Punjab Rural Water and Sanitation Project - Baseline
CHAPTER I
Introduction
1.1 Background
The Government of Punjab (GoP), under its development agenda, has prioritized RWSS as a key area by allocating significant capital to the sector. Government of India also supports the RWSS sector reforms and provides significant financial assistance to the state through its centrally sponsored programs such as ARWSP and TSC. The two major components of the RWSS programme being water supply and sanitation, this report will begin by stating the secondary information pertaining to these two different services.
As per the Census 2001 the State of Punjab has a total population of 2.4 Crores with approximately 66 percent of the population residing in the rural areas. The state has 12278 villages located in 77 tehsils of 20 districts.
As per GoP statistics only 30% of the villages currently receive a basic service level of 40 lpcd through public water schemes (mostly piped water schemes) and are designated Fully Covered (FC) villages, another 40% have piped water supply but with less than 40 lpcd supply (between 10 – 40 lpcd) and are designated Partially Covered (PC) villages, while the remaining do not have any access to any public water supply or less than 10 lpcd from public or other privately installed safe water sources and are termed Not Covered (NC) villages. The existing services are not able to meet the demand of increasing population or for higher service standards. The investment in the sector is largely from the government – both for capital and recurring operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, as user charges finance only about 25% of the current O&M expenditure. Safe water provision is not merely installing handpumps and piped water schemes, which technically is supposed to provide safe water (as the water extraction from ground water sources is from sufficient depths to prevent water contamination – or if surface water sources are used, then needed treatment is included before supply). Safe water provision has today the requirement of providing water which is not only bacteriological contamination free, but also free from other chemical contaminants. Thus, the fact that there is water quality problem in 30% of villages - affected by fluoride, salinity or iron – reduces the level of coverage quoted above. Any improvements in the sector, has to include both adequate quantity and water free from bacteriological and chemical contamination. This would mean sufficient investment in water purification of existing schemes located in quality affected areas, as well installing new schemes, which include appropriate water treatment.
Dependence of households on hand pump is very high in rural Punjab. Census 2001 indicates that approximately 78 percent of the total 27 lakhs rural households are dependent on hand pump for drinking water, and this is important to note because the Government of Punjab prefers the provision of piped water supply schemes, and indeed 93% of the total water supply schemes in Punjab is piped water supply (DWSS data, 2007). However, the higher proportion of handpumps is explained by the fact that a majority of the households in the villages of Punjab invest in private drinking water sources – mostly handpumps). The Figure 1 indicates the distribution of households (Source of information: Census 2001) in terms of type of drinking water source.
Majority of the households in rural Punjab have drinking water source within their premise. The figure 2 indicates the distribution of households (Source of information: Census 2001) in terms of location of drinking water source.
As per Census 2001, 48 percent of the households in rural Punjab have in-house bathroom facility but only 26 percent have latrine facility within their premises.
The figure 3 indicates distribution of households in terms of type and presence of latrines. Most of the households owning latrines have a pit latrine, while the remaining either have a sewerage connection (water closet) or other latrines, of which septic tanks is most common.
The present status of availability of drainage facilities in rural Punjab indicates that more than 73 percent of the households have access to waste water drainage facility, but in the form of open drains.
1.2 Rationale for the study
In the above context, GoP is keen to reform the sector to improve sustainability and standard of rural water supply service delivery and sanitation. Towards this end Department of Water Supply and Sanitation (DWSS) of Punjab has developed a new RWSS policy framework and obtained cabinet clearance of the same. The key features of this new initiative would include:
- handing over the responsibilities of upgradation and management of the intra-village RWSS facilities and services to rural local governments;
- DWSS would have the responsibilities of managing complex multi-village water supply schemes with improved fiscal and operational performance and would provide capacity support to rural local government;
- Initiate partial capital cost sharing by users as an expression of their demand; and financing of recurring cost of O&M by the communities.
- Further reform initiatives include raising and widening the scope of water tariff, transferring the management of the single village schemes to PRIs,
- awarding O&M of new schemes to the private sector, and
- Re-defining the role of DWSS from direct service provider to that of a facilitator.
In this context GoP had obtained World Bank assistance in implementing its 5 year medium term Rural Water Supply and Sanitation program by adopting a Sector Wide Approach to RWSS improvements in the State with three components of Program Management, Community Development Support and Infrastructure Building.
The State Programme Management Cell, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, Government of Punjab, had therefore proposed a baseline survey for determining percentage of rural households in the state with access to:
- safe and adequate water through out the year,
- access and use of safe and hygienic sanitation
The work for the Baseline Survey had been awarded to ACNielsen ORG-MARG Pvt. Ltd. The survey work for the Baseline data had been undertaken from 27 March to 10 May, 2009.
1.3 Study objectives
The purpose of this study was to assist DWSS in developing a baseline on the key outcome indicators on household access to water supply and sanitation in the rural areas of Punjab. The specific objectives of the study were:
1. To assess the status of habitations in the rural areas of the state and each district which are Fully Covered (FC), Partially Covered (PC) and Not Covered (NC) as per the defined norm
2. Estimate percentage of the rural households in the state and in each district with access to safe, adequate and reliable water throughout the year in term of the following indicators:
a. Amount of water, especially safe water, available to the rural households for drinking and other purposes (Table 83,84,85,86)
b. Distance travelled and time consumed for traveling and waiting for water collection by rural households (Table 44,45,46, 123, 124)
c. Availability of drinking water during different seasons in the covered rural habitations (Table 52, 70, 72, 79)
d. Quality of water available (Section 2.6.14)
e. Access to improved water sources for the marginalized groups, especially the poor and the SC/ST households (Table 24 & table 25)
3. Estimate percentage of rural households in the state and in each district having access to sanitation (Table 180)
4. Estimate percentage of participating habitations having satisfactorily performing community sanitation facilities (Table 197 & table 199)
5. To assess the extent of community involvement/role of PRIs in the decision making process of selection and management of the drinking water supply schemes. (Table 216)
1.4 Target respondent group and information collected
State and district offices of the Water Supply Agency
Discussions were undertaken by the core professional team with the nodal officers of the State Water Supply Agency/DWSS. Secondary data as required under the survey regarding the status of habitations in Punjab in terms of coverage, district wise number of FC, PC and NC habitations was also collected. Discussions were carried out with state officials to understand why some of the habitations slipped to PC status from FC status earlier. :
Panchayat and other key stakeholders
In each habitation selected for the survey, discussion was undertaken at the habitation, which included representatives of the Panchayat, and the Sarpanch where possible, as well as other stakeholders, to get the information about coverage/access to safe drinking water and extent of community involvement for water and sanitation in the habitation..
Households
The adult women household member was the key respondent in the household survey. The choice of respondent was based on the assumption that the adult women would be the most knowledgeable on water related information for the household. Households were selected through systematic random sampling procedure to ensure appropriate coverage of all socio-economic groups in the community (including marginalized groups like the SC households). The information elicited from the household was both for the current water situation, and the change perceived in the recent years.
1.5 Sample size estimation and sampling design
Sample estimation for number of respondent households in a district
As we were looking at a heterogeneous population having varied characteristics essentially unknown, it was decided to use a multi-stage sampling technique to arrive at sample estimates. The formula, which was applied when sample estimates were to be drawn up on the basis of proportion of occurrence of key phenomenon but is independent of the population universe, was as follows:
n = t2 p (1-p) f
d2
Where
n = required sample size
t2 = factor to achieve 95% level of confidence (square of the Z value)
p = prevalence of the indicator being measured
d = margin of error to be tolerated
f = design effect
Estimation of proportion (p)
The proportion of population having access to clean and safe drinking water needed to be found out from this survey. In the absence of reliable secondary estimates on the same, the proportion value to be used in the formula was taken as 50% (or 0.5), to ensure the maximum sample size.
Estimation of design effect (f)
The design effect for the study was taken as 1.
Permissible Margin of Error (d)
For this study, permissible margin of error was assumed as 0.05, i.e. + 5 percentage points.
Value of constant (t)
This was a function of the chosen margin of error and confidence level (95%) and was the square of the “Z” value. In this case, the value taken was (1.96)2
Considering all the above, the base required sample size for each category of district (without the design effect) was as follows:
Sample size = (1.96)2 x 0.5 (1 - 0.5) x 1
0.05 x 0.05
= 384 respondent households, say 400 respondent households
Thus 400 respondent households were selected in each district for the study.
Sampling Methodology
A multistage sampling methodology was followed as specified below:
Selection of Districts: All districts in the State were selected for survey.
Figure 4
Selection of Habitations: It was decided to survey 20 respondent households in each habitation.. Given the sample required for each district to be 400, a total of 20 habitations in each district were covered. The required number of 20 habitations weres selected in a manner to appropriately represent the given proportions of FC, PC and NC habitations in each district.
In order to select these 20 habitations in each district, information on the number of FC, PC and NC villages/habitations in the districts was obtained from the DWSS. The exact number of FC, PC and NC habitations to be selected for survey in the district was obtained by apportioning the percentage of FC, PC and NC villages/habitations to the total number of villages/habitations in the district. The table 1 shows the distribution of the district sample of 400 households as per the above discussion.
Table 1: District wise distribution of respondents across type of habitations
District / Type of habitation / Total /FC / PC / NC /
N / % / N / % / N / % / N /
Amritsar / 60 / 15.0 / 200 / 50.0 / 140 / 35.0 / 400
Barnala / 120 / 30.0 / 260 / 65.0 / 20 / 5.0 / 400
Bathinda / 240 / 60.0 / 120 / 30.0 / 40 / 10.0 / 400
Faridkot / 0 / 0.0 / 360 / 90.0 / 40 / 10.0 / 400
Fatehgarh Sahib / 220 / 55.0 / 80 / 20.0 / 100 / 25.0 / 400
Ferozepur / 120 / 30.0 / 200 / 50.0 / 80 / 20.0 / 400
Gurdaspur / 180 / 45.0 / 80 / 20.0 / 140 / 35.0 / 400
Hoshiarpur / 180 / 45.0 / 160 / 40.0 / 60 / 15.0 / 400
Jalandhar / 180 / 45.0 / 20 / 5.0 / 200 / 50.0 / 400
Kapurthala / 120 / 30.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 280 / 70.0 / 400
Ludhiana / 140 / 35.0 / 160 / 40.0 / 100 / 25.0 / 400
Mansa / 200 / 50.0 / 160 / 40.0 / 40 / 10.0 / 400
Moga / 40 / 10.0 / 320 / 80.0 / 40 / 10.0 / 400
Mohali / 260 / 65.0 / 140 / 35.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 400
Muktsar / 20 / 5.0 / 340 / 85.0 / 40 / 10.0 / 400
Nawanshahr / 160 / 40.0 / 140 / 35.0 / 100 / 25.0 / 400
Patiala / 260 / 65.0 / 120 / 30.0 / 20 / 5.0 / 400
Ropar / 280 / 70.0 / 100 / 25.0 / 20 / 5.0 / 400
Sangrur / 240 / 60.0 / 140 / 35.0 / 20 / 5.0 / 400
Tarn Taran / 100 / 25.0 / 240 / 60.0 / 60 / 15.0 / 400
Punjab / 3120 / 39.0 / 3340 / 41.8 / 1540 / 19.3 / 8000
The list of habitations surveyed is annexed with the report.
As per the data provided by DWSS, the proportion of FC, PC and NC habitations in the state is 41.3%, 36.3% and 22.4% respectively. The difference in figures as per surveyed data and data provided by DWSS is due to rounding off the proportion figures of NC/PC/PC habitations for each district and accordingly assigning the number of habitations to be selected under each category out of total of 20 habitations.
For selecting the exact habitations in FC, PC and NC categories in each district, the habitations and their corresponding population were arranged in descending order and PPS (probability proportionate to size) random sampling was done, so that the probability of selecting different habitations in terms of size is more or less the same.
Selection of Respondent Households in each habitation: In each selected habitation, 20 respondent households were selected for detailed household survey. The total number of households were ascertained from the Sarpanch/Panchayat member, and the total number of households was divided by 20 and the sampling interval value was obtained. Systematic random sampling was conducted to identify the households for the survey. Thereafter, one household was selected at random in the habitation and surveyed. After this the sampling interval value was added to the location of the first household, and the corresponding household which was selected after as many houses as the number of the sampling interval, denoted the selection of the subsequent house for survey purpose. Again, after this the sampling interval value was added to the last household surveyed and the next corresponding household was surveyed. In selecting these households, a right hand rule was conducted in each habitation..