Institutional failures blocking water access in low-income urban areas

Researchers have issued an urgent call for reforming Kenya’s water governance, warning that the country's institutional design is failing to deliver on its constitutional and international obligations for universal water and sanitation access. Their study, titled “Accelerating Safe Water and Sanitation Access in Urban Periphery and Low-Income Areas: The Case of Kenya,” was published in Public Works Management & Policy.

The research focuses on the roles and challenges faced by small-scale water service providers (SSSPs) in low-income and peri-urban areas of Kenya. Through in-depth interviews with managers of ten SSSPs across the Nairobi Metropolitan Region, the study unveils the structural impediments undermining their effectiveness, and offers a roadmap to realign Kenya's water sector with Sustainable Development Goal 6 and Vision 2030.

What is blocking equitable water access?

Kenya’s water crisis is less about scarcity and more about systemic exclusion. As of 2023, only 23% of low-income Kenyans have access to licensed water utility services. Most rely on SSSPs, community-based organizations, NGOs, private enterprises, and informal associations that operate without formal recognition. These entities fill critical service gaps left by Water Service Providers (WSPs), but remain legally marginalized and financially unsupported.

The researchers attribute this failure to colonial-era institutional legacies and post-independence policy inertia. Historical neglect of native urban settlements continues to manifest in the infrastructural divide between affluent neighborhoods and informal settlements. Moreover, Kenya’s WSP-centric governance model, which emphasizes commercial viability and cost-recovery, has proven ill-suited to serve the rapidly expanding unplanned urban areas.

Although the Water Acts of 2002 and 2016 introduced reforms such as clustering WSPs and encouraging private sector participation, the execution has largely bypassed SSSPs. Existing regulatory frameworks make it prohibitively expensive for small operators to obtain licenses, while government subsidies and donor funding disproportionately favor larger, already-licensed WSPs.

What do small-scale providers need to succeed?

The study reveals a wide array of external and internal factors influencing SSSP performance. On the external front, operators cited high regulatory costs, bureaucratic licensing processes, lack of subsidies, and rising electricity tariffs as major constraints. Many expressed frustration that despite supplying clean water to underserved populations, they are excluded from government support mechanisms and often face active obstruction from cartels and corrupt intermediaries.

Internally, SSSPs grapple with financial instability, limited professional capacity, and political interference. However, some demonstrated strong governance models, incorporating smart metering, aerial piping systems, and innovative filtration technologies. Several operators had achieved high levels of community trust and were recognized for consistent water quality and reliability.

Interestingly, none of the ten SSSPs interviewed were willing to merge with public WSPs. Concerns ranged from asset seizure and reduced autonomy to fears of reduced service quality. Most preferred maintaining their independence while receiving targeted regulatory and financial support.

Their reluctance stems in part from a lack of trust in public entities, which are seen as less efficient and more politically vulnerable. As one respondent noted, SSSPs are sustained not by profit motives but by social commitment to marginalized communities—a value system not necessarily shared by larger utilities.

What reforms does the study recommend?

The authors argue that Kenya must acknowledge and address the institutional design failures at the heart of its water crisis. A more inclusive governance model is needed, one that formalizes SSSPs as legitimate actors, aligns licensing requirements with their scale and capacity, and provides equitable access to public resources.

The study outlines several recommendations:

1. Licensing Reform: Regulators should introduce tiered licensing that accounts for the limited scale and capacity of SSSPs, rather than holding them to the same standards as large WSPs.

2. Financial Support: The government should consider targeted subsidies, low-interest loans, and grants to support infrastructure development and operational costs.

3. Capacity Building: Investments in training, technology, and professional staffing are critical. Some SSSPs already employ advanced tools like smart meters and nano-filtration, suggesting strong potential for scalability.

4. Clustering with Compensation: Where mergers are unavoidable, mechanisms for fair compensation or shared ownership must be established to safeguard community investments.

5. Governance Alignment: The broader institutional framework must be restructured to reflect Kenya’s demographic and economic realities. This includes rethinking the dominance of commercial-viability criteria in licensing and funding decisions.

The study stresses that neither clustering nor subsidies will guarantee instant success. The onus is also on SSSPs to align with health and safety standards, ensure transparency in governance, and adopt sustainable management practices.

If unaddressed, the governance vacuum around SSSPs will deepen Kenya’s urban divide. Poor households already pay five to twenty times more for water than their wealthier counterparts, and suffer from higher rates of waterborne diseases due to inconsistent quality.