1、 外文翻译 原文 Assessing the financial performance of water user associations: a case study at Great Menderesbasin, Turkey Material Source: Springer Science + Business Media Author: Cengiz Ko Financial administration of management, operation, and maintenance (MOM) services in irrigation schemes is one of
2、the most important functions of aWater User Association (WUA). Without proper MOM financial management, WUA can not properly operate or maintain its irrigation or drainage system. Proper financial management will not only help assure the economic viability and continued existence of WUA; it will est
3、ablish and maintain the confidence of its member. The goals of MOM financial management are to facilitate an effective use of the assets of WUA, manage funds to the best benefit of its members, readily explain the financial condition of the WUA, establish and maintain the confidence of its member, h
4、elp assure the economic viability and continued existence of the WUA. The institutional viability of WUA is strongly related to their financial management. The main source of revenue of WUA is the collection of water use charges as a result of MOM services provided to members. The level of these cha
5、rges, in turn, is dependent on the costs of operating and maintaining the water supply system. Some types of water supply system are expensive to operate and maintain while others are cheaper, and while each system may have its own unique advantages, from the poverty alleviation aspects, the cost ef
6、fectiveness of the system is an overriding consideration. Hence, the establishment of new WUA that use cost-effective technology is generally preferable to the use of more expensive technology. Financial administration of MOM services is the receipt, maintenance, expenditure, and account of the asse
7、ts of a person, business, government department, an irrigation association or a group. Accounting for these is the heart of all financial management. Accounting may be defined as the art of analyzing and recording financial transaction and certain business-related economic events in a manner that cl
8、assifies and summarizes the information and reports and interprets the results (Cone 2004). Irrigation companies incur a number of costs in providing water services to farmers. Among these costs, a distinction must be made between economic costs and financial (accounting) costs incurred in the provi
9、sion of irrigation services. Financial costs are the capital, operation and maintenance and administrative costs involved in ensuring a sustainable provision of irrigation water supply service (Roger et al. 1997). In addition to financial costs, economic costs include all costs attributable to the c
10、ompany, including externalities which are not normally recorded in the company accounts (Greig 1998). Water user association should be large enough to accomplish the designated tasks by collective action (Albernethy et al. 2000). The larger a WUA is the more its financial viability is enhanced by ad
11、vantages of scale. However such increases in scale come at a price, as larger organizations may find it more difficult to maintain good relations with their client than small organizations. A key consideration with regard to financial viability is the relationship between the revenue received from f
12、armers and the costs of operation and maintenance: total revenue should be equal to or greater than the costs of operation and maintenance. If this is not the case, there may be good grounds to amalgamate a WUA with a neighbor if this can arguably improve the relationship between revenue and costs (
13、Ostramet al. 1993). In Mexico, a WUA of 1,0002,000 ha is considered small and potentially financially unsustainable; such associations may either pool their resources, or merge to form one larger association so that MOM services can be carried out more efficiently. In other countries, WUAs are formi
14、ng farmer organization at different levels of the system in order to improve management (Johnson 2001). Aspects of financial performance of irrigation that are most related to management transfer are cost of irrigation to the government, cost of irrigation to farmers, levels of management staff (oft
15、en the largest component of MOM costs), level of water charges and collection rates, budget solvency, and revenue sources (Vermillion 1997). As of end of 2005, State Hydraulic Works (DSI) in Turkey transferred 93% of its 1.86 million ha to 330 Water User Associations (Demr et al. 2005). Budged of WU
16、As, Turkey for 2003 amounted US$70 million. Expenditures of WUAs are 58% for operation, 28% for maintenance-repair and 14% other. Collection rate of water charge for WUAs is 95% (Ozlu 2004). Koc (2001), in a study related with organizational financing of management, operation, and maintenance servic
17、es of irrigation systems, reported that financial autonomy increased the efficiency in management, operation, and maintenance in irrigation tasks after comparing different countries with one another. It was also reported that average maintenance, repair and management costs of irrigation systems in
18、Turkey was US$28 ha and the ratio of personnel costs in total costs was 65%. The objective of performance benchmarking is to find and implement the best management practiced for organization. The difference between the tools and approach Rapid Appraisal Process and performance benchmarking reflects
19、the difference between the modernization of hardware (infrastructure and control systems) and the reform of management practices. Both types of intervention may be valid and may compliment each other, but they should not be confused or substituted for each other (Malano 2000). International Water Ma
20、nagement Institute has developed an on-line programme called the On-Line Irrigation Benchmarking System, in which users can introduce data and establish a benchmarking procedure using existing data (Malano 2002). In 1997, the International Water Services Association established a Task Force on Perfo
21、rmance Indicators within its Operation and Management specialist group. The task force held more than 20 technical meeting in Europe, South America and Africa to obtain the views of different member bodies on the formulation of appropriate performance indicators (Alegre et al. 2002).Amanualofbestpra
22、cticeon Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services was published in July 2000, (Alegre et al. 2000) just as the International Irrigation and Drainage Community was meeting for the first time to consider benchmarking. Running in parallel with its task force on performance indicators, The Intern
23、ational Water Association supported a separate tasks force on benchmarking, which reported in 2002 on process benchmarking relating to the financial performance of water supply utilizes, issues of service provision, water quality and environment were specifically excluded (Larson et al. 2002). In re
24、cent years a substantial amount of literature has been produced on performance assessment for irrigation systems and irrigated agriculture (Vermillion 2000; Malano and Van Hofwegen 1999;Bossetal. 1994: Murray-Rust and Snellen 1993;Rao 1993). Most indicators suggested are simple and are meant to be p
25、ractical and inexpensive to measure and use. Nevertheless, use of such indicators is still relatively rare in developing countries. International Water Management Institute developed a set for evaluating the performance of the transferred irrigation systems in comparison (Molden et al. 1998). Based
26、on this set, following authors evaluated the performances of related irrigation systems. In this study, financial performance of WUAs, carried out MOM services of irrigation schemes in the Great Menderes basin was evaluated. Great Menderes basin is located in West Anatolia, Turkey. Four irrigation s
27、chemes, Nazilli, Akay, Aydn, and Ske in the basin were identified as schemes where financial performance indicators were evaluated. The key descriptors for irrigation schemes researched in the basin were summarized (Table 1). Data relating to schemes for 6 years (1999 to 2004) were collected from De
28、partment of Regional XXI, State Hydraulic Works (DSI), and Water User Associations (DSI 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004). These data included total command area serviced by system, total number of personnel employed, total personnel cost, total MOM expenditure, total annual irrigation fee collect
29、ed, total annual irrigation fee assessed, the revenue out of irrigation fee revenue, total volume of water delivered, total MOM revenue collected, and total maintenance cost. DSI and WUAs use computers to enter, monitor, and process their data. To enable comparisons across countries and time, local
30、units currencies were converted to international standard units and constant US$ dollar prices. A performance indicator is basically a quantitative measure of an aspect of irrigation standards which helps to evaluate and monitor irrigation efficiency (Alegre et al. 2000). Performance indicators are
31、therefore relation ships between two or more magnitudes of an irrigation zone. In order to calculate, these indicators it is necessary to previously define the parameters or variables to be used (Perez 2003). Taking account of the availability of data, the ease of calculation and interpretation of t
32、he indices and their sensitive to factors, the 12 financial performance indicators were selected and evaluated for irrigation schemes. To calculate the financial performance indicators, ten variables were chosen and classified into the irrigation schemes. Financial performance indicators selected, d
33、efinition, units, abbreviation for indicators, and data specifications were summarized (Table 2). Average value, average of maximum values, average of minimum values, and difference factor value related with financial performance indicators were calculated by Software program, Microsoft Office Excel
34、 2003. FD, difference factor value of financial performance indicators selected is the average of maximum financial performance indicator values, divided by average of minimum financial performance indicator values. In order to calculate the average of maximum financial performance indicator values
35、and average of minimum performance indicator values; each of the financial performance indicator values is put in order from maximum values to minimum values for years researched. Maximum and minimum values of performance indicators are grouped separately and divided number of performance indicators
36、 grouped. FD, difference factor value is used to determine the extent to which financial performance indicators change in duration researched. In other words, FD shows the changing ratio of financial performance indicators. When considered that about 1.7million ha irrigation areas have been transfer
37、red to WUAs in Turkey, it is clear that how important the financial performance of WUAs is. Measured and evaluation of financial performance of WUAs in Turkey are urgently required to improve their financial performance and to raise their management levels. The financial performance of WUA can be me
38、asured and evaluated by a method which consists of 12 financial indicators. The present level of financial performance of WUA, major problems and their main causes can be clarified and the main measures for resolving the problems and improving the financial performance can be identified by applying
39、the abovementioned method. The evaluation of financial performance four WUAs in Turkey has demonstrated the application of the method described. This type of evaluation can help to improve the financial performance of WUAs, established in Turkey. 译文 评价水用户的财务绩效 -以土耳其的盆地为例 资料来源 : 施谱林格科学商业媒介 作者： Cengiz
40、 Koc 财务管理，运行和维护（简称 MOM）的灌溉计划服务管理是对自来水用户协会（ WUA 的）最重要的功能之一。如 果没有适当的 MOM 财务管理，农民用水户协会不能正确操作或维持其灌溉和排水系统。适当的财务管理，不仅有利于保证经济可行性和农民用水户协会的继续存在，它会建立和保持其会员的信心。 MOM 的 财务管理的目标是方便一对农民用水户协会的资产得到有效利用，管理到其成员的最佳利益的资金，很容易解释 WUA 的财务状况，建立和维护其成员的信心，有助于保证经济生存能力和 WUA 继续存在。 农民用水户协会制度的可行性与财务管理密切相关。农民用水户协会的主要收入来源是 MOM 的服务提供给
41、会员造成水的使用费的征收。这些收费水平，又是依赖于操 作和维护供水系统的成本。供水系统的某些类型的操作和维护费用昂贵，而其他较便宜，虽然从缓解稀缺方面，每个系统都可能有自己独特的优势，该系统的成本效益亦是一个重要的考虑因素。因此，新成立农民用水户协会，使用成本效益的技术，是普遍好于更昂贵的技术。 MOM 服务的财务管理 是收据，维修，支出，以及个人，企业，政府部门，灌溉协会或团体的资产帐户。这些会计是所有财务管理的核心。会计可以被定义为分析和记录财务交易和某些业务相关的方式，分类和汇总资料和报告，并解释结果的经济活动艺术。 灌溉公司 花费了许多成本在提供水服务给农民 上。 在这些成本 中 ，必
42、须加以区别经济成本和财务（会计）成本的灌溉服务费用。财务费用是资本，经营和维修，并确保灌溉供水服务可持续提供涉及的行政费用。除财政成本，经济成本包括所有不属于通常包括在本公司帐户录得的外部成本 。 用水者协会应足够大，以 集体 行动来实现指定的任务。较大的一个农民用水户协会 的 财务生存能力是通过规模优势增强。但是这种增加的规模是有代价的， 相比小组织， 规模较大的组织可能发现更难以维持与客户的良好关系。一个关于财务可行性的关键考虑因素是来自农民 的收入 和操作和维护成本 的关系 ：总收入应等于或大于操作和 维护的费用。如果不是这种情况，可能有一个很好的理由合并与邻居的 WUA， 如果这 能
43、提高收入与费用的关系。在墨西哥，农民用水户协会的 1000-2000 公顷 土地 可能被认为是小 的，有可能财务 上 不可行的， 这样的协会可能要么集中资源，或合并，形成这样的一个较大的关联MOM 服务可以更有效地进行。在其他国家， WUAs 正在形成 不同等级的农民组织系统 ，以改善管理。 对灌溉设施最相关的财务业绩方面的管理权转移是对政府 的 成本灌溉，对农民的灌溉成本，管理人员 水平 （通常是 MOM 的费用的最大组成部分），水费及收缴率 水平 ，预算偿付能力， 和 收入来源。 截至 2005 年底， 土耳其的 国家水力工程（ DSI）转让其在土耳其的 93 的数量达到 186 万 公顷
44、 给 330 个 水用户协会。对土耳其 WUAs2003 年 的预算 ， 数额 达 7000 万美元。 WUAs 支出的 58 用于 操作， 28 用于 维护修理， 14 用于 其他。 为 WUAs 收集水收费率是 95。 Koc（ 2001 年）， 一个关于灌溉系统的组织财务管理、运营和维修服务的研究报告了在灌溉任务上的管理、运营和维修的效率上，相比另一个不同的国家，财务自治性增强。 另据报道，平均维修和修理 的 土耳其灌溉系统的管理费用为 28 美元及人事费用 总成本的比例为 65。 基准的业绩目标是找到并实施最佳管理实践的组织。工具和快速评估程序和业绩基准的差异，反映了在硬件（基础设施和
45、控制系统）的管理现代化和改革的不同做法。这两种可能的干预是有效的，并可能互相 促进 ，但是他们不应该被混淆或 被 对方取代。国际水资源管理研究所已开发出一种网上程序调用上线灌溉基准系统，用户可在其中引入数据，使用现有的数据建立一个基准程序。 1997 年，国际水务协会内建立其运作和管理专家小组对性能指标的工作队。该工作队 在 欧洲，南美和非洲举行了超过 20 个的技术会议， 去 取得不同成员机构的意 见 关于 适当的绩效指标的制定。 一个最好的实践手册在 “ 绩效指标供水服务 ” 在 2000 年 7 月 出版，正如国际灌溉排水共同体第一次会议审议的基准。根据其性能指标专责小组并联运行，国际水
46、协会支持一个独立的任务部队的标杆，报告在 2002 年基准进程有关的供水利用 的 财务表现，提供服务，水质和环境问题是特别排除 。 近年来，大量的文献已 研究了 灌溉系统和灌溉农业的绩效评价。 多数指标显示， 这 很简单， 以 实用，价廉来衡量和使用。然而，这些指标的使用是在发展中国家还是比较少见。 相比较下， 国际水资源管理研究所开发 了一套关于转移灌溉系统的财务评价系统。 在此基础上设置后， 随后的研究者 评估了有关的灌溉系统性能 。 在这项研究中， WUAs 的 财务 绩效 ，进行了在大德雷斯流域灌溉计划的MOM 服务进行了评价。 大德雷斯盆地位于西土耳其安纳托利亚。在盆地 的 四 个
47、灌溉计划被 定义计划作 为其中的财务业绩指标进行了评价。灌溉计划 在 盆地中的 研究已进行了关键的 总结 （见表 1） 。有关数据为 6 年计划，（ 1999 年至 2004 年），收集 部门为 区域二十一，国家水力工程（ DSI）的，和水用户协会（ DSI 的 1999， 2000，2001， 2002， 2003， 2004）处。这些数据包括总面积指挥系 统提供服务，就业人员总数，总人事成本，总支出的 MOM，全年灌溉费征收，全年灌溉评估费，灌溉费收入收入，交付的总水量，总收入的 MOM 收集和总维护成本。 DSI和 WUAs 使用电脑输入，监控和处理他们的数据。为使不同国家和时间 进行比
48、较 ，地方单位的货币转化为 了 国际标准的单位和 持久不变 的美元价格。 一个 绩效 指标基本上是灌溉标准方面的定量测量，有助于评估和监测灌溉效率。因此，绩效指标 在 两个或两个以上的灌溉区 有联系 。为了计算，这些指标有必要 提前 定义参数或将要使用的变量。 为了 灌溉计划 ，考虑 到数据 可用性，计算指数的简易性和 解 释指标 和敏感 因素 ， 12 个财务 业绩指标 被 选择和 评价 。为了 计算财务业绩指标， 选择了 十 个 变量 ， 分类成 了 灌溉计划。财务绩效指标选择，指标的定义，单位，缩写和数据规范进行了总结 （表 2）。 在 Microsoft Office Excel 20
49、03 中 ， 计算了 关于 财务绩效指标 的 平均值，最高值的平均值，最低值的平均值，价值差异因素。选择不同的财务绩效指标因子的值是最大的财务绩效指标值的平均值，由财务绩效指标的最低值除以平均。为了计算的最大的财务业绩指标值和最低 绩效 指标值的平均值 ，每一个财务绩效指标值来源于多年的 最高值到最低值 的 研究 。绩效指标的最大值和最小值分别进行分组并划分业绩分组指标。差异因子值是用来确定在 持续研究中， 财务业绩指标的变化 范围 。换言之，显示了财务绩效指标变化率。 当 考虑 170 万公顷灌区转移到在土耳其 的 WUAs，很明显， WUAs 的 财务 绩效有 多么重要。土耳其 的 WUAs 测量及财务绩效评估，迫切需要改善其财务 绩效 ，并提高他们的管理水平。农民用水户协会财务 绩效 可 以用 一个方法 被衡量和 评价 ，其中包括 12 个财务指标进行评估。农民用水户协会 的目前财务绩效水平 ，主要问题及其原因可以得到澄清 ，解决问题主要 措施 和改善财务绩效可以采用上 述方法确定。在土耳其 WUAs 财务绩效评估已经证明了该方法的应用说明。这类评价 在土耳其被证实 可以帮助改善 WUAs 的财务绩效。
