Segmentation and characterization of water and sanitation utilities in Mexico

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24850/j-tyca-2026-04-02

Keywords:

public utilities, water supply, sanitation, statistical analysis, data analysis, Mexico

Abstract

This study examines the structure and performance of Drinking Water and Sanitation Utilities in Mexico, using open data from INEGI and unsupervised Machine Learning techniques. A Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was conducted to identify the most representative operational variables, followed by the implementation of the K-Means clustering algorithm to group the utilities into homogeneous categories based on their structural and operational characteristics. The analysis resulted in seven distinct clusters. The first three clusters encompass 88% of the utilities, characterized by low revenues, limited infrastructure, and location in municipalities with very high, high, or medium levels of marginalization. These utilities exhibit average coverage rates ranging from 72.9 to 82.6 % for drinking water, and from 69.1 to 76.5 % for sewerage, with per capita annual revenues below $325 pesos. Clusters 4 and 5 demonstrate improvements in both coverage and operational efficiency, serving larger populations, with better infrastructure and per capita revenues reaching up to $916.96 pesos. Cluster 6, composed mainly of state-level utilities, shows coverage levels above 95% and per capita revenues twice as high as those in Cluster 5. Lastly, the Metropolitan Cluster (MC), consisting of 20 utilities located in large urban areas, presents the best performance indicators, with coverage rates exceeding 97% and average annual per capita revenues of $1 625 pesos. The results obtained allowed for the identification of common characteristics within each group, providing valuable information for the design of public policies and improvement strategies tailored to the specific conditions of each segment.

References

Alarcón, J., & Corona, R. (2018). La (in)capacidad institucional para una gestión eficiente y de calidad del agua en las ciudades mexicanas. En: Instituto Mexicano para la Competitividad (IMCO) (ed.). Califica a tu alcalde: manual urbano para ciudadanos exigentes (pp. 71-77). Recuperado de https://imco.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/m.La-incapacidad-institucional-ICU-2018.pdf

Arellano-Gault, D., & Blanco, F. (2013). Políticas públicas y democracia (primera edición). Instituto Federal Electoral. https://archivos.juridicas.unam.mx/www/bjv/libros/8/3565/1.pdf

Beltrán-Reyna, N. (2019). Propuesta metodológica para estudiar los sistemas de información en los organismos operadores de agua potable. En: Perló, C. M., & Zamora, S. I. (eds.). El estudio del agua en México. Nuevas perspectivas teórico-metodológicas (pp. 117-150). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México-Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales. https://ru.iis.sociales.unam.mx/handle/IIS/5691

Chevez, C. R., Pinell, F., & Mejía, Q. Á. A. (2023). Simulación del proceso de recarga para aguas subterráneas utilizando redes neuronales artificiales como método de aproximación en el acuífero Las Sierras, Nicaragua. Revista Torreón Universitario, 12(33). https://doi.org/10.5377/rtu.v12i33.15896

Conapo, Consejo Nacional de Población. (2022). Datos abiertos del gobierno de México. Obtenido de Índice de Marginación y Carencias Poblacionales por Localidad, Municipio y Entidad 2020. https://www.gob.mx/conapo/documentos/indices-de-marginacion-2020-284372

Hernández, P. (2024, 12 de julio). Estos son los desafíos que enfrentan los organismos operadores en México. Asociación Nacional de Entidades de Agua y Saneamiento (ANEAS). http://www.aneas.com.mx/noticia-10/

INEGI, Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía. (2023). Censo nacional de gobiernos municipales y demarcaciones territoriales de la Ciudad de México. https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/cngmd/2023/

Jain, A. K. (2010). Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-Means. Pattern Recognition Letters, 31(8), 651-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2009.09.011

Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal component analysis (2nd ed.). Springer-Verlag.

Jolliffe, I. T., & Cadima, J. (2016). Principal component analysis: A review and recent developments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2065). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202

Klien, M. (2017). Statistical analysis: Global study on the aggregation of water supply and sanitation utilities. https://doi.org/10.1596/27981

Matplotlib Development Team. (2025). Matplotlib (3.10.0) [Software]. https://matplotlib.org

Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., & Duchesnay, É. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825-2830. https://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume12/pedregosa11a/pedregosa11a.pdf

Python Software Foundation. (2025). Python (3.12.11) [software]. https://www.python.org/

Salazar, A., & Lutz, A. N. (2015). Factores asociados al desempeño en organismos operadores de agua potable en México. Región y Sociedad, 27(62), 5-26. https://doi.org/10.22198/rys.2015.62.a36

Soares, D. (2021). El agua en zonas rurales de México. Desafíos de la Agenda 2030. Entre Diversidades. Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, 8(2), 191-211. https://doi.org/10.31644/ed.v8.n2.2021.a09

Downloads

Published

2026-07-01

How to Cite

Camacho, H., & Briseño, J. (2026). Segmentation and characterization of water and sanitation utilities in Mexico. Tecnología Y Ciencias Del Agua, 17(4), 35-71. https://doi.org/10.24850/j-tyca-2026-04-02