.

**Water schemes that tap shallow groundwater are more likely to fail than do those that use deeper groundwater (Figure 9).** Water schemes with deeper groundwater—between 25 and 100 meters below ground—have around a 20% probability of failing within their first year, and over a 30%

14
probability of failing after 10 years. Water schemes with shallower groundwater—between 0 and 25 meters below ground—have more than a 30% probability of failing in their first year and almost a 60% probability after 10 years.

# _(b) Empirical Results_

The logit regression estimates of the determinants of the non-functionality of water schemes are presented in Table 2 for the full sample of water schemes that are one-year-old, three to six years old, and more than eight years old. The logit regression and Shapley decomposition estimates were run on 2,808 water schemes (Table 2), those that are one-year-old, three to six years old, or older than eight years. The results for water schemes that are two, seven, and eight years old are not included, but can be furnished upon request. The analysis also excludes the 13 water schemes that are missing from the groundwater productivity and depth estimates. As in the case of the LWSS curves, the outcome variable is binary and equals 0 if the water scheme is functional and 1 if it is non-functional.<sup>10</sup> The results indicate that the presence of a WASHCOM has a negative and significant impact on the non-functionality of all water schemes at the 1% level, for three-to-six-year-old schemes at the 5% level, and for eight-year-old schemes at the 10% level. The availability of spare parts is negative and significant for non-functionality at the 1% level for the full sample and for three-to-six-year-old schemes, and at the 5% level for one-year-old schemes and for those more than eight years old. Together, these results suggest that the presence of a WASHCOM and the availability of spare parts play a major role in preventing the breakdown of water schemes. In terms of promoters, using donors as the base-level, community/philanthropist promoters had a negative and significant impact at the 10% level for all water schemes and for three-to-six-year-old schemes. For all water schemes, using the north east as the base level zone, the chances of failure were high and significant at the 1% level in the southeast and southcentral regions. In the south-central region, the chances were also high and significant at the 1% level for

> 10 <mark>For the following four variables: Repairing Agents, Groundwater Productivity, Groundwater Storage and Depth to Groundwater, we collapsed some of these categories together in the functionality curves for ease of interpretability in the graphs but decided to include the un-collapsed versions in the demographic table (Table 2) and the regression table (Table 3).</mark>

15
three-to-six-year-old schemes, but the chances declined to the 10% level for schemes older than eight years. Finally, for all water schemes, using low groundwater storage as the base level, having a high volume of groundwater storage reduced the likelihood of water scheme failure, and this was significant at the 5% level. The regressions on the other two hydrogeological variables, groundwater productivity and depth, were not statistically significant.

# (c) _Shapley Decomposition for Water Scheme Failure_

As discussed earlier, to understand the relative importance of the factors driving the functionality of water schemes, we use logit analysis to calculate the effect of a number of variables on water scheme failure (Table 3). To determine the reasons for failure in the short and medium to long term, we group together water schemes that are one year old, three to six years old, and over eight years old. In this section, we calculate the predicted impact of hydrogeology, technology, location, promoters, management, and maintenance and operation in explaining the likelihood of water scheme failure in each of these three age groups, and calculate the Shapley values (Table 3) for each component’s contribution to failure (Figure 10).

Further, we group the factors discussed above into three broader categories: (1) **factors that cannot be changed** , such as _political regions_ and _hydrogeology_ ; (2) **those that are influential at the design and implementation stages** (and so can be taken into account when developing new schemes)— namely _technology_ and _how promoters operate and implement interventions_ ; and (3) **factors that are influential at the operational stage** (and can be addressed for existing schemes), that is, _management_ and _maintenance_ (whether it is managed by WASHCOM and the different individuals/organizations in charge of carrying out the repairs). The Shapley values are presented in Table 3, columns 1, 3, and 5. The marginal contribution of most of these factors to the rate of failure has a general downward trend as schemes age, with the exception of the geographical zone and WASHCOM, whose contributions increase.<sup>11</sup>

> 11 The Shapley decomposition values presented here differ slightly from those presented in the _A Wake Up Call: Nigeria Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene Poverty Diagnostic_ (World Bank, 2017). This is because, given the

16
Results from Table 3 (columns 2, 4, and 6) and Figure 9 indicate that as water schemes age, their likelihood of failure is best predicted by those factors that cannot be modified, as well as by those that can be controlled during operational stages. Conversely, as water schemes age, the share of failures linked to factors that are relevant at the design and implementation stages decreases slightly. Furthermore, the importance of (1) repair and maintenance and (2) management by a WASHCOM remain high and do not change much over the life of the scheme. In the water schemes’ first year, just over 39% of failures are explained by factors that cannot be modified (14.8% due to political region and 24.3% to hydrogeology), increasing to 49.6% (28.1% due to political region and 21.5% to hydrogeology) during the three-to-sixyear period. After eight years, it increases slightly to 50.8% (28.4% due to political region and 22.4% to hydrogeology). Similarly, the share of the factors that can be changed during the design and implementation stages (scheme size, scheme type, and promoters) decreases from 32.7% in the first year (13.7% attributed to promoters, 9.4% to scheme size, and 9.6% to scheme type) to 21.4% in years three to six (15.2% for promoters, 2.7% for scheme size, and 3.5% for scheme type), and increases slightly to 22.2% after eight years (6.5% for promoters, 7.6% for scheme type, and 8.1% for scheme size). Finally, just over 28.1% of water scheme failures in the first year can be linked to factors that are relevant at the operational stages, such as repair and maintenance and WASHCOM management, increasing to 28.9% for three to six years, and declining slightly to 27% after eight years. Thus, poor repair and maintenance and absence of a WASHCOM, combined, explain between 27% and 30% of failures across all years.

# **6. Conclusions and Policy Implications**

The NWSS 2015 survey data enable us to identify the failure rates of water schemes across their lifetimes as well as the causes of these failures. Currently, around 46% of all schemes in Nigeria are non-

> nature of the data, and the use of a binary variable as the outcome indicator, it was decided to fit the logit model instead of a log-linear model to the regression presented here. This was done after the WASH Poverty Diagnostic report had already been published.

17
functional, and approximately 30% of water schemes are likely to fail in the first year. Further, around 60% are likely to fail after 10 years. The location of the water schemes matters, including factors related to both the political region (schemes in the north generally outperform those in the south) and underlying hydrogeology (for example, greater groundwater depth is preferable).<sup>12</sup> Technology also plays a role in determining the failure of water schemes. Differences in scheme size—as measured by the number of beneficiaries that they serve—have an impact on their functionality. Within the first year, this contribution exceeds 9%; in the midterm, it is only 2.7%; and in the long term, it again increases to 8.1%.

Finally, when we decompose the failures of water schemes, we find that as **water schemes age, their likelihood of failure is best predicted by those factors that cannot be modified, as well as by those that can be controlled during the operational stages. Meanwhile the influence of factors relevant to the design and implementation stages decreases slightly.** In the first year, 39.0% of failures are explained by factors that cannot be modified, and after eight or more years, that share increases to 50.8%. Similarly, the share of factors that can be changed during the design and implementation stages decreases from 32.7% in the first year to 22.1% after eight years. Conversely, around 28% of water scheme failures in the first year can be linked to factors that can be controlled during the operational stages, such as repair and maintenance and management by a WASHCOM, whereas that number is 27% after eight or more years.

There are striking similarities between the patterns of failed water points (Andres et al., 2018) and failed water schemes in Nigeria. In both cases, water infrastructure performs better in the north than in the south, performs better with the presence of a WASHCOM than without, when spare parts are available, and when promoters are NGOs rather than government authorities. For both water schemes and points, repair and maintenance decline in importance as the infrastructure ages. However, there are some

> 12  Note that the model presented here does not intend to make causal inferences. Absent a control group, as exist in experimental or quasi-experimental research designs, it is not possible to make any strict causal inferences about the role that each of these factors plays in explaining the probability of water point failure. Further experimental research is needed to further fully flesh-out the causal factors driving water point failure.

18
significant differences. Technology and location—both in terms of political region and underlying hydrogeology—grow in importance as water points age, but decline in importance for schemes. On the other hand, the presence of a WASHCOM grows in importance as a scheme’s infrastructure ages, a pattern that does not hold for water points. Finally, the importance of the initial promoter does not change much as water points age, while it declines in importance for schemes.

The results have several policy implications. The finding that 61% of first-year failures can be linked to factors relevant to the design, implementation, and operational stages suggests that these need to be given top priority to drastically reduce failure rates. Results from our regression analysis also suggest that the presence of a WASHCOM and the availability of spare parts may play a large role in preventing the breakdown of water schemes. Thus, WASHCOMs need to play an increasing role in the maintenance of water schemes throughout the country.

There is also a need to address other important issues for functionality to be improved in the future. For instance, there is a tendency for projects to fall apart when donors leave. This may be because local skills are inadequate, or because the technology may be costly to adopt and maintain. Furthermore, a scheme designed for use by, for example, 200 people a day might instead be used by 300 people, resulting in more wear and tear and greater need for costly maintenance and repair. The maintenance of water schemes remains a challenge, and one that requires careful attention.

19