Romania - Rehabilitation of the Water Supply/Sewerage Public Service in Medgidia

From WaterWiki.net

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Importing text file)
(Importing text file)
Line 193: Line 193:
 +
The project is in the inception phase; therefore no results have been obtained yet. However, the initial schedule proposed by the Local Council has been going on according to the plan.
 +
Example of lesson learned: close cooperation and joined efforts of private partner, public authorities, financial and commercial sector
START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See [[Help]] if necessary)
START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See [[Help]] if necessary)

Revision as of 14:52, 1 August 2006


Contents

Title, Short Description, Identifiers

Project/Initiative

Rehabilitation of the Water Supply/Sewerage Public Service in Medgidia

Synopsis / Summary

The project represents a real PPP on infrastructure rehabilitation under UNDP’s Local Agenda 21 project in Romania and has the following main components: construction and operation of drinking water treatment station; construction and operation of a new wastewater treatment plant; extension of the water supply/sewage service; rehabilitation of the existing piping network.

Location of Experience

Romania

UNDP's / Partner's Role

UNDP implemented Local Agenda 21 in Medgidia municipality. The project was a success and benefited of the ful suport of local authorities and community. The first priority project identifyed within LA21 was the Rehabilitation of the Water Supply/Sewerage Public Service. With UNDP support an Opportunity Study was developed and the tendering process for the concession of the public service was prepared. The Municipality of Medgidia fully aware of the importance of this project for the local community provided all the necessary technical information by mobilising the local expertise and the logistic support as well. The foreign investor understood to bring its state of art tecnology and the financial support to implement it in Romania. It also agreed to recover its investment on a long period by operating the system for 25 years.

Timeframe & Status

The project is currently in the inception phase. The project contract was signed by the private investor and Medgidia Local Council in June 2006 and curently, the private investor is taking over the system from the former local operator Edilmed (final take over foreseen for 1 October 2006) The concession contract was signed for a period of 25 years.

Contact

Roxana Suciu - Head of Energy and Environment Section, UNDP Romania, UN House, 48A Primaverii Blvd, 011975 Bucharest 1, Romania, Phone: +4021 201 78 06, Fax: +4021 201 78 28.



The existing situation of water and waste water services in Medgidia is characterized as follows: -Not all the population of the city has access to water supply/sewerage services; - the existing water and wastewater networks are very old; so are the entire water and wastewater system. - because of the old equipment the efficiency is extremely low; huge water loss is registered each year (over 50%); - the actual local operator of water supply-sewerage system, Edilmed, also operates the sanitation and energy services and its financial sustainability is extremely limited. Therefore, they had no capacity to make any investments in the water field in Medgidia. Given the above-mentioned situation, the Local Council decided to find a new partner with the adequate experience in the area as well as with the appropriate financial capacities.

The main issue to be solved is the water and wastewater quality in Medgidia as well as the provision of efficient services for acceptable prices for the population. The local administration faced a financial incapacity for the appropriate investments, while the age and efficiency of the existing system were worsening every day. There was also an increasing need to extend the water and wastewater services supply in other parts of the town, which are not yet connected to the different networks. The Local Council faced the need and, at the same time, the opportunity of a public-private partnership which would lead to an improvement of the existing water situation in Medgidia.

|

Goal or purpose of the project/intervention
For example: secure access to water by the poor? Water governance in irrigation? Private sector participation? National policy on water governance (revision of laws, localizing water governance, etc…)? Resolve conflicts? save water resources? etc..

|} The main goal of the project is to insure the access of all citizens of Medgidia and of two adjacent villages Valea Dacilor and Remus Opreanu, to water and wastewater services and for decent costs. This should be accomplished in an efficient manner, i.e. with a minimum and good quality water resources. It should be mentioned that the existing losses are of about 50% of the water quantity extracted. The funds to be invested are private and the investor intends to accomplish all investments within 2 years. This means that at the end of this period of time all citizens will have full access to water and wastewater services at lower costs due to an increased efficiency of the system.

START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)


The Solution (Description of Action Taken)

In this section, describe how the project/intervention answered the need set in the preivous chapter ("The Problem"). Explain the "path" that led to the results.
Cover all points below, like in a press story (what, who, where, when, how?)

-> start your entry after the next sub-heading "WHAT"

WHAT

Write about what specific solution was used to tackle the Problem described above

Specify:

  1. The setting (same as "Context"): the different institutional, legislative, social, economic and technical dimensions;
  2. Description of the solution: What approach was chosen? Main outcomes? What was the intended change? What change has eventually been achieved?
  3. Innovation: What is special about this solution/intervention? What makes it different from other approaches?


Write about what specific solution was used to tackle the Problem described above Specify: 1. The setting (same as "Context"): the different institutional, legislative, social, economic and technical dimensions; 2. Description of the solution: What approach was chosen? Main outcomes? What was the intended change? What change has eventually been achieved? 3. Innovation: What is special about this solution/intervention? What makes it different from other approaches? 1. The institutional solution found was a form of a PPP between the Local Council and a private investor for a specific period of time. The project is developed under the Romanian law and the private partner will insure the observance of all applicable laws in force. The social issue was a key factor and therefore the main decision focused on securing complete access for all citizens to water and wastewater services while insuring the efficiency of the existing system. The economic as well as the technical needs imposed the PPP with a powerful investor with adequate experience in this field. 2. Based on an opportunity study ordered by the Local Council, it was proved that the existing water company in Medgidia – Edilmed – did not have the financial capability to provide the adequate investments needed to improve the system. Therefore, the Local Council organized an open tender in order to select the investor. Consequently, a partner was thus found; the change will consist in a modernized water supply and wastewater services system. 3. The opportunity study ordered by the Local Council explored the following potential solutions: keeping the situation unchanged; finding non- reimbursable European funds to complete the necessary investments and find a private investor. The first possibility did not prove to be a real solution. The second one would have implied long and complex procedures (i.e. years are normally needed to access these funds). Therefore, the Local Council decided that the third solution was the most appropriate for Medgidia. It should be mentioned that this last solution will put in place a totally revolutionary technology in this field in Romania and, more important, will solve the problems within a quite short period of time. START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

WHO

Describe the main stakeholders
Who is implementing?
Who are the stakeholders?
What is the involvement of UNDP, if any?
And who were the project’s direct beneficiaries?
Also,

The Local Council, together with the investor, will insure the operation of the system. The investor comes with new technologies and financial support, while the Local Council will secure the overall observance and accomplishment of the terms of the contract. The main stakeholders of this project are: - the entire population in Medgidia - all industrial companies and economic agents operating in the area; - all public institutions; - the entire population of Romania through a better use of its natural resources as well as thorough the implementation and experience of a revolutionary technology in the country. Such a complex project, unique in Romania so far, needed a special monitoring and control in order to secure the transparency and the accountability of its implementation. As the project identification was done under UNDP project Local Agenda 21, and knowing the previous fruitful collaboration with the municipality of Medgidia, it was agreed that UNDP will be responsible for the sound administrative, financial and technical management of the project. A Memorandum of Understanding to this effect was signed in June 2006. The direct beneficiaries are the citizens of Medgidia together with the economic agents and public institutions operating in the town. START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

WHERE

Show the geographic and socio-economic context
What is the location of the experience?
Any important contextual details: in the countryside, in the city, in a protected area, coastal zone, wetland?
Who lives in this area? What socio-economic / ethnic factors are important?
What are the active groups (farmers, user groups, women…)?

The location of the project is Medgidia town, located in Romania, Constanta county. The town is located 35 km from the seaside, on the Danube river, at the core of the agricultural basin of South Dobrogea. Medgidia is also located on the Danube – Black Sea channel, with a total length of 65 km, very important for trans- European connections between the North Sea and Black Sea. The total population of the town, according to the 2002 census is 44,843 inhabitants, out of which 35,554 Romanians, 8,122 Turks and other minorities. Medgidia is the second largest town in the county, after Constanta. The population is divided in two main religious communities: Orthodox – around 35,228 inhabitants and Muslims – 8,168 persons. There are other minor religious communities (Catholic, Pentecostal, Baptist, Adventist), though extremely active. The active part of the population is mostly formed by the employed population, out of which the majority are men. START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

WHEN

Mention the duration and time-related aspects
When was the project implemented?
What's the status/progress of the project/intervention?
Was the duration appropriate, too long, needed for such a project to evolve?
Does/did time-related factors have any specific influence/impact on the experience?


The project will be implemented starting with October 2006. The project is currently in the inception phase. It is estimated, based on other local experiences, that this project was developed in a short period of time and it is forecasted that all investments will be in place within 2 years. The time is one of the most important elements and this is why both partners – the investor as well as the Local Council – are interested in advancing the project as quickly as possible. START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

HOW

Describe step by step how the project/intervention was set up/implemented

Try to address the following points:

  1. Specify the steps taken/necessary (if possible/relevant starting in reverse chronological order — the last activity first and then moving back to the initial first steps)
  2. Make sure to keep in mind the initial Issue/Problem and tie whatever activity to how well it responds to and/or solves the problem identified in the previous chapter
  3. Focus on the five Main themes of the HDR 2006 to show the linkages between field-based activities and analysis/policy
  4. Stress on innovation versus traditional approaches: Has traditional knowledge/patterns been applied/supported? How did they contribute to advancing the project/intervention? What sort of innovative steps were adopted instead? How well was this all received by beneficiaries; or was there resistance to change?
  5. Cooperation between the partners / stakeholders: How did it work?
  6. External factors/challenges: What influences from outside had an impact on the project/intervention? Were there any specific challenges to overcome?
  7. Finally: What did it cost? What was the Source of Funding: UNDP, donors, government, others?


1. The last important step related to the project implementation was the signing of the contract in July 2006. Before that, the tender was held in May 2006 based on which the investor was chosen. The tender was organized based on an Opportunity Study ordered by the Local Council, who analyzed different approaches to the problem. 2. The main problem identified was the poor quality of the water and wastewater services in Medgidia and the limited access to these services. So far no measure was implemented because at the moment the system is in the transferring process from the former operator to the new investor. 3. 4. There have been no approaches implemented yet but it is forecasted that both traditional and innovative measures will be used, according to each necessity. 5. The relations between the two main partners are so far optimal; the Local Council has granted full support to its partner. 6. The interest of the US ExIm Bank in exporting US technology and the support of the Commercial Department of the US Embassy in Romania had a positive impact on the project speeding up some phases of the project preparation. 7. The investments are implemented with private funds. START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

The Analysis (Results and Lessons Learned)

In this section, make sure you describe the main results and how/why the "Solution" described in the previous chapter has solved the problems/issues/challenges.
What has been achieved? What are the changes?
What went as planned, what not?
Any insights / lessons learned for future activities?
Also focus on unintended consequences: Surprises, new challenges or new opportunities. Explain why the "path" had led to the results.

-> start your entry after the next sub-heading "Main Results"

Main Results

Describe the main outcomes
What concrete achievements have been made?
What is different / what has changed for the beneficiaries?

For example, detailing the main outcomes and their impact in terms of changes/contribution made towards:

  1. Management and access;
  2. public-private partnerships;
  3. water production and environment; or
  4. sanitation & security

T O P I C S - N E E D - T O - B E - D I S C U S S E D - S T I L L  !!!


The project is in the inception phase; therefore no results have been obtained yet. However, the initial schedule proposed by the Local Council has been going on according to the plan. Example of lesson learned: close cooperation and joined efforts of private partner, public authorities, financial and commercial sector START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

Lessons Learned & Replication

To-the-point analysis on WHY the results have (or have not) been achieved
  1. Highlight key elements that were helpful / hindering in the process
  2. Stress on facilitating factors as well as challenges/barriers that contributed to success/failure of parts of the intervention/project.
Why was this a success? Why have certain results not been achieved?
What specifically do you think has triggered certain developments?
Had changes been made to the original plans? Why?
What is the difference compared to other, similar experiences?
  1. Try to identify patterns behind the process or outcome, or important lessons, that would be useful for others planning a similar intervention/project
Would you do everything the same way again? Why? What would you change?
What are key recommendations for similar endeavours? How would you go about to replicate thsi project/experience?


START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

Testimonies, Opinions, Validation (Reality Check)

"Voices from the field"
For instance, document excerpts from interviews with beneficiaries or other stakeholders to reflect the impact of the intervention and/or the actual or perceived results through a "field lense".
Questions for interviews could inculde
How would you describe the project / the results?
Which problems have been solved? What remains to be done?
Did you learn anything throug/during/becaus of this intervention? Any major insights?
Did everything go as you expected? Were there surprises? Unexpected developments?
Etc...
What has changed compared to the initial problem/situation?

-> This should also be done with an eye to the possibility of future video interviews, or a depiction of the quotations in a multi-media format.


START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)


Outlook (Conclusions and Next Steps)

In this last sub-section, give a short outlook about what else is expected in this project/intervention
Have the results and processes been institutionalized? How?
What has been / will be done to ensure that they are sustained beyond the timeframe of the project/intervention?
What further interventions would be necessary to tackle remaining/new issues?


START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

References, Sources, and Further Information

Interviewees and Key Contacts

List names and addresses (e-mail, postal) of all people interviewed or resource persons cited
Also indicate who could give further information


START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

Sorce Documents, References, Cross-Links, and Further Readings

1. Indicate all sources of information used

Apply bibliographic citation
Provide URLs for online documents or note address where printed documents are held

2. Create links to similar projects and/or useful information on WaterWiki or external webpages

-> Consult the Help-pages to find out how to insert internal/external links, upload documents to this site, etc.


START YOUR ENTRY HERE (insert Sub-Titles, as needed -> See Help if necessary)

1874 Rating: 2.3/5 (93 votes cast)