Using the 1994 Bolivian Integrated Household Survey, this study analyzes the equity implications of urban water sector reform including both increased water prices and increased access to piped water. Household water expenditures are examined by income decile, and low-income households are found to spend a higher percentage of income on water than high-income households. However, households purchasing from private water vendors could benefit from obtaining piped water, because regression analysis shows that on average, these households spend more on water than those with piped water inside their buildings or yards. This differential was the greatest in the city of Cochabamba, which also had the largest percentage of households purchasing from private water vendors. To understand the equity impact of water reform, the effects on both prereform users of piped water and those without access to piped water must be considered.
Agthe, D. E., & Billings, R. B. (1987). Equity, price elasticity, and household income under increasing block rates for water. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 46(3), 273-286.
2.
Asthana, A. N. (1997). Where the water is free but the buckets are empty: Demand analysis of drinking water in rural India. Open Economies Review, 8(2), 137-149.
3.
Ballvé, M. (2005). Bolivia: privatized water company defeated. NACLA Report on the Americas, 38(5), 41-43.
4.
Barja, G., & Urquiola, M. (2003). Capitalization, regulation, and the poor: Access to basic services in Bolivia. In C. Ugaz & C. W. Price (Eds.), Utility privatization and regulation: A fair deal for consumers? (pp. 203-233). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
5.
Barragán, J., Crespo, C., Donoso, G., & Escobar, J. (1998). Mercados e instituciones de aguas en Bolivia [Water markets and institutions in Bolivia]. La Paz, Bolivia: Unidad de Analisis de Politicas Sociales y Economicas.
6.
Briscoe, J., Furtado de Castro, P., Griffin, C., North, J., & Olsen, O. (1990). Toward equitable and sustainable rural water supplies: A contingent valuation study in Brazil. The World Bank Economic Review, 4(2), 115-134.
7.
Brookshire, D. S., & Whittington, D. (1993). Water resources issues in the developing countries. Water Resources Research, 29(7), 1883-1888.
8.
Cairncross, S., & Kinnear, J. (1992). Elasticity of demand for water in Khartoum, Sudan. Social Science and Medicine, 34(2), 183-189.
9.
Clarke, G. R. G., Menard, C., & Zuluaga, A. M. (2002). Measuring the welfare effects of reform: Urban water supply in Guinea. World Development, 30(9), 1517-1537.
10.
Dinar, A. (Ed.). (2000). The political economy of water pricing reforms. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
Esrey, S. A. (1996). Water, waste, and well-being: A multicountry study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 143(6), 608-623.
12.
Esrey, S. A., Potash, J. B., Roberts, L., & Shiff, C. (1991). Effects of improved water supply and sanitation on ascariasis, diarrhoea, dracunculiasis, hookworm infection, schistosomiasis, and trachoma. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 69(5), 609-621.
13.
Estache, A., Gomez-Lobo, A., & Leipziger, D. (2001). Utilities privatization and the poor: Lessons and evidence from Latin America. World Development, 29(7), 1179-1198.
14.
Farthing, L., & Kohl, B. (2001). Bolivia’s new wave of protest. NACLA Report on the Americas, 34(5), 8-11.
15.
Finnegan, W. (2002, April 8). Leasing the rain. The New Yorker, 78, 43-53.
16.
Foster, V. (Ed.). (2001). Condominial water and sewerage systems-costs of implementation of the model: An economic and financial evaluation of El Alto Pilot Project in Bolivia (UNDP-Water and Sanitation Program, Report 24653). Retrieved July 31, 2003, from www-wds.worldbank.org
17.
Galindo, L. M. (1999). La demanda de agua potable en México: Estimaciones preliminaries [The demand for drinking water in Mexico: Preliminary estimations]. Investigación Económica, 59(227), 27-43.
18.
Gómez-Lobo, A., Foster, V., & Halpern, J. (2000, June). Better household surveys for better design of infrastructure subsidies. Viewpoint, No. 213. Washington, DC: World Bank Private Sector and Infrastructure Network.
19.
Grosh, M. E., & Glewwe, P. (1995). A guide to living standards measurement study surveys and their data sets (Living Standards Measurement Study Working Paper No. 120). Washington, DC: World Bank.
20.
Hutton, G., & Haller, L. (2004). Evaluation of the costs and benefits of water and sanitation improvements at the global level. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
21.
International Monetary Fund. (2003). International financial statistics yearbook 2003. Washington, DC: Author.
22.
Komives, K. (1999). Designing pro-poor water and sewer concessions: Early lessons from Bolivia (Policy Research Working Paper No. 2243). Washington, DC: World Bank, Private Sector Development Department.
23.
Komives, K., Foster, V., Halpern, J., & Wodon, Q. (2005). Water, electricity, and the poor: Who benefits from utility subsidies?Washington, DC: World Bank.
24.
Marvin, S., & Laurie, N. (1999). An emerging logic of urban water management, Cochabamba, Bolivia. Urban Studies, 36(2), 341-357.
25.
McKenzie, D., & Mookherjee, D. (2003). The distributive impact of privatization in Latin America: Evidence from four countries (Institute for Economic Development Discussion Paper No. 128). Boston: Boston University.
26.
McPhail, A. A. (1994). Why don’t households connect to the piped water system? Observations from Tunis, Tunisia. Land Economics, 70(2), 189-196.
27.
Nickson, A., & Vargas, C. (2002). The limitations of water regulation: The failure of the Cochabamba concession in Bolivia. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 21(1), 99-120.
28.
North, J. H., & Griffin, C. C. (1993). Water source as a housing characteristic: Hedonic property valuation and willingness to pay for water. Water Resources Research, 29(7), 1923-1929.
29.
Plummer, M. L. (1999). To fetch a pail of water. Natural History, 108(1), 56-65.
30.
Rietveld, P. (2000). Block rate pricing of water in Indonesia: An analysis of welfare effects. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 36(3), 73-92.
31.
Schultz, J. (2000). Bolivia’s water war victory. Earth Island Journal Online, 15(3). Retrieved from www.earthisland.org
32.
Shirley, M. M. (2002). Thirsting for efficiency: The economics and politics of urban water system reform. Washington, DC: World Bank.
33.
Solo, T. M. (1998). Competition in water and sanitation: The role of small-scale entrepreneurs. Viewpoint, No. 165. Washington, DC: World Bank, Finance, Private Sector, and Infrastructure Network.
34.
Spronk, S., & Webber, J. R. (2005). The two Bolivias square off. Canadian Dimension, 39(3), 17-19.
35.
Timmins, C. (2002). Does the median voter consume too much water? Analyzing the redistributive role of residential water bills. National Tax Journal, 55(4), 687-702.
36.
Walker, I., Ordoñez, F., Serrano, P., & Halpern, J. (2000). Pricing, subsidies, and the poor: Demand for improved water services in Central America (Policy Research Working Paper No. 2468). Washington, DC: World Bank, Finance, Private Sector, and Infrastructure Sector Unit, Latin American and the Caribbean Region.
37.
Walker, I., Velasquez, M., Ordoñez, F., & Rodriguez, F. (1999). Reform efforts in the Honduran water sector. In W. D. Savedoff & P. T. Spiller (Eds.), Spilled water: Institutional commitment in the provision of water services (pp. 35-87). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.
38.
Whittington, D. (1992). Possible adverse effects of increasing block water tariffs in developing countries. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 41(1), 75-87.
39.
Whittington, D., Lauria, D. T., & Mu, X. (1991). A study of water vending and willingness to pay for water in Onitsha, Nigeria. World Development, 19(2/3), 179-198.
40.
World Bank Operations Evaluation Department. (2002). Bolivia water management: A tale of three cities. Précis No. 222. Washington, DC: World Bank.
41.
Zeballos Hurtado, H., & Quiroga Crespo, E. (2003). Política y economía de los recursos naturales renovables en Bolivia [The policy and economics of renewable natural resources in Bolivia]. La Paz, Bolivia: Plural Editores.
