Diapositive 1

1
Session 5.B Information needed for water pricing
expenditure on water Vienna 22 June
2005 French experience with water prices
survey and use - Illustration from the
Artois-Picardie river basin Arnaud
Courtecuisse Agence de lEau Artois-Picardie
France
2
Content of the presentation

1. The objectives of the survey
2. The Artois-Picardie basins context
3. Water price survey
4. Assessment of households available income
5. Comparison Water bill vis à vis available income
6. Results, limits and discussion

3
1. The objectives of the survey

• from water price to water bill analysis
• the rising of the awareness about social impact
  of water bill
• the context of the WFDs implementation and its
  reference to disproportionate costs
• comparison of costs and benefits
• capacity of economic sectors (inc. households)
  to finance the environmental objectives targeted

4
2. The context of the Artois-Picardie Basin
5
2. The context of the Artois-Picardie Basin

• 20 000 Km2
• 4,7 Millions inhabitants
• GDP 98 billions
• GPD/inhabitant 21 107
• GPD/inh France 25 978

Rivers quality assessment

• Unemployment rate 12,7
• France 9,9

• 96 of drinkable water come from groundwater

6
(No Transcript)
7
3. Water price survey

• tariffs for water and sewerage set at
  municipality level (2 448 for the Artois-Picardie
  basin)
• an annual survey is undertaken by the
  Artois-Picardie Water agency (i.e. collecting the
  price for water and sewerage for all
  municipalities for a mean consumption of 120m3
  per year and per household)
• this survey covers (in 2004) 95 of the basins
  population

8
3. Water price survey

• one page questionnaire sent to municipalities,
  groups of municipalities, private operators every
  year
• a feedback to all 2 448 municipalities through 4
  pages results (mean water price for the basin,
  for sub-basin,)
• since 2004 survey, the data at municipality
  level can be found on the Artois-Picardie agency
  website

9
3. Water price survey
Mean Price for one m3
10
3. Water price survey
The breakdown of the 3,28 euros
Water Distribution
Sewerage
Environmental Taxes
Other taxes
VAT
11
Country Consumption (liter/day/personn Mean water price m3 Water seweragetaxes (euros/m3)
Spain Ireland Luxembourg UK Italy Sweden Portugal Greece France Finland Germany Belgium Netherlands Danmark Austria 130 135 150 150 160 180 190 200 113 116 118 120 126 138 150 1,0 0 0,90 1,6 0,8 1,15 1,0 1,1 2,6 2,5 3,6 1,9 2,7 4,3 2,6
IWA
12
4. Assessment of households available income
table 1 Mean available income per household in
all the sub-region of the Artois-Picardie
Basin. Source INSEE (National Statistics)
CEGMA TOPO
13
5. Comparison Water bill vis à vis available
income
Mean Water bill (all services) (price paid for
120m3 in a year) Mean available income per
household
  Mean available income per household (A) Mean Water invoice per household (120m3/year) (B) B/A
Aisne 23 499 455 1,94
Nord 24 314 366 1,51
Pas de Calais 23 194 428 1,85
Somme 23 796 382 1,61
Table 2 comparison of the mean water invoice
with mean available income per household
14
Water bill / mean available Income
15
5. Comparison at municipality level
Water Bill / Mean Available Income
Less than 1
More than 3
16
5. Comparison at municipality level
Water Bill / Available Income
More than 2
Only Water Distribution
17
6. Results, limits and discussion

• several groups of municipalities with ratiogt3
  (2-3 is a guidance value see OCDE, EU,
  Académie de leau)
• these groups of municipalities combine high
  water price and low mean available income (and
  sometimes households expenses to buy bottled
  water equivalent to annual water bill)

18
6. Results, limits and discussion

• the commonly used value of annual consumption of
  120 m3 per household hides important differences
  of mean consumption per region
• mean available income per municipality hides
  also various situations (and the real part of the
  population facing major difficulties to pay water
  bills)

19
6. Results, limits and discussion

• what to do ? Continue ! Refine this ratio and
  continue to track it in the coming years
• pay a specific attention to the groups of
  municipalities where efforts to meet WFD
  objectives should lead to major increase in water
  price (extent solidarity principle, delay or less
  stringent objectives ?)
• it raises this issue of specific social tariffs
  (e.g. Flanders experience, blocks tariffs,
  development of water savings, renew confidence in
  tap water)