Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Presentation - OECD workshop on the performance of utilities for wastewater, Portugal

Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Wird geladen in …3
×

Hier ansehen

1 von 26 Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Presentation - OECD workshop on the performance of utilities for wastewater, Portugal (20)

Weitere von OECD Environment (20)

Anzeige

Aktuellste (20)

Presentation - OECD workshop on the performance of utilities for wastewater, Portugal

  1. 1. Best practice from Portugal OCDE WORKSHOP THE PERFORMANCE OF UTILITIES FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT Susana Rodrigues, Quality Department 31 january, 2023
  2. 2. 2 AGENDA 1. Wastewater Regulation in Portugal 2. Qualility of Service Evaluation System 3. Wastewater KPIs 4. How benchmarking impacts 5. Challenges and final remarks
  3. 3. WASTEWATER REGULATION IN PORTUGAL
  4. 4. 4 Wastewater regulation in Portugal ERSAR Regulation model Structural regulation Regulation of utility behaviour Monitoring Other additional activities Drinking water quality regulation Quality of service regulation Economic regulation Legal and contractual regulation User interface regulation Contribution to the clarification of sector’s rules Contribution to the sector’s legislation Information gathering and processing Capacity building Sanctioning and infractions Investigation, innovation and studies Inspection and fiscalization actions Auditing and monitoring actions Contribution to the sector’s organisation Cooperation Cooperation with national authorities Cooperation with international authorities Holistic and integrated approach
  5. 5. 5 Wastewater regulation in Portugal ERSAR Regulation universe o National level (mainland) o All the utilities: vast size and diversity of operators with different governance models (State-owned, municipal-owned, private companies) and activity scopes (water, wastewater, urban waste; bulk, retail) ERSAR Universe of 354 operators … State owned and municipalities … in direct management model, by delegation or concession … operating bulk or retails systems or both 239 water supply entities 237 wastewater management services entities 260 urban waste management entities Ten million consumers
  6. 6. QUALITY OF SERVICE EVALUATION SYSTEM HOW?
  7. 7. 7 Quality of service regulation. HOW to promote quality of service of monopolistic utilities? CARROT STICK Sunshine regulation: KPI assessment system, simple and transparent Performance Benchmarking
  8. 8. 8 Clear procedures and definitions Technical guide Universal, applicable to every operator, regardless of the activity scope, nature, management model or size Comparable and transparent, establishes all the definitions of data and indicators required: formulas, reference ranges, data base sources, and reliability Uptaded, new KPI and targets are defined to address new legal and strategic challanges Quality of service regulation. How?
  9. 9. 9 Adequacy of service to users Accessibility of service Quality of service provided Service management sustainability Economic sustainability Infrastructural sustainability Physical productivity of human resources Environmental sustainability Efficient use of natural resources Circularity and valorisation Efficiency on pollution prevention 3 Objectives, and 8 Criteria Quality of service regulation. How? Objectives and criteria Performance assessment, to compare operators and promote efficiency
  10. 10. 10 Quality of service regulation. How? KPI assessment system 1. Profile data (operator and system) 2. Base data 3. Key Performance Indicators 4. Reference values 5. Operators' individual performance file (after results validation) quantitative assessment of efficiency and effectiveness for certain aspects of the service allows benchmarking, using clusters code, definition, and rules for reliability semaphore codes for easier perception System Components:
  11. 11. 11 Frequency: Annual Cycle Beginning of the cycle January Data treatment by ERSAR June to August Results publication, publicising and awards for excellence November Data validation by ERSAR (audits) May to June Data report by the utilities March and April Right-of-reply by the utilities September Technical guide and files Individual file Portal ERSAR Annual report Website App ERSAR Audits Awards and certificates Quality of service regulation. How?
  12. 12. 12 Quality of service regulation. How? Reliability and Data Validation: Audits Audits for Data Validation 100% of the reported data are validated Reliability assessment to validate sources and measurement procedures Right of Reply Final Validation REGULATOR value OPERATOR value AMOUNT Data More data Even More data ………... All the data available QUALITY Uncertain information Better information Even better information ……….. Best available information COMPARISON Benchmarking Better benchmarking Even better benchmarking …………. Best possible benchmarking STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 ………. STEP N Audits Treatment Audits Treatment Audits Audits Treatment Treatment
  13. 13. 13 Transparency: Are the data being collected in a timely and efficient manner? Portal ERSAR IT system, through a single platform: Centralises information of all operatos Standardises data collection and analysis Otimises reporting procedures Improves comunication with operators Reduces information assymetries Quality of service regulation. How?
  14. 14. WASTEWATER KPIs
  15. 15. 15 Wastewater services Adequacy of service to users Accessibility of service for users B - Physical accessibility (service coverage) (%) R - Service coverage through fixed networks and septic tanks (%) R – Affordability (%) Quality of service provided to users Flooding occurrences [n.º/(100 km collector.year)] Reply to suggestions and complaints and information requests (%) Service management sustainability Economic sustainability Cost recovery ratio (%) B - Connection to the service (%) R - Connection to the service through networks (%) Infrastructural sustainability Sewer rehabilitation (%) Sewer collapses [n.º/(100km.year)] Monitoring of the structural condition of sewers (%) Treatment infrastructures’ use (%) Physical productivity of human resources B - Adequacy of human resources on transport & treatment [n.º/106m3.year)] R - Adequacy of human resources on treatment [n.º/106m3.year)] R - Adequacy of human resources on collection and drainage [n.º/(100km.year)] Environmental sustainability Efficient use of natural resources Energy efficiency of pumping stations [kwh/(m3.100 m)] Sludge production (kg/m3) Circularity and valorisation Production of water for reuse (%) Own energy production (%) Efficiency on pollution prevention Control of emergency discharges (%) Compliance with the discharges permit (%) 21 Fed by 108 variables Quality of service regulation Wastewater KPI
  16. 16. 16 Wastewater KPI Quality of service regulation. OCDE ERSAR IWA Compliance with the UWWTD AR21 - Compliance with the discharges permit (%/year) wEn1 - Compliance with legislation on wastewater treatment plant discharges (%/year) Greenhouse gas emissions PAR04 - Indirect greenhouse gas emissions (kgCO2e/m3) - Energy use PAR06 - Energy consumption in treatment (kWh/m3 /year) wOp18 – Energy consumption in treatment facilities (kWh/p.e./year) Production AR19 - Own energy production (%) - Quality of service AR02 - Service coverage through network and septic tanks (%/year) AR05 - Response to complaints, suggestions and information requests (%/year) - wQS27 - Response to complaints (n.º/1000 inhabitants/year)
  17. 17. 17 Wastewater KPI Quality of service regulation Number of structural collapses per 100 km of collector. AR10ab – Sewer collapses [No./(100 km ⋅ year)] AR10ab = Sewer structural collapses (No./year) Total length of sewers (km) x 100 dAR54ab dAR31ab Reference values for bulk systems: Good service quality 0,0 Average service quality ]0,0; 1,0] Unsatisfactory service quality ]1,0; + ∞] Reference values for retail systems: Good service quality 0,0 Average service quality ]0,0; 2,0] Unsatisfactory service quality ]2,0; + ∞] Clusters: reference values may be different for retail/bulk and for predominantly urban, medium urban or predominantly rural intervention areas
  18. 18. HOW BENCHAMRKING IMPACTS
  19. 19. 19 Quality of service regulation How Benchmarking impacts: public information Evolution assessment for each indicator of quality of service Annual assessment of the quality of service for each operator ANNUAL BENCHMARKING between operators regarding the quality of service 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 AR08b - Média do indicador (n.º/(100 km.ano)) 1,6 2,8 3,9 1,6 1,1 N.º de EG com resposta 241 245 245 210 208 N.º total de EG 257 257 257 227 225 Fiabilidade dos dados *** (%) 76 80 82 83 86 Fiabilidade dos dados ** (%) 7 6 8 8 6 Fiabilidade dos dados * (%) 17 14 10 9 8 0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0
  20. 20. 20 Quality of service regulation How Benchmarking impacts. Sunshine regulation o All information is publicly available on our website to be used by researchers and by the public o Awards and certificates excellence, in 5 categories: • Drinking Water Quality • Water Supply Service • Wastewater Service • Waste Management Service • Efficient Use of Water o Rewards best practices and good behavior towards ERSAR and the consumer (and improves consumer awareness) o Results are used in operators' access to EU funds, a major incentive for improvement: artificial competitive environment
  21. 21. 21 Quality of service regulation How Benchmarking impacts 60% 86% 28% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 Access to wastewater services (1993-2020) Access to drainage Access to treatment ∆= +58 ∆= +26 p.p. ✓ Better performance in critical KPIs ✓ Increase in the number of responses ✓ Improvement in data quality
  22. 22. 22 Quality of service regulation Linking quality of service and willingness-to-pay 5% 2% 2% 5% 17% 31% 32% 6% 4% 2% 2% 4% 17% 30% 33% 9% 2% 1% 1% 4% 14% 31% 34% 12% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% NS/ NR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 % de respostas Escala de avaliação Avaliação positiva Avaliação razoável Avaliação negativa Abastecimento de água Saneamento de águas residuais Resíduos indiferenciados Qualidade muito baixa dado o preço Qualidade muito alta dado o preço 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% AR01b AR02b AR03b AR04b AR05b AR06b AR07b AR08b AR09b AR10b AR11b AR12b AR13b AR14b Retail System Good quality Average quality Unsatisfactory quality No reply End user perception versus reality High service quality evaluation considering the cost Low service quality evaluation considering the cost Doesn’t know/ answer
  23. 23. CHALENGES AND FINAL REMARKS
  24. 24. 24 Quality of service regulation Challenges and Final remarks Performance benchmarking is: o A key tool for regulation (monitoring national strategies) o Provides reliable information for structural (optimal operation scale) and operational efficiency (cost reduction and productivity increase), economic regulation (invest or subsidise), for compliance control (EU targets; performance based contracts on concessions) o Promotes capacity building (e.g. climate change resilience). The role of Regulators Command and control instrument: setting targets The Challenge is on the definition and practical implementation of KPIs, to compare only what is comparable. Who? How?
  25. 25. 25 Quality of service regulation The role of Regulators Compare what is comparable: opportunities of digital transformation o Accuracy, Transparency and Reliability: clear, accurate and detailed information on clusters definition and reference values, input data and KPIs definitions, normalisation factors, and validation process for member states o Communication: information to the public versus performance benchmarking results (smart phone apps, websites) o Operators: reliability of information has progressed slowly, as it requires an adaptation on the operator's IT systems o Regulators: developments needed to simplify and automatize validation process (at least annually) Challenges and Final remarks
  26. 26. susana.rodrigues@ersar.pt THANK YOU

×