{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022583559168925023, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00045167118337850043, 'mean_word_length': 6.0094936708860756, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Water Utility Performance in Central America: The Political Economy of Coverage, Quality and Cost

Performance indicators for water utilities in Central America do not give much reason for celebration. Data are sparse, suggesting a lack of transparency and public awareness regarding relative performance in the region. The resulting information asymmetries limit pressures for reform and can contribute to dysfunctional social conflict. This chapter describes four sources of conflict in the design and implementation of water policies: authority conflicts (reflecting jurisdictional disputes over who has the last word), cognitive conflicts (based on technical disagreements regarding the analysis and interpretation of performance data), values conflicts (involving ideological differences or differential preferences for sector outcomes), and interest conflicts (where different groups—utilities, customers, unserved citizens, regions, and unions— benefit or lose, depending on the decision). Using data from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Panama, we survey the Central American experience. The study suggests strategies that might be adopted to promote conflict resolution and to improve water sector performance in the region, particularly with regards to universal service, service quality, and cost containment. The purpose of this paper is to examine the political economy of water utility performance in Central America, focusing on coverage, service quality, and cost. The study presents comparative data and describes the forces shaping access to water and sewerage in the region. The fundamental problem facing citizens and policy-makers in these nations is the lack of comprehensive performance comparisons within and across countries. Yardstick comparisons could provide tools for creating incentives within water utilities, information on outcomes for holding decision-makers accountable, and rankings that could give citizens realistic indicators of relative performance. Without transparency regarding decision processes and data on performance outcomes, political leaders can make promises that are not grounded in reality. 1. Benchmarking to Document Sources of Inefficiency