Living Standards Measurements Study - Serbia 2002 - 2007

11.13. Contact with water suppliers
Households in Serbia appeared relatively
satisfied with their WSS system. Respondents were
also asked if during the past two years they brought
an official complaint about their water supply or
sewerage service to any authority. Only 3 percent of
households (n=67) reported having made an official
complaint and there were no differences between
type of settlement or regions.
Households connected to piped water or to the
sewerage network were asked if they regularly
received information from the water authority when
water cuts or shortages will occur. Overall, less
than half of the households (44 percent) received the
relevant information regularly while others did not;
24 percent said information was received
irregularly, 18 percent never received information
and 15 percent did not know. This varied by type of
settlement and region with secondary towns
residents most likely to receive information. This is
expected since the households in secondary towns
reported higher incidence of water cuts; while rural
areas also suffered from water cuts as much as the
residents of secondary cities, they were the least
likely to receive timely information. The residents
of the Vojvodina region also received water
information far more often than other regions.
11.14. Enumeration District
Questionnaire
In April 2007, the Heads of the Regional
Offices of RSO were asked to complete a short
Enumeration District (ED) questionnaire on the 510
Enumeration Districts (EDs). This questionnaire
gathered information on facilities and infrastructure
of each ED included in the LSMS sample. The
results from this survey have been merged with the
household level data.
The ED questionnaire confirmed that in
Belgrade and the other urban areas piped water
system was available to all residents. The ED
questionnaire clearly showed the availability of
formal waste collection systems in both the Capital
city and in other urban areas. In the rural areas, on
the other hand, less than half of the communities
had a formal waste collection system; some buried
their solid waste, others threw it to nearby rivers,
piled it in their back yard or took it to a local dump.
Regional differences were also prominent; Belgrade
and Vojvodina regions were predominantly served
by municipal collectors whereas; the situation in
other regions was more complicated.
If the main method of waste disposal in the ED
was collection, the respondents recorded whether
this service had to be paid for. In urban areas nearly
all households pay for solid waste services. About a
quarter of rural households did not pay for services
even when their waste was collected.
The tendency for not paying for solid waste
services was highest in West Serbia. Waste is most
often collected in secondary towns. In almost a fifth
of cases in Belgrade waste collection took place
only 1 -3 times a month (Figure 4). The waste
disposal service is most frequent in SE Serbia.
11.15. Irrigation and drainage system
in rural areas
In rural area, the heads of the regional offices
were asked a number of questions on the irrigation
and drainage system in the ED. The drainage
system in Vojvodina is much more developed than
in other parts of the country. However, most
respondents in Vojvodina felt that the drainage
system was in an emergency state. Belgrade seems
to have a drainage system in best condition but the
necessity for irrigation was rated highest in
Belgrade and the lowest in West Serbia.
Table 11.7. Condition of the system of drains by region
Belgrade Vojvodina West Serbia Sumadija East Serbia
8
SE Serbia7F
Functioning uninterruptedly 21.7 - - - - -
Functioning with minor disturbances 53.4 22.3 52.1 38.3 50.9 -
In an emergency state 24.9 77.7 - 61.7 29.9 -
Does not operate - - 47.9 - 19.2 -
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
N=259
160 Living Standards Measurements Study - Serbia 2002 - 2007