Why neither public nor private can do this alone

Governments in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Nepal carry the mandate to deliver water and health services to millions of people. They set standards, regulate services, and are accountable to citizens. But they frequently lack the operational capacity, technology, or capital to deliver at scale — particularly in fast-growing areas where infrastructure is perpetually behind demand.

Private sector actors have resources and expertise. But without a clear regulatory home and a viable business model, they stay away from rural and underserved areas. Profit alone does not reach the households that need safe water most.

In Bangladesh, roughly 41 million rural people still lack access to safely managed drinking water. In Ethiopia, hundreds of community water schemes had fallen into disuse — government-owned but effectively abandoned. Closing that gap requires bringing the right partners together, with clear roles and a shared stake in making it work.

Building public–private partnerships for water access in Bangladesh

Our work in Bangladesh has been built over more than a decade, always with the same underlying logic: strengthen the public partner, create a viable private operator, and formalise the relationship between them.

In practice, that means working with Union Parishads — locally elected government bodies with a legal mandate over water services — to help them function as genuine regulators: approving tariffs, overseeing service quality, resolving disputes. And it means building the commercial models that make private operation sustainable well beyond any single programme cycle.

Max TapWater: built for the long term

The most significant step has been Max TapWater, a Dutch social enterprise that builds and operates piped water grids across the climate-vulnerable coastal belt of Bangladesh. Max TapWater operates under formal agreements with local government, collects tariffs directly from households, covers its own operational and maintenance costs, and reinvests to expand. More than 100 grids now run under this model.

"What makes this a genuine partnership is the clarity of roles and risks. Government provides legitimacy, land, and regulatory oversight. Max TapWater brings capital, technology, and long-term accountability for service delivery."

Rehabilitating community water schemes in Ethiopia

Ethiopia offers a different kind of proof point. Through a P4G-funded programme in Sidama, Max Foundation piloted a formal partnership between Waterlife Construction PLC and the regional government's Water, Mine and Energy Bureau, to rehabilitate community water schemes that had been sitting broken for years.

The pilot exceeded its target. Twenty-seven schemes were brought back into operation — seven more than planned. When the Ethiopia Water Technology Institute joined to provide spare parts and logistics, it confirmed something important: when a partnership is working, others want to join it.

This pilot is now the foundation for scaling. Max Foundation holds a formal role as a partner in Ethiopia's Seqota Declaration — the national programme to end child stunting across 700 districts by 2030. Mobilising private sector investment in water and nutrition systems is one of our specific deliverables within that role.

What the facilitator role actually means

Max Foundation is not the government and not the private operator. The word facilitator can sound passive — what we mean is more active.

01 — Identify where conditions for partnership exist — even when the partners cannot yet see it themselves.

02 — Structure agreements so risks are allocated fairly and everyone knows what they are responsible for.

03 — Build government capacity to regulate, not just approve — genuine oversight, not rubber-stamping.

04 — Do the patient work of building trust between parties who may not have a history of working together.

Without a capable facilitator, most of the partnerships we have helped create would not have happened — the transaction costs are too high, and the risk of getting the structure wrong is too significant. This is not a support role. It is a strategic one.

Getting the design right — not just getting partnerships done

PPP frameworks in most countries were designed for large infrastructure — power plants, ports, toll roads. Applying that logic to decentralised rural water utilities or community health programmes requires genuine adaptation. Poorly designed partnerships can undermine local accountability, trust, and the flexibility that makes community-level work effective.

"Public–private partnerships — structured well, at the right scale, with communities as active participants — are one of the most powerful tools available for systemic change that outlasts any single programme. After more than a decade of building them, we are more convinced of that than ever."

We are actively working to deepen this model: formalising engagement with national PPP frameworks in Bangladesh, scaling the Ethiopia model through the Seqota Declaration, and beginning to apply the same thinking to food and nutrition systems. The measure of success is not what is built during the funding period — it is what is still running long after it ends.

Interested in exploring partnerships with Max Foundation? Get in touch with our team.