- Water supply and sanitation in Brazil
Water supply and sanitation in Brazil has proved to be a resilient and resourceful sector, despite tremendous challenges and persistent inequalities in the sector. A lot has been achieved during the past decades, including a sustained improvement in efficiency and improved access. Access to improved
water supplyincreased from 83% in 1990 to 90% in 2004, and access to improved sanitationincreased from 71% to 75%. [ WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program [http://www.wssinfo.org/pdf/country/BRA_wat.pdf] ] Nevertheless, more needs to be done in order to reduce glaring inequalities and to attain the water supply and sanitation Millennium Development Goals, which Brazilwould only achieve in 2054 if the current level of investment was maintained.
"Source": Joint Monitoring Program
WHO/ UNICEF( [http://www.wssinfo.org/en/welcome.html JMP] /2006). Data for [http://www.wssinfo.org/pdf/country/BRA_wat.pdf water] and [http://www.wssinfo.org/pdf/country/BRA_san.pdf sanitation] based on [http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/trabalhoerendimento/pnad2003/default.shtm National Housing Sample Study] ("Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios", 2003) and the [http://www.ibge.gov.br/english/estatistica/populacao/censo2000 Census] (2000).
Access to improved water supply in Brazil stood at 90% and access to improved sanitation at 75% in 2004. [ WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program [http://www.wssinfo.org/pdf/country/BRA_wat.pdf] ] Coverage is significantly higher in urban areas, where 84% of Brazil’s population live. Urban coverage is 96% for water and 83% for improved sanitation, including 53% access to
sewerage, the remainder being accounted for by on-site sanitation. Coverage in rural areas, where 16% of Brazil’s population lives, is much lower. It stands at 57% for improved water supply and only 37% for improved sanitation. [ ibid ] Geographically coverage is lowest in the country’s poorest regions: particularly in predominantly rural North, Northeast, and Center-West.
Average water use in Brazil for users served by utilities fell from 217 to 143 liter/capita/day over the past years (-34%). Water use in Brazil thus is lower than the excessively high water use found in many other Latin American countries and is now much closer to levels in Central Europe. Increased metering and a higher share of low-income users with low per capita water use probably played a role in the reduced average water use.
Reaching the poor
-supported Low Income Sanitation Technical Assistance Project [http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTWSS/0,,contentMDK:20875273~menuPK:3810623~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:337302,00.html PROSANEAR] .
Brazil’s major and medium size metropolitan areas face increasing problems of water
pollution. Coastal cities such as Rio de Janeiro, São Pauloand Recifesuffer effects of upstream residential and industrial sewage contaminating feeder rivers, lakes, and the ocean. In 2000, only 35% of collected wastewater received any treatment.
For example, according to the environmental sanitation company of the state of São Paulo, [http://www.cetesb.sp.gov.br/ Cetesb] , the Tietê River, which runs through the São Paulo metropolitan area (17 million inhabitants), has returned to its 1990 pollution levels. Despite the support from the
IDBand [http://www.caixa.gov.br/ Caixa Economica Federal] in a US$400 million clean up effort, the level of dissolved oxygen has returned to the critical level of 1990 at 0 mg per liter due to increased levels of unregulated sewerage, phosphorus, and ammonia nitrogen discharged into the river. ["Piora nivel de poluicao do Tiete" " [http://www.estadao.com.br/ Estado de São Paulo] Newspaper". 16 May 2007.] Although the city of São Paulo treats 63.9% of the collected sewerage, the surrounding cities of Sao Bernardo (19.7%), Diadema (11.3%), and Guarulhos (0%) treat much less. [Ibid.] The state water company Sabespprojects that a minimum of R$3 billion would be necessary to despollute the river. ["Limpar of Tiete exige mais de R$3 bi." [http://www.estadao.com.br/ Estado de São Paulo] . 17 May 2007.]
History and recent developments
Municipal service provision (prior to 1968)
Until 1968, the responsibility for water supply and sanitation was municipal. Service providers were municipal water and drainage companies, each of them with different financial and administrative structures. The federal role was limited to the National Health Foundation (Funasa), which lacked funding as well as regulatory or enforcement capacity. [ da Motta, Ronaldo Seroa, and Moreira, Ajax. 2006. "Efficiency and regulation in the sanitation sector in Brazil." "Utilities Policy", 14: p. 186.] At that time coverage rates were low and there was no institutional structure to plan and finance an increase in coverage on the necessary scale. [http://www.mre.gov.br/cdbrasil/itamaraty/web/ingles/economia/saneam/apresent/index.htm Marta T S Arretche: Water supply and sanitation] , an undated article on the website of the Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs ]
The central role of municipalities in the sector was confirmed by the 1967 Federal Constitution, only to be fundamentally altered shortly afterwards.
The National Water Supply and Sanitation Plan PLANASA (1968-1986)
To address the challenges in the sector, the National Water Supply and Sanitation System was created in 1968. It consisted of the National Water Supply and Sanitation Plan (Planasa) supported by three newly created institutions:
* the National Housing Bank (Banco Nacional de Habitação) or BNH;
* the Employment Guarantee Fund (FGTS), the main source of funds for Planasa;
* and 27 state-owned water and sanitation companies (Caompanhias Estaduais de Saneamento Básico or CESBs).
Planasa was the first federal government initiative in water and sanitation in Brazil. BNH managed the FGTS and, by extension, national urban development policy.
Beginning in 1971 State Water and Sanitation Companies (CESBs) were set up in every Brazilian state. Until 1985, only these public companies could obtain financing from BNH for water supply and sanitation, being responsible for construction, operation and maintenance. In order for CESBs to operate in their respective states, they had to obtain municipal licenses to run the services under long-term contracts, because the Brazilian Constitution had already established that the power to grant licences for public water and sanitation services belonged to the municipalities.
The favorable performance of the economy, the scale of the system being installed, the amount of funds available and the subsidized interest rates on loans, all helped services to expand extremely quickly. In 1980, the population covered by Planasa with water supply services was around 50 million, or 42% of Brazil's total population of 119 million, at the time. Planasa's drainage and sewerage services attended around 17.5 million people. In 1990, when the total population was 146.8 million, state water and sanitation companies covered around 83 million persons, and drainage and sewerage reached 29 million.
Between 1970 and 1990, PLANASA expanded coverage from 45% to 95% for water and 24% to 42% for sanitation among urban residents [ McNallen, Brendan. 2006. "Fixing the leaks in Brazil’s water law: Encouraging sound private sector participation through legal and regulatory reform." "Gonzaga Journal of International Law", 9: p. 173-174.] As anticipated, due to their larger territorial scope, state water companies were better able to cross-subsidize between different classes of consumers, especially between grossly disparate neighboring municipalities [ Tupper, Henrique Cesar, and Resende, Marcelo. 2004. "Efficiency and regulatory issues in the Brazilian water and sewage sector: an empirical study." "Utilities Policy", 12: p. 30.]
The coverage expansion happened unequally. Investment in water services was given priority because it was less costly and produced a quicker return through water charges. In addition, although there was significant expansion of services all over Brazil, Planasa gave priority to the country's richer regions of the South and South East; most of the investment was concentrated in the larger cities, and within these cities, in the better-off sections of the population.
About 3,200 of Brazil’s municipalities took advantage of PLANASA (although often without formal contracts), granting concessions to these state companies for 20-30 years. 1,800 municipalities chose to continue providing services directly on their own or indirectly through municipal companies, most of them in the South-eastern region, particularly
Minas Geraisand São Paulo. [ Sabbioni, Guillermo. 2008. "Efficiency in the Brazilian sanitation sector." "Utilities Policy", 16: p. 13. Arretche gives the percentage of municipal service provision at that time as only 20%. ] .
Other municipalities retained partial autonomy, linked to a Health Ministry entity, now known as the National Health Foundation (Funasa). They operate in accordance with the model established by the Special Service for Public Health over 40 years ago. Services are operated by a municipal agency which is administratively, technically and financially autonomous, but in which there is considerable input from Funasa, whose functions range from administration to technical assistance. In 1993 about 6% of Brazilian municipalities functioned under this system in 625 locations. They are largely concentrated in the North-eastern region.
Planasa coincided with the period of military government in Brazil (1964-1985) (see also History of Brazil), which has left its mark on the corporate culture of the state water companies at the time. For example, Lemos and Oiveira labeled the state water and sanitation companies as "pre-democratic institutions" that perceived themselves as “islands of competence,” constituting an “infallible technocracy” which systemically warded off public involvement in policy-making. [Lemos, Maria Carmen, and de Oliveira, João Lúcio Farias. 2005. "Water Reform across the State/Society Divide: The Case of Ceará, Brazil." "Water Resources Development", 21(1): p. 137.] PLANASA also reduced the role of many municipal governments to signing concession contracts with state water companies, leaving them with a sense of marginalization. [Barraqué, B., Formiga Johnsson, R.M., and Britto, A.L. 2007. "Sustainable water services and interaction with water resources in Europe and in Brazil." "Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions", 4: 3454.]
The return to democracy and the decline in federal funding encouraged many states and municipalities to devolve services to the local level. Some also began to seek private concessions. Water and sanitation policy thus entered a new era which was characterized by an environment of legal uncertainty and political controversy.
Gradual municipalization, some private sector participation
As from the nineties, under the impulses of the State reform processes, an important re-structuring has been taking place in the administrative set-up of the Brazilian water and sanitation services, significantly changing the institutional structure that had been established by Planasa.
In 1986 the Housing Bank BNH was dissolved and management of the FGTS, the key financing instrument for the sector, was passed on to the Caixa Econômica Federal (CEF), under the supervision and control of the Supervisory Council of the FGTS (CCFGTS). However, the sector policy functions of BNH were not passed on to CEF and national policy for sanitation was the responsibility of various bodies in charge of urban management. PLANASA was formally abolished in 1992, making it more difficult for state governments to finance state water companies.
The 1988 Federal Constitution does not clearly assign the responsibility for water supply and sanitation to either munitipalities or states. [ McNallen, Brendan. 2006. "Fixing the leaks in Brazil’s water law: Encouraging sound private sector participation through legal and regulatory reform." "Gonzaga Journal of International Law", 9: p. 175-176.] According to the document, both can implement programs, provided the basic guidelines issued by the Federal Government are followed. A complicated web of un-enforced or weakly-enforced statutory requirements (e.g. permit requirements) persisted. [McNallen, Brendan. 2006. "Fixing the leaks in Brazil’s water law: Encouraging sound private sector participation through legal and regulatory reform." "Gonzaga Journal of International Law", 9: p. 176-177.] According to Tupper and Resende, the primary effect of the new constitution was to render the responsibility for water provision “less clearly defined”. [ Tupper, Henrique Cesar, and Resende, Marcelo. 2004. "Efficiency and regulatory issues in the Brazilian water and sewage sector: an empirical study." "Utilities Policy", 12: p. 30-31.] Article 30 of the 1988 constitution allows municipal government to legislate in matters of “local interest” and to “organize and provide, directly or by concession or permit, the public services of local interest,” but does not resolve a variety of “unclear property rights” questions relating to the concession authority of municipalities. Nevertheless, state water companies continue to be regulated almost exclusively by state governments.
State governments have adopted different strategies during the 1990s to offer a wider range of services. Some state governments, such as that of
Rio de Janeiroand of Espírito Santo, have been attempting to grant concessions to the private sector. Other States, such as Mato Grosso do Sul, returned the operation of services to the municipalities, a strategy, which, ultimately will mean to abolish the state operator. Further, other States, such as São Paulo, Paraná and Ceará, took a series of measures to strengthen their state company. In this case, the companies restructured their operational standards to maintain and expand their markets, improving their efficiency. This strategy also included diversifying the origin of the funds, opening the company's capital to private investors, as well as contracting out the management of systems to local private operators.
In February 1995 The Public Concession Act was passed. It cast additional legal uncertainty on swathes of public concession contracts with state water companies and eviscerated relevant states on contract law.
However, since 1996 some 65 municipalities in 10 states have granted concessions to private operators, serving about 7 million people, or 4% of the population of Brazil.
In January 2007 President
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silvasigned a new federal water and sanitation law (Lei 11.445/07 para o saneamento básico) that outlines federal policies in the sector. The law aims at increasing investments to provide universal access to water and sanitation, while taking into account local specificities and using appropriate technologies that are in line with users' ability to pay. It also aims at increasing transparency and "social control". The law is a compromise between diverging interests of a broad array of stakeholders. It thus leaves some important issues undefined. One of these issues is the responsibility for service provision in large metropolitan areas, where some municipalities have challenged the constitutionality of service provision by state companies. The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on two such cases. Nevertheless, the law fills a void by providing a legal basis for the role of the federal government in water and sanitation that had remained undefined during the previous 20 years. [ [http://www.fnucut.org.br/Brasil%20tem%20nova%20lei%20para%20o%20Saneamento%20Basico.htm Edson da Silva, Federação Nacional dos Urbanitários (FCU), 2006. FCU is a public-sector trade union] ]
In the same month, the President announced a new Program for the Acceleration of Growth (PAC) that includes major investments in highways, airports, ports, energy, as well as providing housing, water and sewage that would benefit poor Brazilians. The program calls for a total of 504 billion real (235 billion U.S. dollars) through 2010, of which about 205 billion U.S. dollars would be provided by state-owned companies and the private sector, while the rest would come from the federal government. [ [http://english.people.com.cn/200701/23/eng20070123_343828.html PAC] ]
Responsibility for water supply and sanitation
Policy and regulation
At the national level the Ministry of Cities coordinates sector policies, which are implemented by various Ministries. For example, the Ministry of Health has certain attributions related to sanitation, and the Ministries of Regional Development and of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform have attributions in rural areas. Water resources management is the responsibility of the national water agency ANA. [ OMS 2000, Section 3 [http://www.cepis.ops-oms.org/eswww/eva2000/brasil/informe/inf-03.htm] ]
Regulation of service provision is a responsibility of the municipalities. Nevertheless, 14 Brazilian states have established regulatory agencies for public services that cover, among other sectors, water supply and sanitation. Given that the legal mandate for regulation rests with the municipalities, however, the role of these regulatory agencies in water and sanitation is minimal.
The National Water Supply and Sanitation Policy, approved by the Congress of Cities, has identified six steps to improve service coverage and efficiency by encouraging a more competitive and better regulated environment: (1) the institutional separation of service providers and service regulators: (2) promotion of different decentralized alternatives for service provision; (3) promotion of social participation in service regulation and control; (4) use of low-cost technologies; (5) development of financially sustainable pricing schemes which include subsidies for low-income families where required to assure universal access to basic services; and (6) greater cooperation between federal and local authorities and civil society.
According to the Brazilian constitution the provision of water and sanitation services is the responsibility of the country’s 5,560 municipalities (see
List of major cities in Brazil). However, state water and sewer companies in each of Brazil’s 26 states (see States of Brazil) are in charge of water services in about 3,887 municipalities with a population of 103 million, corresponding to about 75% of Brazil's urban population with water connections. They are also in charge of sewer services in 893 municipalities with a population of 45 million, corresponding to about 55% of the population with access to sewerage. Most state water and sewer companies are mixed public-private companies with the majority of shares owned by the respective state government. Three state water companies - Sabespin São Paulo, Copasa in Minas Geraisand Sanepar in Paraná - have floated shares in the Brazilian stock market and one of them - Sabesp- also at the New York Stock Exchange. One state company, Saneatins in Tocantins, is majority-owned by the private sector with the state government owning only a minority of shares. [ [http://www.aesbe.org.br/aesbe/pages/documento/exibirAnexo.do?tipo=documentos&arquivo=16.pdf AESBE Financiamiento de Investimentos em Saneamento Básico 2006 p. 2] ]
Some state companies operate under concession contracts with municipalities, while others operate under the authority of state governments. In some cases municipalities have challenged the legality of service provision by state companies that do not have concession contracts with municipalities.
Water privatization in Brazil
All state service providers and most municipal service providers in Brazil are public. However, since 1996 65 municipalities in 10 states (
Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Paraná, Espírito Santo, Mato Grossoand Paráamong others) that serve 7 million customers signed concession contracts with private service providers either to provide only water services, only sewer services or both. [ [http://www.abcon.com.br/index.php/14 ABCON] ] In 1996 private service providers have formed the Brazilian Association of Private Water and Sanitation Concessionnaire (ABCON). [ [http://www.abcon.com.br/ ABCON] ] A multi-stakheholder assessment of the success of these concessions is currently underway.
According to the World Bank's Private Participation in Infrastructure database, investment commitments by the private sector in Brazil's water and sanitation sector reached US$ 3 bn in 1994-2004 through 52 projects. 3 projects were divestitures, 39 were concessions and 10 were greenfield projects in wastewater treatment plants. [cite web
title=Country Snapshot Brazil
Some public service providers, both at the state and the municipal level, perform very well, while other perform poorly. Likewise, some private concessions are quite successful, while others have not lived up to expectations and their obligations.
Municipal service providers are associated in the National Association of Municipal Water and Sanitation Service Providers ASSEMAE. [ [http://www.assemae.org.br/ ASSEMAE] ] State water and sanitation companies have formed the Association of State Companies for Water Supply and Basic Sanitation AESBE [ [http://www.aesbe.org.br/ AESBE] ]
Two common indicators of the operating efficiency of water and sanitation utilities are the level of
non-revenue water(NRW) and labor productivity.
NRW in Brazil varies between 21% and a staggering 81%, reflecting huge differences in efficiency between service providers. [ SNIS Diagnostic 2005, p.102-107 ] The average level of NRW in Brazil in 2006 was 39.8% [Source: [http://www.pmss.gov.br/snis/PaginaCarrega.php?EWRErterterTERTer=69 SNIS: Diagnóstico dos Serviços de Água e Esgotos – 2006] , p. 107] , roughly the same for state and municipal public water companies. The level has remained unchanged since 2000. The average NRW for private utilities, however, was only 30% in 2000. [ [http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/lac/lacinfoclient.nsf/69bd5cba306da19e8525695d00701f3c/b51f1f29f2426ee385256e1a00610f51/$FILE/Cap_11_Water.pdf Water, Poverty Reduction, and Sustainable Development in Brazil, World Bank 2003] , p. 27 ]
Most public utilities in Brazil are heavily overstaffed. In 2000 the staff ratio was lowest for state utilities (3.7), much higher for municipal utilities (5.8) and - surprisingly - highest for privately operated utilities (6.4). [ World Bank 2003, p. 25-26 ] Average labor productivity has since then increased from 4.4 to 3.7 employees/1000 water connections.
Tariff level. Water and sanitation tariffs in many Brazilian cities are relatively high compared to the Latin American average. According to the urban water and sanitation information system SNIS the average water tariff of utilities participating in the system (which provide water services to 95% of the urban population) was the equivalent of US$ 0.68/m3 and the average sanitation tariff was US$ 0.67/m3, for a total of US$$ 1.35/m3 for those connected to the sewer network. The ratio of sanitation to water tariffs of almost 1:1 is very high for Latin America and close to the ratio of the actual cost of the two services, while in most other Latin American countries sewer tariffs remain much lower than water tariffs.
Water and sewer tariffs vary substantially between cities. According to a 2005 study by the Latin American association of water and sanitation regulators ADERASA the typical monthly residential water bill for a consumption of 20 cubic meters per month was equivalent to US$17 in São Paulo, US$15 in Espírito Santo and US$ 10 in Pernambuco, compared to an average of US$11 among the 21 Latin American cities covered. [ ADERASA/PPIAF/World Bank: Las tarifas de agua potable y alcantarillado en America Latina, 2005, p. 55 ]
Tariff structure and subsidies. In most parts of Brazil a low social tariff applies to the first block of consumption. In some cases a minimum consumption fee applies to all residential connections, and sometimes to commercial and institutional connections. Such subsidies benefit many who are not poor. [ World Bank 2003, p. 21 ] However, some State Water Companies have improved the targeting of their social tariffs by using the cadastres established for the
Bolsa Familia Conditional Cash Transferprogram. This is the case in Paraná(SANEPAR), Pernambuco(COMPESA) and Bahia(EMBASA). In these cases the social tariff is limited to about 10% of the company's customers. [ World Bank, Implementation Completion and Results Report, PROSANEAR-TAL, April 2008 ]
Other utilities have introduced direct cash payments to needy families to help them pay their water bills. For example, the city of
Brasiliahas introduced such a scheme. The Federal District pays the water utility an amount equivalent to the water and sewerage bills of poor families consuming less than 10 cubic meters per month. The State Water Company in Goiais has introduced a similar program. In each case, about 20,000 families benefit from the program. However, not many municipalities in Brazil have the institutional capacity to administer such a targeted subsidy scheme. [ World Bank 2003, p. 21 and World Bank, Implementation Completion and Results Report, PROSANEAR-TAL, April 2008 ]
Change in tariffs over time. Tariffs in most cities increased modertately in the 2002-2005 period net of inflation. According to the SNIS the average urban water tariff increased by 57% and the average sanitation tariff increased by 54% in
nominal valueprices, while inflation stood at 40%, thus resulting in a moderate increase in real prices.
Affordability. According to data collected by the
Pan-American Health Organizationbased on multi-purpose household surveys, the share of water expenditures in household expenditures in urban areas was the second-highest among 10 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean in the late 1990s. The share was on average 2.3% and 3.4% for households in the poorest income decile. [ [http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1020-49892002000500013&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en Rangel et al., Public Health 11(5/6), 2002] and especially [http://www.scielosp.org/img/fbpe/rpsp/v11n5-6/10723t3.gifTable on Household Expenditure] ]
Overall revenue collection losses for state utilities in Brazil were about 12% in 2000, but this masks large variations among utilities. State utilities with the highest collection losses are in the North and those in the Center-West and South have consistently good collection ratios. A number of municipal utilities appear to have serious collection problems. [ World Bank 2003, p. 27 ]
In 2005 total investment in water and sanitation by service providers participating in the national water and sanitation information system SNIS stood at 3.55 billion
Brazilian Reals, including 1.53bn for water and 1.35bn for sanitation and 0.67bn for other investments. [ SNIS Diagnostic 2005, p. 98 ]
The recently announced Program for the Acceleration of Economic Growth is expected to contribute to further raise investment levels in water and sanitation.
It has been estimated that investments in water and sanitation infrastructure in the order of R$ 9.6 billion (US$ 4.5bn or $24 per capita or 0.7% of
GDP) per year, or almost three times the level of 2005, would be needed to achieve universal access.
The great majority of investments in water and sanitation in Brazil are financed from domestic resources, with some complementary financing from international financial institutions.
In general, utilities with the greatest need to improve performance and expand services find it hardest to access funding, partially because they do not know how to access funding (including grant funding), partially because of weak institutional capacity, and partially because of their lack of creditworthiness.
Self-financing. By far the major source of funding in 2004 was self-financing by the utilities, accounting for 1.82bn Reals or 51% of all financing. [ SNIS Diagnostic 2005, p. 100 ] This is a remarkably high share by Latin American standards. However, it is less a reflection of financial strength of the utilities, but rather a symptom of a historically low level of investment in 2004.
State contributions funded by federal public banks and international finanical institutions. The federally owned [http://www.caixa.gov.br/ Caixa Economica Federal] and the Brazilian Development Bank BNDES both play important roles in financing water supply and sanitation investments in Brazil. They administer large public pension funds, such as the FGTS, which invest, among others, in water and sanitation. However, loans from the Caixa and BNDES are not made directly to utilities, but to the states, which in turn pass on funds to the utilities as a non-reimbursable contribution to their capital.
Loans to state governments from international financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the IDB, are also passed on to utilities as a non-reimbursable contribution to their capital.
The capital market. The financially most solid utilities also tap the capital market directly either through the Brazilian stock market or borrow from commercial Banks. The state water utility for São Paulo,
Sabesp, is even listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
Output-based grants from the federal government. Since 2001 the federal government "buys" treated wastewater through an innovative program called
PRODES, which allows utilities to access federal grants if they properly operate and maintain their wastewater treatment plants.
The National Health Foundation FUNASA. For small towns and rural areas a major source of funding is the National Health Foundation FUNASA under the Ministry of Health, which has invested 890 million Reales in 3,500 municipalities benefitting 11.43 million people between 1995 and 1999, mainly through its Programa Alvorada. [ FUNASA, Saneamiento at [http://www.funasa.gov.br/ FUNASA] ]
Program for the Acceleration of Growth (PAC). In January 2007, the federal government announced a new Program for the Acceleration of Growth (PAC) that includes major investments in highways, airports, ports, energy, as well as providing housing, water and sewage that would benefit poor Brazilians. The program calls for a total of 504 billion real (235 billion U.S. dollars) through 2010, of which about 205 billion U.S. dollars would be provided by state-owned companies and the private sector, while the rest would come from the federal government. [ [http://english.people.com.cn/200701/23/eng20070123_343828.html PAC] ]
The most important external partners supporting the development of the Brazilian water and sanitation sector are the
Inter-American Development Bank(IDB), the World Bankand the Japanese Bank for International Cooperation. Support is provided in terms of financing as well as analytical and advisory activities.
* [http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR-L1005&Language=English BR-L1005 : Igarapes de Manaus Environmental-Social Program] Approved on
November 30 2005, the US$140 million loan provides for sanitary infrastructure and institutional strengthening in the Educandos-Cuarenta basin.
* [http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR0324&Language=English BR0324 : Ceara Sanitation Program] Approved on
November 26 2003, the US$100 million loan aims to improve the sanitary and environmental conditions of the State of Ceará.
* [http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR0351&Language=English Goiania Water and Sanitation] Approved on
July 17 2002, the US$47.6 million loan aims to improve water supply and sanitation in the city of Goiania.
* [http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR0269&Language=English BR0269 : Social Program Water Sewerage Small Municipal] Approved on
October 17 2001, the US$100 million loan provided for the construction of water and sewerage systems in communities for low-income communities of up to 75,000 inhabitants where HDI is below the national average.
* [http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR0345&Language=English BR0345 : Federal District Sanitation Program] Approved on
December 6 2000, the US$130 million loan aims to improve potable water and sewerage services, institutional efficiency, financial sustainability, private sector participation in management and investment financing for the Federal District of Brasília.
* [http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR0265&Language=English BR0265 : Tiete River Decontamination, Stage II] Approved on
October 20 1999, the US$200 million loan aims to improve the environmental quality of the Tiete River basin in the São Paulo Metropolitan Region.
Loans provide not only infrastructure financing, but also policy advice and capacity building in order to improve the institutional framework for improved service delivery.
"Dedicated water and sanitation loans"
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P089011 Municipal Adapatable Pprogram Lending Phase 1: Uberaba] Approved on
March 21 2007, the US$28.78 million loan aims to promote better living conditions for the Uberaba Municipality through the integration of several components, including, flood protection (41%), sewerage (31%), and water supply 15%).
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P089440 Brasilia Environmentally Sustainable Project] Approved on
August 25 2005, 70% of the US$159.04 loan aims at financing water, sanitation, and flood protection sector.
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P087711 Espirito Santo Water & Coastal Pollution Management] Approved on
July 1 2004, the US$62.3 loan is aimed at improving sewerage (75%) and water supply (15%) in the state of Espirito Santo.
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P043420 Water Sector Modernization Project (02)] Approval
March 5 1998, the US$300 million loan aims to improve the sewerage (53%) and water supply (36%) sectors.
"Other loans with water and sanitation components"
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P101879 Additional Financing for the Rural Poverty Reduction Project - Pernambuco] Approved on
October 19 2006, the US$40 million loan aims at financing basic social and economic infrastructure, including, water supply (15%).
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P081436 Bahia Poor Urban Areas Integrated Development] Approved on
December 6 2005, the US$82.2 million loan aims at reducing urban poverty in a sustainable manner in the city of Salvador as well as other cities in the State of Bahia. The water, sanitation and flood protection sector receives 25% of the loan.
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P052256 Rural Poverty Reduction Project - Minas Gerais] Approved on
September 6 2005, the US$46.8 million loan aims to assist the State of Minas Gerais to reduce high levels of poverty through several aspects, including, improvement of sewerage infrastructure (20%).
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P082142 Ceara Multi-sector Social Inclusion Development] Approved
July 12 2005, the US$649 million loan aims to strengthen social inclusion in the State of Ceará through 24% of expenditures in water, sanitation, and flood protection.
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P076924 Amapa Sustainable Communities] Approved on
December 7 2004, the US$6.81 million loan aims to reduce urban and rural poverty through 25% expenditures in the water, sanitation, and flood protection sector.
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P082328 Integrated Municipal Project - Betim Municipality] Approved on
July 1 2004, the US$49.07 loan aims to assist the Betim Municipality in improving sewerage (40%).
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P049265 Recife Urban Upgrading Project] Approved on
April 24 2003, the US$84 million loan seeks to enhance urbanization by improving water supply (30%) and solid waste management (30%).
Technical assistance, analysis and advice
* [http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P039199 Low Income Sanitation Technical Assistace Project - Prosanear - TAL] Approved on
January 6 2000, the US$47 million technical assistance loan aims at improving the general water, sanitation, and flood protection sector (18%).
* [http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=64187835&piPK=64187936&theSitePK=523679&siteName=WDS&menuPK=64187283&callBack=&projid=P074676&siteName=WDS&menuPK=64187282&callBack= How to revitalize infrastructure investments in Brazil: public policies for better private participation, 2007]
Japanese Bank for International Cooperation
* [http://www.jbic.go.jp/autocontents/english/news/2004/000054/index.htm Sanitation Improvement Project for the Baixada Santista Metropolitan Region] Approved on
August 6 2004, the 21.32 billion Yen loan finances the improvement and expansion of the sewage system and the development of an environmental monitoring system and improved water quality.
Water resources management in Brazil
Water supply and sanitation in Latin America
Water supply and sanitation in Pernambuco
Irrigation in Brazil
* Presentation on the national water and sanitation system [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTWSS/Resources/337301-1147283808455/2532553-1149773908363/Ernani_InfoinWSSinBrazil.pdf SNIS Presentation World Bank 2004]
* [http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/lac/lacinfoclient.nsf/69bd5cba306da19e8525695d00701f3c/b51f1f29f2426ee385256e1a00610f51/$FILE/Cap_11_Water.pdf Water, Poverty Reduction, and Sustainable Development in Brazil, World Bank 2003]
* [http://www.bndes.gov.br/english/thecompany.asp Brazilian Development Bank BNDES]
* [http://www1.caixa.gov.br/idiomas/ingles/index.asp Caixa Econômica Federal CEF]
* [http://www.ana.gov.br/ingles/indexingles.asp National Water Agency ANA]
WHO/ UNICEF[http://www.wssinfo.org/en/welcome.html Joint Monitoring Program]
* [http://www.abes-dn.org.br/ Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental]
* [http://www.cidades.gov.br/index.php?option=content&task=section&id=17&menupid=215&menutp=saneamento Ministério das Cidades (Ministry of Cities)]
* [http://www.fazenda.gov.br/ Ministério da Fazenda (Ministry of Finance)]
* [http://www.planejamento.gov.br/ Ministério do Planejamento, Orçamento e Gestão (Ministry of Planning)]
* National water and sanitation information system [http://www.snis.gov.br/ SNIS]
* [http://www.funasa.gov.br/ Fundação Nacional de Saúde FUNASA]
* Brazilian Federal Applied Economic Research Institute [http://www.ipea.gov.br/default.jsp IPEA]
WHOEvaluation 2000 [http://www.cepis.ops-oms.org/eswww/eva2000/brasil/informe/inf-00.htm Brasil]
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.