Management of public water and sewage services by municipalities in Goiás, GO, Brasil

Abstract

The characteristics of services provided and the regulations governing their cost both contribute to the satisfaction of the consumer. Therefore, the aim of the study was to analyze the quality of public water and sewage services in 21 municipalities of Goiás, to include billing procedures and consumer satisfaction, and taking into account whether or not the operations were regulated. To accomplish this, we conducted on-site visits to complete questionnaires relating to our interviews with managers to obtain technical information and with consumers to determine their level of satisfaction. It was observed that systems are managed by local authorities in ten municipalities, four by city hall departments or appointed officials, and seven did not have any specific regulatory oversight. Seven municipalities had no water treatment; of those, six had no specific regulatory oversight, revealing the lack of a planned management system. In 57.1% of the municipalities, there was no sewage treatment and sewage was dumped in soak pits. These had no governing body, and the price-charging adjustments were established in three ways: i) approval of the project by the Town Hall councilors; ii) decree by the mayor; and iii) analysis by the Municipal Sanitation Council (CMS). The satisfaction of the consumers was related to economic, cultural and, especially, political factors, and the existence of a management system improved infrastructure conditions.

Gestão das águas e governança: panorama da produção científica brasileira de 1999 a 2019

“…Os debates acerca do tema governança e gestão das águas concentraram-se nas seguintes categorias: a) participação social nos processos de gestão das águas e governança (JACOBI, 2010;EMPINOTTI, 2011;LORENZETTI e CARRION, 2012;FRACALANZA et al, 2013;WOLKMER e PIMMEL, 2013;MARTINS, 2015;PIZELLA, 2015;EMPINOTTI, 2016;FADUL et al, 2017;FERREIRA et al, 2017;SOUZA, 2017); b) análise do funcionamento e eficiência dos comitês de bacias hidrográficas e atuais sistemas de gestão hídrica no Brasil (CAMPOS e FRACALANZA, 2010, CARNEIRO et al, 2010MITJAVILA e GRAH, 2011;RIBEIRO, 2011;JACOBI E SINISGALLI, 2012;FRACALANZA et al, 2013;MATOS e DIAS, 2012;CHIODI et al, 2013;SOUZA et al, 2014;FISCHER, 2016;LIBANIO, 2016;MOURA, 2016;PIRES DO RIO et al, 2016;SILVA et al, 2016;SOUZA e SILVEIRA, 2016;ZORZI et al 2016;JUNIOR et al, 2017;TUGOZ et al, 2017; ROSSI e SANTOS, 2018); c) serviços de distribuição e acesso ao saneamento nas cidades (JUNIOR, 2009;RIBEIRO, 2011;PALUDO e BORBA, 2013;SOUZA e COSTA, 2013;ARRUDA et al, 2016SOUZA e SILVEIRA, 2016; SOUZA, 2017) e d) educação ambiental como prevenção de riscos para a gestão de recursos hídricos (SAITO, 2011;PICOLLI et al, 2016).…”

“…A maior proporção de artigos publicados sobre governança e gestão das águas durante o período analisado, basearam-se em estudos de caso (CARNEIRO et al, 2010;EMPINOTTI, 2011;RIBEIRO, 2011;MATOS e DIAS, 2012;CHIODI et al, 2013;SOUZA et al, 2014;ALMEIDA et al, 2015;DEMAJOROVIC et al, 2015;PIRES DO RIO et al, 2016;ARRUDA et al, 2016;SOUZA e SILVEIRA, 2016;FADUL et al, 2017;JUNIOR et al, 2017;FERREIRA et al, 2017), seguidos por estudos de construção de modelos teóricos (JUNIOR, 2009; CAMPOS e FRACALANZA, 2010; SAITO, 2011; LORENZETTI e CARRION, 2012; JACOBI e SINISGALLI, 2012; SOUZA e COSTA, 2013; PIZELLA, 2015;EMPINOTTI et al, 2016;LIBANIO, 2016;PICOLLI et al, 2016;TUGOZ et al, 2017), revisão de literatura (JACOBI, 2010;MITJAVILA e GRAH, 2011;FRACALANZA et al, 2013;MARTINS, 2015;ZORZI et al, 2016;SOUZA, 2017;FISCHER, 2016;MOURA, 2016) e estudos de caso comparativo (PALUDO; BORBA, 2013).…”