Content uploaded by S. Manasi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by S. Manasi on Jun 30, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
#2017-026
Sanitationchallengesofthepoorinurbanandruralsettings:
CasestudiesofBengaluruCityandruralNorthKarnataka
ManasiSeshaiah,LathaNageshandHemalathaRamesh
MaastrichtEconomicandsocialResearchinstituteonInnovationandTechnology(UNU‐MERIT)
email:info@merit.unu.edu|website:http://www.merit.unu.edu
MaastrichtGraduateSchoolofGovernance(MGSoG)
email:info‐governance@maastrichtuniversity.nl|website:http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/governance
Boschstraat24,6211AXMaastricht,TheNetherlands
Tel:(31)(43)3884400
WorkingPaperSeries
UNU-MERIT Working Papers
ISSN 1871-9872
Maastricht Economic and social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology
UNU-MERIT
Maastricht Graduate School of Governance
MGSoG
UNU-MERIT Working Papers intend to disseminate preliminary results of research carried
out at UNU-MERIT and MGSoG to stimulate discussion on the issues raised.
1
Paper presented at UNU-MERIT external event “Pathway to the SDG: Micro to Macro
perspectives” 19-20 November in New Delhi.
Sanitation Challenges of the Poor in Urban and Rural Settings
- Case studies of Bengaluru City and Rural North Karnataka1
Manasi Seshaiah, Latha Nagesh, Hemalatha Ramesh
Abstract
Bengaluru city faces severe challenges in providing sanitation infrastructure for the
urban poor. Similarly, we have villages in North Karnataka that encounter problems of toilet
access and related challenges. This paper addresses concerns both in city and rural contexts.
We surveyed 400 respondents across 20 slums and 500 respondents in six districts of North
Karnataka through survey instruments and focus group discussions (FGDs) to understand
the problems with respect to toilet access and usage. Open defecation (OD) prevails in spite
of several interventions made. In the urban contexts, lack of usage was largely due to
technical discrepancies, behavioural concerns, space issue, water scarcity and poor
maintenance of toilets. In the rural contexts, apart from water scarcity, restricted space, poor
maintenance, cultural habits and financial constraints dominated non-usage of toilets. This
paper captures these issues in-depth and provides some options in technologies and improved
governance based on study findings and review of case studies. In the urban areas too, the
topography of the slum location, operation and maintenance and apt technology plays an
important role while in the rural areas, promoting education and awareness creates a
positive impact on usage of toilets. Also, institutionalising the process of construction with
transparency and accountability at various stages matters to ensure proper construction of
toilets.
E- mail addresses: manasi@isec.ac.in, latha@isec.ac.in, hemalatha@isec.ac.in
Affiliations
Associate Professor, Centre for Research in Urban Affairs, Institute for Social and Economic Change,
Bangalore.
Senior Research Assistant, Centre for Research in Urban Affairs, Institute for Social and Economic
Change, Bangalore
Senior Research Assistant, Centre for Ecological Economics and Natural Resources, Institute for
Social and Economic Change, Bangalore
Key Words: Toilet Access, Urban Sanitation, Rural Sanitation
JEL Classification codes: Q01,Q59,R10,O18
1 This paper is drawn from a larger study, ‘Pathways to Sanitation: Growing Challenges and Access to Urban Poor - A Study of Bangalore
City’, supported by HUDCOs Human Settlements Management Institute, New Delhi and ‘Towards Improving Rural Sanitation in
Karnataka, Understanding the Institutional Dynamics, Performance and Benefits of Constructing Private Toilets under Infosys Foundation
Assisted Project – Parishudh Initiative’, supported by Infosys Foundation and carried out by Centre for Research in Urban Affairs and
Centre for Ecological Economics and Natural Resources, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru. Authors acknowledge all
team members of the study.
2
Introduction
The 2030 Agenda has emphasised ‘Water and Sanitation’ as an important component
by devoting Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 for water and sanitation, besides linking
it to other goals on health, food security, climate change and many others. In sum, SDG 6
demands a clear vision to ensure universal access to drinking water and sanitation while
addressing issues pertaining to quality, supply and improving water management to protect
ecosystems and build resilience. So far, several agencies have worked on providing safe
water and sanitation across the globe including UNICEF, the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation, Water Aid, World Vision, WASH. Meanwhile, smaller start-up companies like
Synergy, BlueEnergy, SeeSaw, have all initiated several projects. Additionally, we have
several governments and NGOs that have taken action to ensure safe water and improvised
sanitation infrastructure. However, achieving complete access to safe water and sanitation
amenities remains a distant dream.
The ill effects of poor sanitation access have been serious so far, poor sanitation and
practice of open defecation have serious impact on environment, health and economic
ramifications on affected communities. It is estimated that a combination of poor sanitation,
water, and hygiene would lead to around 700,000 premature deaths every year, and loss of
approximately 443 million school days due to consequential diseases (The World Bank
2014). Long term impacts of economic productivity on both individuals and society due to
lack of sanitation and increased health system costs are estimated at US$ 260 billion every
year (The World Bank 2013). Besides, women safety is a matter of concern, public
defecation may cause sexual harassment (The World Bank 2014).
India has also been afflicted from these problems and several studies have indicated
them, time and again. 48% of the total Indian population defecates in the open and India
ranks among the first 12 countries practicing open defecation (Krishna Prasad, 2014). Despite
significant public investment in urban sanitation, over 37 million people in Indian cities resort
to open defecation. The 2011 Census of India provides some startling results. Nearly 12% of
urban households resort to OD and another 8% use public or shared toilet facilities. The
conditions are far worse in smaller cities (population below 100,000), with OD rates around
22%. As per 2011 Census of India, only 30.7% had toilet facility compared to 81.4% urban
households indicating the gravity of the rural circumstances.
Several initiatives have been taken in India but we have the problem still on. In India,
water and sanitation is a state subject under the Indian Constitution. However, the national
policy is set by the Indian government and also provides financial support to state level
programs. Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council 2010 states that operation and
maintenance as well as execution of such plans have to come through State Departments of
Public Health Engineering or Rural Development Engineering and State Water Boards
(Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborate Council, 2010). But in practice, the local
government authority leaves it to either the village or district level panchayats in rural areas
(Panchayat Raj Institutions) or to municipal governing bodies in urban areas (Urban Local
Bodies) (Leavens and Derksen-Schrock, 2010).
With the failure of past reforms, the Government of India came up with the National
Urban Sanitation Policy in 2008 that aimed to “ensure and sustain good public health and
environmental outcomes for all citizens with special focus on hygiene and affordable
sanitation facilities for urban poor and women” (Dasra 2012). It is to be noted that emphasis
3
was not only on infrastructure but it included behavioural change, continual operation and
maintenance, proper disposal, treatment and reuse of wastes and state involvement through
state and city sanitation plans (Nivedita, 2010). This policy was monumental on two fronts –
there was a separate recognition of urban sanitation and also there was set planning and
implementation targets for states and cities to be achieved (Dasra 2012). To achieve these
targets, the mandate was to create a City Sanitation Plan (CSP) that would be run by a City
Sanitation Task Force to formulate a State Sanitation Strategy with members from
government agencies, key experts, businesses, non-profits, worker unions, elected
representatives and ULB among others and all CSPs. The Ministry of Urban Development
will provide support financially for national-level awareness generation and for monitoring
and evaluation knowledge management and capacity building.
Another observation has been that, urban sanitation was comparatively less focused
upon compared to water supply, besides, bulk of the finances were allocated towards water
infrastructure. Besides, more emphasis was also on rural sanitation as rural areas had
relatively less number of toilets compared to urban areas. However, in spite of having more
number of toilets, it is not that urban areas are exempt from open defecation for varied
reasons. The recent Swachh Bharat Abhiyan aims to clean India by 2019 and focuses on two
submissions – rural and urban. The urban component will be initiated over a five year period
and within 4041 statutory towns with an expected total cost of Rs. 62,009 crores with 14,623
crores contributed by government. SBA’s goal for urban India includes elimination of OD,
transition towards pour flush toilets, removal of manual scavenging; behavioural change
regarding sanitation practices (Diligent Media, 2014). We also need to understand that
challenges vary across the rural and urban contexts, for instance, land tenure or proliferation
of slums that are not notified or recognised by government is applicable to cites only.
It has been emphasised that it is crucial for effective governance in achieving
efficiency in delivery of services. Good governance is expected not only to advocate
judicious exercise of governmental authority but ascertain other forms of collective decision
making, formal and informal, participatory and representative, centralised and decentralised
and national and local (Harpham and Kwasi Boateng, 1997). Nelson Ekane et al 2015,
emphasises the need for multilevel governance analysis to understand the challenges in the
sanitation sector and stresses that demand-driven strategies and private sector involvement is
vital for establishing sanitation paradigms and socio-technical regimes. The state, in
governance terms, should be closer to society through better representation. While, Ana
Hardoy et al (2005), suggests that providing water and sanitation services to the poorest areas
is likely to happen only if all the actors involved – the public sector, private company,
regulator, NGOs and communities are committed to working together towards a solution.
Technology is another significant component in revolutionising systems and
maximising efficiency in delivery of services. Across the world, results of technological
change are apparent everywhere. However, still the greatest struggles encountered by
mankind have been not with the sword but with ideas that diffused into their daily lives and
emerged as cultural changes (Reed, 1961). Four essential elements in diffusion of any idea is
– (i) the innovation (ii) its communication from innovation to another, (iii) in a social system
and (iv) over time (Rogers, 1965). Thus diffusion of technologies is still a serious challenge.
Innovation is required in technology types as well as governance approaches/models for
achieving sustainable development goals. Shyama et.al (2012) in her paper has observed that
pro-poor innovations like toilets face greater challenges in comparison to the demand boom
for cell phones, as intended beneficiaries perceive neither a need not a want for them. In
4
response, social entrepreneurs catalyse demand for such pro-poor innovations through a
variety of schemes before and after provision of the new product. Pro-poor innovations, their
creation and diffusion, have not received the attention given to mainstream innovation by
economists and management science experts. So, strategies for the diffusion of pro poor
innovation should be based on actual field practices of sanitation entrepreneurs in India was
shown by indicating that the sanitation entrepreneurs have to begin by ascertaining the
community’s perceived value for the innovation through multi-purpose socio-economic
surveys, which serve to initiate relations with the target community. This needs to be
followed up by appropriateness of technology, demand through educational workshops,
house to house visits and focus group discussions, thus constructing a closed-loop delivery
mechanism that involves monitoring, accompaniment and resolution of problems after
provision of the innovation.
Similarly, there are other concerns. For instance, issue of tenant rights and tenure in
slum communities prevent and discourage households from investing in sanitary facilities
(Nivedita, 2010). Also, most common type of sanitary facilities in rural areas are pit latrines,
whereas in urban areas, toilets are connected to sewer networks. Not all households will have
connection to sewage networks which obstructs households from using the infrastructure
besides inadequate operation and maintenance leading to depreciation of infrastructure over
time (Nivedita, 2010). There are further many such complexities that constrain toilets to
function effectively, resulting in open defecation.
Given this backdrop, the current paper is organised as follows – situation analysis of
Bengaluru’s slums in accessing toilets in Section I and in Section II of the paper we look at
the intervention made by Infosys Foundation for improving access to toilets in Northern
districts of Karnataka. Our paper will bring to the fore some key concerns highlighting
constraints in the technology adopted, problems encountered and its acceptance. We will also
discuss some of the interesting initiatives that have aided in technology redesign and
improved governance. After reviewing these two cases and based on review of best practices
in other parts of the country, we arrive at some solutions that call for improved nuances in
governance to meet the key aspiration of eradicating open defecation. Our study findings in
Bangalore city (representing slums) and North Karnataka (representing rural areas) reiterates
the fact that we will not be able to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach, rather, a context based
approach considering social, economic, cultural, geographical and technical aspects, in
attaining the SDG in the context of water and sanitation. Water and sanitation are linked;
however, we will be discussing sanitation explicitly and toilet concerns in specific. The case
studies discussed will throw light on generalising issues that may be applicable to other
contexts as well. There are several common issues but some are specific to rural and urban
areas. Hence, we will discuss them separately.
We attempt to answer three questions (i) What are the key factors that act as
constraints in eradicating open defecation? (ii) What approaches may help in improving
governance mechanisms to eradicate open defecation? (iii) What are the constraints in
implementing existing technologies in the context of usage and design?
Accessing Toilets – Challenge in Slums of Bengaluru city
Bengaluru is one of the fastest growing cities and fifth largest city in India.
Bengaluru’s population has grown immensely (84,49,944 as per 2011 census). Similar to any
other metropolitan cities, rapid urbanisation has posed serious challenges to urban planning
and management in providing infrastructure and other civic amenities like housing,
5
electricity, water and sanitation in the urban areas (Ahluwalia, 2011; Bhagat, 2011; Kundu,
2011, Kulkarni and Ramachandra, 2006).
In the context of providing sanitation to the urban poor, there are several issues that
needs to be addressed. To begin with, data from Karnataka Slum Development Board
(KSDB) indicates 597 slums in Bengaluru city of which 388 slums are notified and 209 are
non-notified2. However, the number of slums have remained same over the period of time,
which may not be true, for certain. More number of slums may be getting added in the cities,
which are not accounted for. Surveys about the number of slums was conducted more than
four decades ago. So, while we discuss, problems of the poor, we are not accounting for the
new entrants into the slum category. We are also not discussing slums that may have been
rehabilitated, hence, are no more slums. These are also not listed in the Annual Reports of the
Karnataka Slum Development Board. We strongly feel that all this will have an influence on
interventions to be made, fund allocations and policy implications.
Few independent studies have highlighted sanitation concerns faced by the urban poor
in Bengaluru city. Benjamin (2000) observes that women are forced to use open fields for
defecation and face harassment from drunken men making it unsafe. Kala Sridhar and Venu
Reddy (2011) see the need for a policy to incentivise and influence the entry of private
service providers into slums. Study by Mythri Sarva Seva Samithi (2012), highlights 40%
slum population did not have access to toilets. There are instances of sharing one toilet by
100 people and sharing nine toilets by 200 people (in Tasker Town, Shivajinagar). Besides,
these-toilets tend to become unusable due to lack of maintenance, a matter of serious concern.
Public health experts and other studies have pointed out that large sections of the urban poor
are denied access to toilets. Extent of night soil disposed into rain water drains is of serious
concern that could cause implications on health. An official report, in 1994, (Ravindra, 1997)
says around 1,13,000 houses were without toilets, while 17,500 had dry toilets. Sanbergen
and Loes-Schenk (1996), highlight that of 22 slums, nine (with a total population of 35,400)
had no toilet facilities, while in the remaining ten slums; there were 19 public toilets for
16,850 households or 102,000 inhabitants. However, as per Census data, Bengaluru city has
shown a substantial progress in improving access to toilets from 90.78% to 96.76% from
2001 and 2011 respectively. In this backdrop, our study in slums is an attempt to understand
the current problems in the context of toilet constructed and usage leading to open defecation
in spite of the increase in toilet construction.
Methodology and Data Sources
We collected both qualitative and quantitative data, reviewed studies on sanitation,
secondary data was collected from concerned departments Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara
Palike, (BBMP), Bengaluru Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB), Karnataka Slum
Development Board (KSDB), Corporate initiated schemes, and NGO initiated Sulabh
Shauchalaya Schemes and other case studies. Interviews and discussions were held with
government officials and other personnel of the corporates and NGOs. Both structured and
semi-structured survey instruments (questionnaires/ checklists) were designed for
stakeholders, group level meetings and individual interactions. 10 declared and 10 undeclared
slums were identified across all zones of the city representing ownership of land (government
land and private land), slums with migrant population only, location (slums located beside
railway lines, alongside of sewage drain), slums without access to toilets, having access to
public toilets, pay and use toilets and slums that are benefited with housing schemes. Twenty
2 Annual Report 2014-15, KSDB
6
respondents covering a total sample of 400 respondents across 400 households were surveyed
(20 HHs each from 20 slums), representative of age groups, women, and elderly population.
Focused group discussions also formed part of the survey for a comprehensive analysis.
Augmenting Toilet Structures
We observed that various schemes have been implemented by the State and Central
governments to provide toilet access by providing financial assistance for constructing houses
with toilet facilities besides individual toilets. It can be seen that the total number of
individual toilets constructed in the study area has increased after 2010 (Figure 1). The data
collected during the household survey indicates that 42% of individual toilets were
constructed after 2010 which may be attributed to the implementation of various government
schemes viz, Basic Services for the Urban Poor (BSUP) and Integrated Housing and Slum
Development Scheme (IHSD) under Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JnNURM).
In addition, recently under the World Bank sponsored project Karnataka Municipal Reforms
Project (KMRP) implemented by BWSSB, toilets have been constructed in several slums.
Innovative initiative like e-toilets installation in public spaces and vicinity of slums have
aided to a certain extent in providing access pay and use option, besides making it convenient
as it has several automated features. Besides the schemes, various government initiatives and
NGOs have promoted awareness on hygiene via Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan, Swachh Bharat
Mission etc., thus motivating people to construct toilets. Another reason for increase in
private toilets built by residents own costs in slums may be attributed to the non-availability
of space for open defecation making it an everyday challenge, resultant effect of enormous
growth of built up area in Bengaluru. Also, when people can afford, they do not want to
suffer inconveniences caused due to lack of access to toilets. This fact is also reiterated by
Dasra 2012 where he makes a comparison to rural areas and urban areas. Households in
urban areas have a demand of and value for toilets, with increasing population growth and
scarcity of land, not only land is mostly unavailable for open defecation, the act of open
defecation and the embarrassment of security issues of such an act are more easily observed.
Figure 1: Toilet Construction over Time
Source: Primary Survey, 2015
In 45.5% of the households with individual toilets, toilets were constructed on their
own and 21.5% have received financial support either from the State or Central government
13
41 48
166
3.25 10.25 12
42.25
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
1980to
1990
1991to
2000
2001to
2010
After2010
NumberofHH
Percentage
7
under various schemes (only in notified slums). In non-notified slums, majority of the toilets
are self-constructed, excepting a few which have been constructed with the help of World
Bank scheme KMRP implemented by BWSSB. Under KMRP project, the beneficiaries are to
contribute for construction. However, under JNNURM, VAMBAY, people have contributed
10% of the total cost of house construction which varied between Rs.28,000 and Rs.36,000
across slums.
We observed that a majority of the surveyed households have access to individual
toilets3. Having individual toilets is constructive as households with individual toilets feel
less beleaguered as compared to those that use public or shared toilets. Besides, it also
motivates all the members within households to use toilets. Individual toilets are largely used
by households owning them. In few cases, we observed that though households have toilets at
home, some members of the family, particularly men, do not make use of them and are
comfortable with open spaces to relieve themselves.
Increased Number of Toilets but problems in accessing toilets remains
Type of toilets and their infrastructure is an important indicator for understanding the
quality of toilets which, in turn, affects usage. Toilet infrastructure across the slums
highlights an important aspect indicating the prevalence of open defecation in spite of the
availability of toilet facility (out of 20 slums, 10 slums practice open defecation). So, mere
provision of the physical infrastructure does not necessarily ensure accessibility to toilets.
There are several issues concerning access, for instance, water scarcity, and technical aspects
etc. which force people in to defecating in the open.
While the latest Census 2011 data indicate that 5.2% of households lack toilet facility
and 94.8% have access to toilet facility in Bengaluru, the absolute numbers of households
that lack toilets are still high, majority of which comprise the large segment of the population
living in poorer pockets of the city. This also has been evidenced by our study wherein 67%
(i.e. 268 households) have access to individual toilets (in-house toilets), while a significant
percentage of the households (19.5% , 78 households) are dependent on shared/ pay-and-use
public toilets. Another 13.5% of the households (54 households) are denied of toilet facility
of any form forcing them to use open spaces/area for defecation (Table 2). Households with
no access to individual toilets depend on community toilets/public toilets, shared toilets or
neighbour’s toilets. Around 7% of the households use public toilets.
Table 1: Type of Toilets Used and Practice of Open Defecation
Type of toilets Percent Notified Non-notified
Individual/own Toilet 67.0 75 59
Public toilet 7.2 10 4.5
Shared toilet 12.3 2.5 22
Open space 13.5 12.5 14.5
Total 100.0 100 100
Source: Primary Survey, 2015
3 Most of them in Gangodana halli slum, Govindaraja nagar slum, Yarab nagar slum, Nayandahalli slum
8
Constraints in eradicating Open Defecation
Open defecation prevailed for varied reasons in the study area. For instance, in Hakki
pikki colony with a population of around 2000, all 208 households (except 3 or 4 households)
defecate in the open areas as they do not have access to any type of toilet. Similarly, in
Shivapura slum, LBS nagar slum, Yelahanka A K colony slum, around 50% of the
households do not have access to any kind of toilets facility and hence practice open
defecation (see Map 1). This stands supported by a survey conducted in 2013 by Bengaluru
Urban zilla panchayat (ZP) which highlights that 34,656 households in Bengaluru Urban
district do not have access to toilets and hence, resort to open defecation. Some of the reasons
are lack of space to construct toilets, inadequate number of public toilets, unused toilets due
to poor maintenance etc. People largely complained about inconvenience caused as they have
to travel long distances in search of open spaces which adds to stress, safety concerns for
women, inconvenience to children and the aged, particularly in the late evenings.
Map 1: Slums practicing open defecation
Source: Primary Survey, 2015
Toilet Usage
Complete access and effective usage of toilets is the key factor in making Bengaluru
an open defection free city. We observed that just providing toilet infrastructure for the slum
households does not merely ensures its usage. Instead, there are other several constraints that
make toilet usage difficult as discussed in detail in the following section.
9
Type and Quality of Toilets determine Usage
Toilet usage in slum households is determined by several socio-cultural, technical
factors. Unless these aspects are covered, access to and usage of toilets gets affected.
Inadequate number of toilets
Inadequate number of toilets is another issue because of which slum dwellers depend
on open spaces. 9 slums have partial access to toilets i.e., few households have access to
individual toilets or shared toilets and not to public toilets. They are forced to opt for open
defecation in view of water shortage and drainage problems. For instance, Gulbarga slum is a
non-notified slum where 50 HHs out of a total of 325 HHs, have constructed own individual
toilets
4
. The rest of the slum dwellers defecate in nearby open spaces.
Technical problems
In our observations, there are toilets constructed across slums that have the physical
structures but does not ensure usage. Among the surveyed slums, 12 slums had access to
individual/shared/public toilets. However, problems faced force household members to
defecate in the open. In several instances, blockage of underground drainage is a prominent
problem encountered across slums. Some of the technical problems that restrict the usage of
toilets are - damaging of toilets by rodents and termites, collapsing of pits due to heavy rains,
overflowing, poor infrastructure and irregular emptying of soak pits. A majority of the
respondents (44%) have reported a combination of above mentioned problems followed by
damaging of toilets by rodents and termites (16%), over flowing of pits during rainy season
(12%) and pit collapsing due to heavy rains (Fig 2).
Fig 2: Technical Problems Source: Primary Survey, 2015
4
24 are ring-pit type of toilets and the remaining 25 are connected to the drainage system.
Destructionof
toiletsby
rodentsand
termites
16%
Pitcollapsing
duetoheavy
rains
11%
Pitcollapsing
dueto
overflowing
8%
Overflowingof
pitsduring
rainyseason
12%
Collapsingof
toiletandpit
duetopoor
infrastructure
7%
Frequently
emptying
2%
Multiple
problems
44%
Percentage
10
Lack of Space - a major hurdle in toilet construction
The landscape of a given slum is an important factor that determines the construction
of toilets. Slums have evolved in unplanned manner, hence, are mostly congested with very
small lanes. Another reason for the absence of toilets in the dwelling units is the lack of
sufficient space for constructing individual toilets, so the construction of community toilets
being the only option. Absence of individual/community toilets has led to open defection, as
observed in LBS nagar, Priyanka nagar AK Colony and Shivapura slums. Most of the houses
are too small with variations, the area of buildings are about 12*15 feet, 12*18 feet and
12*20 feet. 18.2% of the respondents live in households that cover an area of 10*15 feet,
while 29.8% of the respondents live in HHs that occupy an area of 10*10 and even less and
hence, the construction of toilets is an issue. Besides, the houses are located too close to each
other with no space available either to construct toilets within or outside of the households.
Besides, the sub-standard quality of semi-pucca households adds further to the problem.
Plate 1: Narrow Lanes and Space constraints for toilet construction, Swatantrapalya Slum
It is observed that in Shivapura slum, most of the households do not have access to
toilets, excepting 50 households which have constructed toilets using their own funds on the
storm water drainage. The remaining households resort to open defecation. Men generally use
open lands located nearby, while women use the adjacent lake beds for defecation. People
consider the daily drudgery of open defecation as a challenge, causing inconvenience with
regard to timings since they have to plan their timings each day i.e., early mornings or late
evenings as privacy is an issue besides self-dignity.
Water scarcity affects Toilet Usage
Inadequate water availability affected toilet usage as water access and availability is a
matter of concern across most of the slums. Although the slum dwellers have access to water,
it is not sufficient to meet their requirements completely; 32.75% of the respondents have
reported water insufficiency. Another reason for not being able to access water is the motor
related problems faced by households (vertical structures). Households living on the second
and third floors have to depend on motors for lifting water to overhead tanks. Motors get
frequently damaged and require frequent repairs, additional costs that are a burden.
11
Plate 2: Water Storage, Purchasing water from Tanker, Water Scarcity, Nayandahalli Slum
Purchasing of water is a common feature across slums. This explains the reasons that
affect sanitation drastically. People face problems in balancing expenditure, as purchasing
water is a major component, where they have to purchase water for drinking and also for
toilet usage.
Behavioural Problems
It is observed that, there are a small percentage of men who prefer to defecate in the
open as they do not feel comfortable to use toilets. This is a cultural factor as migrants from
rural areas who have settled in Bengaluru still continue with the habit of using open spaces
for defecation. 15% of women respondents have expressed inconvenience with regard to the
use of toilets, particularly when men are around the public toilets. The behavioural aspects of
toilet usage are influenced by educational levels as well. The educational levels of the
respondents are low, however, the educated, particularly the youth, prefer and insist on
individual construction.
Poor maintenance of Public toilets leads to open defecation
Public toilets serve as an alternative for toilet access among the densely populated low
income communities in urban and semi-urban areas. Among the surveyed slums, public
toilets are present in seven slums and around 7% of the total surveyed households (29
households) are dependent on public toilets (Map 1). The public toilets constructed in the
study slums are operated on pay-and-use basis, excepting one in Swathantrapalya slum.
People are not satisfied with public toilets due to poor maintenance (76%) and water
scarcity (24%) and hence, resort to open defecation (Table 2). Besides, respondents
especially find it inconvenient to use public toilets because their usage is subject to restricted
timings (closed by 9 pm), leaving people with no choice other than defecating in the open.
Other inconveniences include poor lighting facilities and lack of sufficient water/no water
(Gandhi grama slum). Another major reason of inconvenience caused to the users was
standing in long queues during the rush hours.
The condition of public toilets in some of the slums is extremely poor. However, in
some of the slums, they are maintained well - LBS nagar, for example.
Table 2: Reasons for Not Satisfied with Public Toilets
Reasons Number of HH Percent
Poor maintenance and hygiene 22 76
Water scarcity 7 24
Total 29 100
Source: Primary Survey, 2015
12
Overall, a few people were comfortable paying user charges, while some of them
complain that user fees is high for them to afford. Public toilets are used by slums but varied
in the usage pattern across families/slums. Some of the families completely depended on
public toilets as they did not have an individual toilet in their houses. However, there were
families, although had individual toilets, used public toilets during situations where their
toilets were blocked, drain leakage etc. Respondents complained about lack of hygiene and
maintenance in public toilets leaving them with no choice than use them.
In Gangodanahalli slum, few households are dependent on a community toilet located
nearby. In Nayandahalli, Swatantrapalya and Gandhinagar slums, though the residents own
houses with individual toilets, due to frequent blockage of sanitary pipes, dependency on
community toilets is relatively high. Public toilets are an alternative option, not a preferable
choice. Major reasons for dependency on public toilets -
(a) Lack of space for construct own toilets in (LBS Nagar, Swatantrapalya, Jayaram
slum (3.2%) as they are located in highly congested, densely populated areas with
small houses.
(b) Individual toilets are too small to use
(c) Financial constraints to have their own toilet (2.2%)
(d) Water scarcity
Plate 3: Public Toilets
13
Map 2: Access to Public Toilets
Source: Primary Survey 2015
Shared Toilets and Open defecation – Sharing of one toilet by two households was more
common across slums. For instance, in Vasanthapura slum, shared toilets were more in
number due to space constraints and three - four households share one toilet. At times, some
extreme cases, one toilet was shared by 15 households (LBS nagar slum). Shared toilets
caused a lot of inconvenience as people had to wait for their turn before using toilets, many a
times, forcing them to opt for open defecation. Since shared toilets generally lack
maintenance and accessibility on time, men opt for open defecation. Among the 400
households, 49 households (12.2%) were using shared toilets, across 10 slums. The
dependency on shared toilets was more in non-notified slums compared to notified slums.
Observations indicate, in 2% of the HHs, two families share a single toilet and in around 6%
of the HHs, three families share a single toilet and 3% of the HHs, 4 families share single
toilet (Plate 4).
Plate 4: Shared Toilets, Jayaram Slum
14
Individual Toilets in all houses aids Open Defecation Free Slums - There are some slums
(Gangondanahalli, Govindarajnagar, Swanthatrapalya, Yarabnagar, Sarvagnanagar,
Deshiyanagar slums) which are completely free from open defecation besides maintaining
toilets well. This was observed in slums where individual toilets are present in all the houses
(Plate 5). The households were built under JnNURM scheme along with toilets prior to which
open defecation was prevalent along the sides of the railway lines located close by. People
now feel relieved that houses have been constructed with access to toilets. Toilets are used by
every member of the family with no open defecation practiced.
Plate 5: Individual Toilets located beside Houses
Toilet Maintenance
38% of the respondents with individual toilets clean the toilets once in a week, while
17.75% clean daily and 16.5% cleaned twice in a week. In all households, cleaning is carried
out by women except in around 8% of the households, paid labour were hired to clean
toilets. Individual toilets were maintained well by a majority of the households. In the case of
shared toilets, households took turns to wash toilets on a weekly basis.
Poor Hygiene
Hygienic conditions varied across and within slums as also across households. The
cultures of keeping the immediate surroundings clean vary extensively. Newly constructed
vertical structures looked like ‘concrete slums’. Tendency to misuse common areas to dump
belongings, store firewood, heat water etc. makes the place untidy. Few households had kept
their houses and surroundings clean and tidy. Instances of renovating the houses to suit their
tastes by redoing flooring, painting walls etc. at their own cost were also observed. Given the
overall conditions of the slums, there is a large scope for intervention in creating awareness to
maintain a minimum level of hygiene.
40% of the respondents took a bath every day as access to water is good in their
slums. While 42% take a bath on alternate days as the water is supplied on alternate days. In
these households, there was no adequate space to store water. Few slums face acute water
scarcity problems and the residents have bath once in three days (17%) or once in a week
15
(1.2%). It is well known that hand washing practices plays an important role in preventing the
transmission of several diseases. 98.2% of the respondents washed their hands prior to
cooking, while 97.2% of the respondents washed their hands prior to eating. 68% of
respondents used soap to wash their hands, which depended on the type of occupation they
are involved in. People engaged in construction and sanitation activities tend to use soap
whereas those engaged in sorting out metals, paper waste, etc. washed hands with plain
water.
To sum up, numbers of toilets have increased but usage is affected due to several
factors. It is important that all aspects of functionality of toilets are ensured for effective
usage. There is need for improved governance in providing more options to construct toilets
that suit local contexts. People are receptive and involving them to consider innovative
options would make way for open defecation free city.
Toilets in Rural Areas – The North Karnataka Experience
Infosys Foundation as part of its corporate social responsibility (CSR) has provided
sanitation facilities in North Karnataka as open defecation is a major problem in these
districts. The program ‘Parishudh Initiative’, began in October 2011 with the motto of
educating the people regarding the importance of hygiene and improving sanitation facilities
through toilet construction. The aim was to create model villages, popularise the approach
and upscale it. Besides, the team also wanted to demonstrate that right approaches and
initiatives would aid in attaining sanitation goals. Parishudh team worked with the local
people in innovative ways, encouraged entrepreneurs and adopted toilet models to suit local
contexts. Specific objective was to achieve the target of constructing 10,000 toilets covering
50 villages and a population of 50,000 in one year. With this backdrop, an attempt was made
to study sanitation initiatives in the rural areas of North Karnataka where an NGO, Parishudh
has taken up several initiatives to address the problem of sanitation. In spite of the various
initiatives under taken by the Government, NGOs and other institutions, Parishudh
Initiative’s (PI) approach/model of achieving 100% sanitation within a short time frame while
simultaneously promoting awareness among people as part of bringing about a behavioural
change is relevant from a larger spread effect point of view in the state. Against this
background, the study focused on documenting the processes and situational analysis for
understanding institutional dynamics, performance and benefits of the initiative.
Methodology
The study was carried out using comprehensive data sets from secondary sources, the
existing data base with Parishudh, as well as primary fieldwork based data. To understand
key issues in sanitation sector, an extensive review of studies and data from secondary
sources were referred. A comprehensive field survey was carried out, covering various
aspects of sanitation. Field survey was conducted using structured and semi-structured survey
instruments designed for group level meetings and individual interactions. Primary data was
collected from households using a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire were designed
covering socio-economic, physical, financial, user satisfaction and environmental aspects to
receive a systematic public feedback to assess the performance and perceptions. Based on
pilot visits to some districts, the study team revised the questionnaire.
An appropriate sampling design was followed at different levels for selecting
respondents. Case studies and focused group discussions across types of beneficiaries -
16
individual households, institutions, and community toilet were included. Stratified Random
Sampling was adopted for covering geographical area representing villages, technology, land
holding size, institutions. Villages thus selected were representative of toilets constructed in
terms of highest, medium and lowest numbers. The districts covered were Gulbarga, Yadgir,
Bidar, Raichur, Bijapur and Koppal. Responses were collected from 500 households (5% of
the sample) representative of cross-sections of the society- caste wise, income-wise, with and
without water connection. The representation was also extended to various types of
beneficiaries - households, institutions and biogas connected users. Besides, discussions were
held with initiators and Nirmal Grama Samithis, Panchayat representatives and Contractors.
Open Defecation in rural areas – Causes and Concerns
The traditional practice of open defecation is common in rural areas and may be
attributed to the cultural practice of open defecation that was followed since generations.
With large open areas available, people never felt the need for toilets. Besides, the usage of
toilets was not a practice acceptable to them as toilet usage is generally viewed as a practice
followed in the urban areas, and was, therefore, one of the reasons for sanitation programmes
being partially successful. Besides, they felt that, having toilets within the house was against
the cultural practice and many believed it would bring bad luck. Further, there were
designated places to defecate, hence, did not see the need for toilet construction. For instance,
from the households interviewed, 33.20 % of the respondents were not keen on constructing
toilets as they were used to open defecation. People expressed discomfort with respect to
defecating in closed set-up, while defecating in open fields was considered more comfortable.
Similarly, 31.63% of the respondents opined that the need to construct toilets did not occur to
them, indicating that open defecation was very much a part of their lives.
Over time, situations have changed. Survey findings indicated problems encountered.
With the population expansion and associated activities, the availability of space has become
a constraint and more visible in the peri-urban areas. This has resulted in people travelling far
distances to find open spaces. Besides, adding to the problem, designated areas that were
meant for open defecation have been converted into either cultivatable land or roads, and
commercial layouts. In fact, 54.22 % of the respondents expressed that there were no
designated areas for defecation. In addition, farmers were reluctant to allow people to
defecate nearby their cultivable lands for defecation; around 4% of the respondents reported
that land owners opposed defecation in their farm lands, with many of them fencing their
lands. This led to a situation wherein there was reduction in space for open defecation and
caused stress to the people every day.
Lack of access to toilets forced women to travel long distances for finding spaces that
had privacy, safe and free from people and vehicular movement (14%). Traveling long
distances was another difficulty with 7% of the respondents spends more than an hour. This
caused mental stress to women as they were to return home to attend to their routine work of
cooking and serving other working family members. With limited time available for her to
meet the demands of family routine and family members, conflicts were quite common,
affecting personal and professional work of family members. Travelling far distances was
cumbersome and tedious for expectant mothers (7.8%) besides worrying about the risks of
accidental fall that could put their life at risk. Hence, women would delay their defecation,
causing associated physical ailments besides mental discomfort. The elderly population
suffered the most with no toilet access. It was difficult for the elderly as they had to walk
long distances in search of open spaces, risking injury and the resultant medical expenses for
the family, as reported by 6.5% of the elderly respondents. It was pathetic that the elders
would have minimum food or would sleep hungry to avoid going out to use toilets during
17
night fall. Instances were reported of young members of the family insisting that elders have
little or no dinner as they taking them out to relieve during night fall was cumbersome.
Difficulty during Night fall was a common problem for both men and women with
23.2 % of the respondents reporting that defecating at night time being challenging due to
lack of lighting in the streets and surroundings. During night times, searching for an open
space was a herculean task. Insects and snake bites and mosquitoes were the added problems.
This forced people resorting to defecating on road sides especially during night times.
An attack by pigs was another menace faced by the people whenever they ventured
out for defecation in fields, as reported by 5.3% of the respondents. Many a times, the attack
would be violent, fractures to the elderly. Children were traumatised and would always want
company to go to the fields.
Rainy season would create further additional trouble with water stagnating on roads,
thus making defecation in fields/places extremely murky and unhygienic. Rainy season was a
crisis period in terms of the spread of diseases and infections. Stagnant water would facilitate
the spread of infections and diseases in view of increase in mosquitoes and flies and the
resultant conditions unhygienic situation with foul smell and the loss of aesthetics. Water
bodies like lakes, rivers, tanks and ponds got contaminated with the practice of open
defecation. 10.41% of the water bodies observed were contaminated, making it unfit for
consumption.
Constraints Involved in Construction of Toilets
Financial Restriction and Reluctance to Invest in Toilet Construction
The finance problem was reported as the major constraint encountered to construct
toilets, since most of the people in rural areas live on daily wages which makes it difficult for
them to afford toilet construction. Access to financial assistance was reported as the best
motivator for taking up toilets construction. Thus, Parishudh Initiative helped many
households with direct cash and in some cases, in the form of construction materials.
However, there were examples, wherein people could afford but were not willing to invest in
toilet construction and reported financial constraints as the reason. People were willing to
invest in gadgets like LED TV sets, mobile phones by every member of the family, but not in
toilets indicating the mindset and preferences of people.
Insufficient space
Insufficient space was a major constraint for households in rural areas, as reflected by
27.70 % of respondents having limited space for construction of private toilets. Besides, in
many of the villages, the village layout was not well planned and haphazard. Hence,
community toilets and group toilets were preferred. Cultural factors/belief systems and
preferences determined the location and usage of toilets which had to be accommodated
within the limited space. For instance, several households i.e. 85 % had preferred to have
toilets built outside their houses as compared to 14% of households wanting to have toilets
constructed inside their houses.
Scarcity of water
Water scarcity was another major demotivating factor as far as the construction of
private toilets. Gulbarga and Bidar respondents reported water scarcity as a major concern as
compared to other districts.
18
Being used to Open defecation
Several of the respondents practiced open defecation and were used to it and were not
keen on changing their habits. Besides, open defecation being such a natural part of their
lives, it was mentioned that it did not occur to them that they need to have/use toilets.
Figure 3: Causal Factors for Not Opting for Toilet Construction
Source: Primary survey
Note: Percentage figures do not add up to hundred due to Multiple Responses
Post Toilet Construction – Challenges for Usage
Lack of Water Availability Affects Toilet Usage
Toilet usage and water availability were directly related. During six months of
adequate water supply, people would use toilets and for the rest of the year; they were forced
to defecate in the open due to water scarcity. 28.29 % expressed poor access to water due to
failed bore wells and lack of other alternative sources. In few other places, there was
adequate water available, but inadequate power supply and frequent power cuts were a major
problem for water accessibility (Figure 4). For instance, people in Suntanur Village of
Gulbarga Taluk, Gulbarga District would experience a severe scarcity especially during
summer. On an average family would devote nearly 12 hours a day to fetch water.
Figure 4: Poor Accessibility to Water
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
Insufficient space
Scarcity of water
use to open
defecation
Financial constraint
Didn’t occur
19
Source: Primary survey
Misconceptions
People felt that the soak pits would get filled up soon if used every day. Another
reason was their speculation regarding water leakage caused while flushing toilets might flow
out of the toilet. These misconceptions mainly hamper the usage rate of toilets in many
villages. In certain cases, this belief increased the construction cost of toilets as people
constructed pits thrice in size to the prescribed one. To address these issues, explaining to the
beneficiaries more about the technical aspects of the structure became important.
Neighbours’ Objections
The households having toilets faced neighbours’ objections as the neighbours
believed that odour from the toilet would make their living difficult. Some of them who
constructed toilets had specifications about the location of toilet in that the living rooms and
toilets should not be constructed in the same premises. The preference to construct the toilets
outside the house, though within their own premises, was objected to by 4.71 % of the
neighbours.
Adapting to new habits was a challenge
We also observed that it was difficult for people to change their set habits. Several
reasons that people expressed were (i) felt restricted in a closed environment (ii) felt self-
conscious to enter a toilet (iii) Felt scared (iv) men felt open defecation was more
comfortable; (v) Younger women preferred to defecate openly as that is the only time
freedom they have available for them for interactions with peers and sharing (vi) children
were not used to using toilets (vii) used to open defecation and so difficult to break the
practice; (viii) the concept of using a small room for defecation causes discomfort; (ix)
restricted ventilation and no fresh air in closed rooms
Constructed toilets for other reasons
There were several reasons expressed that people constructed toilets but not used
them. (i) not used to toilets but wanted to have private toilets since neighbours had
constructed toilets (ii) may be useful during emergencies (nightfall, sickness) and make use
of funds provided (iii) better to construct toilets as funds are provided and may be used for
storage purposes
Gradual increase in Usage Levels
1.96 1.18 0.39 0.39 1.18 1.38
6.48
2.95 3.14 1.38
4.32
6.29
10.22
28.29
0.98 0.39
1.57 2.95
Bidar Bijapur Gulbarga Koppal Raichur Yadagir GrandTotal
WaterScarcityPooracess Others
20
There was gradual change observed in the usage of toilets among all sections of the
society with an increase in the percentage of people using toilets i.e. 85.8% of households.
Among the family members’ women and elderly were using toilets regularly as compared,
6.48 % of men using toilets rarely (during rainy season/ill health) and 3.54 % during night
time. 14.15 % of households not using toilets are a matter of concern.
Figure 5: Status of Toilet Usage across the Districts (%)
Source: Primary survey
Toilet Models and Preferences
Technology is an important aspect which needs to suit the various aspects like
locality, climatic and socio-economic conditions besides being user-friendly. Total Sanitation
Program in India, with the limited technological options it offers, is not suitable to cater to the
diverse socio-economic (poor/tribal areas), geographical (hills, deserts etc.), geo-hydrological
conditions (low/high water areas). In India, providing environmentally safe sanitation
facilities is challenging for; the introduction of new technologies can challenge people’s
tradition and beliefs (Asian Development Bank Report, 2009). Parishudh Initiative, founded
by the Infosys Foundation identified certain technologies that could be suitable to the
Northern Karnataka regions keeping in view the soil conditions and water availability. The
models installed and peoples responses are discussed in the table were
Models Features
Implementation and Experiences
17.88
5.89
14.15 12.57 9.63
25.74
85.85
1.18 0.98 4.13 1.57 2.36 3.93
14.15
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Bidar Bijapur Gulbarga Koppal Raichur Yadgir Total
Usage Nonusage
21
Single pit
model - Septic tanks were more in demand
- User-friendly and durable
- A simple structure with single pit septic tank
- Relatively quick to construct.
- Brick/cement blocks used for walls
- Gulbarga has a hard rocky bed under the
soil which prevents wastewater getting
absorbed. Hence, wastewater flow from
toilets is channelled through
underground drains or is let out into pits
of short depths to be soaked up beside
the toilets
- 51% respondents adopted septic tank
model,
- 24% adopted leach pit and 21% twin pit
models
Septic Tank
Traditional
Model
- Brick and mortar used for toilet building.
- The model has two pit plastered septic tank.
- Material and manual labour intensive/highly
durable
- Sludge can be poured out
- Costs - 80 % more than low cost models
- Popular in Koppal and Raichur districts,
people have adopted leach pit and twin
pit models due to presence of rocky
beds Common model used in places
where UDG is absent
Stone
Biotech
Model
- Special cleaning material like natural detergents -
Salt, Coal and Antawala/Rita used to ensure that
microbes are not destroyed.
-
A
cceptable but not popular as people were
not following guidelines
Prefabricated
Toilet - Easy to install as prefabricated elsewhere
- People were convinced with its utility and found it
user-friendly
- Popularly adopted in Yeragunta,
Raichur
Septic Tank
connected to
Biogas
- Cost effective and subsidised by Government
- Slurry is an added value and has high demand,
residue sold at Rs 3000 per ton
-Socially acceptable without any cultural
restraint and was successful. Around 272
biogas based toilets across Gulbarga and
Davanagere.
Twin Pit
Model - Consists two alternating pits connected to a pour
flush toilet. Solids are sufficiently dewatered,
removed and reused as manure.
- Low operating costs but relatively high investment
costs
- Twin pits were constructed so that when one is
filled, the other one is used until the filled one is
emptied and relocated.
- Not applicable in hard rock soil, high
ground water levels or areas prone to
flooding
Ecological
Sanitation
(Eco-san
Model)
- Based on ‘closing the loop approach (Nutrient
Cycling)’, where urine and faeces are regarded as
resources rather than waste
-
A
lthough ecosan toilets are more
environment friendly and requires
minimum use of water, it was not
acceptable due to its high costs and
design
22
Group
Toilets - Minimises construction costs
- Constructed in common location - used and
maintained by individual families
- Community toilets and group toilets were
preferred due to lack of space. (Belegere
village, Yadgir district), .
Figure 6: Technology Adopted
Source: Primary Survey, 2013
The most commonly used technology was the conventional design i.e., Septic tanks –
brick wall – RCC roof were used for toilet construction and were selected based on the soil
structure.
Satisfaction Levels on Models Adopted
Parishudh worked towards making the technology user-friendly after analysing
technical factors like soil texture, durability, cost, style and pattern etc. 98.23 % were
satisfied with the models adopted.
Figure 7: Beneficiaries Satisfaction on Toilet Models
Source: Primary survey
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
Bidar Bijapur Gulbarga Koppal Raichur Yadgir Total
Percentage
TwinPit% LeachPit% SpecticTank% Stonebiotech%
0.00
50.00
100.00
Bidar Bijapur Gulbarga Koppal Raichur Yadgir
18.47 6.68 17.88 13.95 11.98 29.27
98.23
0.59 0.20 0.39 0.20 0.00 0.39 1.77
Satisifed Unsatisfed
23
It is important that models that are discussed prior implementation with household
members by involving them at all stages as it influences usage patterns. However, there were
some households in villages of Raichur who complained of mosquitoes and foul smell in the
vicinity of the toilets. Such aspects have to be considered and taken care of while adopting
technologies in the future. Similarly, although ecosan toilets are more environmentally
friendly and require minimum usage of water, it was not acceptable to the people due to its
high costs and design. However, interestingly biogas model proved to be socially acceptable
and successful in some villages. People did not have any cultural restraint using biogas for
cooking and may be attributed to the role of strong and influential self-help women groups in
promoting biogas based toilets.
Parishudh Approach
Involving and participation of all stakeholders from the initiation of the project has
led to good governance of the PI. The process of implementation includes components of
replicability, awareness and design. The processes were planned in collaboration with a local
NGO via, identification of villages, feasible design options, finances, coalition, time frames,
bank procedures, and coverage and so on. Progress tracking and monitoring strategies were
planned for ensuring transparency and accountability. An Advisory Committee supervised
the work progress and provided suggestions. Anticipating risks in view of failure, strategies
to overcome them were planned. As for Legal and Contract Management, all the legal MOUs
had been signed for ensuring conflict-free management and quality work assurance.
Schedules and Formats had been so designed as to ensure clarity and progress in respect of all
aspects of work-construction, finance and quality. Awareness creation and management of
specific goals and approaches were the other important components that worked towards
ensuring sustainability of the project.
Orientation to the Parishudh Staff on a regular basis helped them introspect,
communicate, understand about resolving issues at the field level. For instance, during
weekly, they would decide on good/medium/no response villages. Besides, they would also
make a list of the technologies identified for a given village and a structured checklist about
the time lines which would help them follow up on tasks. Targets were set supported with
motivation through recognition helped retain enthusiasm among the staff members. Besides,
daily meetings lasting about 15 min with the team members helped them keep track of status
and progress of toilet construction.
The Parishudh team consisted of 20 members apart from the Information Education
and Communication (IEC) team. Members were grouped into different sub teams - (1)
Inspection team (construction) (2) Global Positioning System Team (3) Incentive team (4)
Co-coordinators team. The process began with a team of 5 Parishudh staff consulting the GP
members/other influential persons (at least 4 pro-active members) and sensitise them about
PI. Education and awareness creation programmes were held to promote good sanitation
practices by distributing pamphlets, brochures and film screening. Date and time for
conducting the IEC programs were planned in consultation with the people to ensure
maximum participation.
Awareness Creation Sessions
IEC team carried out door –to-door visits covering more than 5000 houses to spread
the concept of safe and improved sanitation. Between October 2011 and February 2012, 75
24
sessions were conducted across 60 plus villages with more than 25,000 families attending the
sessions, followed further by smaller follow up and awareness sessions. House listing was
done and for the persons who showed interest in constructing toilets was provided with
applications. A tentative plan was drawn up for the identification of space for toilets to be
built and specific aspects like technology and type of toilets etc. A time limit was also set for
the construction of toilets, which helped assess their enthusiasm. Incentives were given on the
completion of toilet construction. The PI team would also request these enrolled persons to
encourage at least 5 other persons to construct toilets, which worked out effectively. Finally,
Nirmal Gram Samithis were formed with volunteers to work and motivate others to construct
toilets.
Innovativeness in Convincing the Beneficiaries - The team used various innovative ways
to motivate the beneficiaries. For instance, team members reached out to people of lower
caste groups and convinced them to construct toilets. Once the lower caste households
constructed toilets, they would use this as a means to convince the upper caste families
informing them about the completed toilets among the lower caste households. Thus, the
team indirectly, used the construction of toilets as a status symbol. Similarly, they would
speak to the newly wedded grooms to ensure safety and privacy for their young wives. This
appealed to majority of the young men and they constructed toilets immediately.
The team involved at all stages till the construction of toilets was complete including
the delivery of incentives. Issues arising during the construction phase would be rectified and
proper guidance provided throughout. The team would visit the households 5 times at various
stages from initiation to completion. This ensured confidence among the beneficiaries,
leading to increased enrolments for toilet construction. Exposure Visits to Model Villages of
village leaders to villages that had achieved 100% sanitation motivated them to initiate the
program in their respective villages.
Special Awareness Drives – People living in villages have great respect to religious Gurus.
PI involved local Gurujis and their associates to deliver speeches on sanitation. Five such
exclusive sessions were held. Besides, even in all public meetings, the significance of
sanitation was stressed, not missing any opportunity to promote sanitation.
Involving Volunteers - Volunteers from Infosys Foundation, Bangalore visited households in
villages during weekends promoting importance of sanitation. Children were also involved as
agents of change. A competition on rural hygiene and sanitation was conducted in January
2012 in 1200 schools across five districts of North Karnataka. Over 10,000 students from
500+ schools participated in the essay, speech and drawing competitions.
25
Plate 6: IEC Program
Toilet Summits – Three toilet summits, representing more than 55 villages, each with more
than 300 participants were held. The summit included motivational speeches, brain storming
sessions, showcasing of best practices and sharing of experiences popularising the importance
of sanitation. Prototypes and display of artefacts were constructed for visual display and
understanding about sanitation. (Plate 7).
Plate 7: Toilet Summit
Mass media - Participation in government programs, updates to the press regarding the
initiative etc. were used for creating awareness among the public. Press updates were popular
with more than 50% of the Gram Panchayats in these districts.
26
Plate 8: Newspaper Clippings on PI
Volunteer’s network- Volunteers belonging to varied backgrounds played a major role in
promoting the construction of toilets. About 1000 volunteers worked with the Parishudh team
roped in from the existing institutions - village leaders, religious heads, young men and
women, self-help group members, former Panchayat members and so on. The role of
volunteers was intense and involvement at every stage was ensured. Volunteers had to make
10 visits before the toilet construction was complete. Several volunteers had spent money
initially to ensure the construction of toilets which was later paid back by the users in
instalments indicating motivation of leaders and goodwill and trust amongst the people.
Models to suit local situations
Loan Repayment Approach – PI was initiated in collaboration with NGO called SPREAD,
Raichur. Agencies used the funds provided by Parishudh and worked out a sustainable model.
The NGO primarily identified Self-help groups (SHGs) across different villages, while at the
same time; awareness about the PI scheme was popularised. The NGO’s approach was to
create a repayment model, not a one-time incentive, to aid SHGs have rotating funds to
increase the number of toilet construction. SHG members had to sign an agreement after
which construction material for toilet construction worth Rs 8000 was provided to each
individual household. On completion of toilet construction, households repaid monthly
instalments.
Cost Effective Model - Parishudh Team collaborated with Indus Foundation, an NGO
operating in Koppal for promoting the construction of toilets. Indus Foundation manufactured
fabricated toilet models and the cost was met by Parishudh Initiative and NBA scheme of the
government. The beneficiaries did not have to contribute towards owning toilet and this joint
initiative turned out to be successful.
27
Maintaining a Data Base and Ensuring Accountability
Parishudh adopted GIS technology for maintenance of accurate data.
“Salesforce.com”, cloud computing software was used to cover details of each beneficiary,
village, GP, phone number, status of his toilet construction etc. Besides these, the details of
payment, incentive provided etc. was also covered. Thus, this software has enabled accuracy,
accountability status and effective reporting. The other software used is the “Poimapper”,
wherein photograph of all individual toilets built with its longitude and latitude position is
mapped. To check and avoid misappropriation of toilet construction, 600 GPS were installed.
To sum up, the initiative taken up by the Infosys Foundation has been laudable. Since
Northern districts of Karnataka state indicates the need for improved sanitation compared to
other districts, the initiative was implemented in selected districts. Overall the program is
successful and was able to meet more than the planned target of 10,000 (11,000 constructed)
toilets within the stipulated one year.
Policy Options for improving Governance
Enhanced Governance Initiatives
Need for a plan document with respect to achieving an open defecation free
city/village through improving toilet access is important. There is a need for a systematic
understanding of the ground realities and formulate the plan by involving stakeholders. This
should cut across departments and agencies, institutions, experts, community to gather views
and options to make it a complete document. Another pressing need is for improving data and
information systems. For instance, with respect to Bengaluru, currently, the data on slums is
being documented by the Directorate of Municipal Administration, using the GIS software
which is a welcome initiative. However, it is also important to work towards upgrading the
available data by capturing the field situations. For instance this was adopted in the Parishudh
Case discussed above. Effectual data base using GIS and GPS technology for the
maintenance of accurate data has been effective way to use technology integration to
sanitation aspects. The software enabled in accuracy and accountability status and effective
reporting of the information.
Another important component required is maintaining transparency and accountability
by streamlining processes with checks and balances at all levels. In the PI case discussed,
progress tracking and monitoring strategies had been strategically planned for ensuring
transparency and accountability. Achieving the goal and meeting specific targets were the
other important components that worked towards ensuring sustainability of the project by
promoting healthy competition among the employees. A vision to attain total sanitation had
been put in place phase-wise with a specific time frame. Schedules and Formats had been
designed as to ensure clarity and progress of all aspects - work-construction, finance and
quality. An Advisory Committee supervised the work progress besides providing suggestions.
It is noteworthy to understand that the programme implementation of PI was based on
effective planning and dynamic process as it helped evolve during the process and rectify
problems they encountered. Apart from this, the processes of implementation had been
worked out in detail including the components of replicability, awareness and design which
was prepared in consultation with all the grass root employees, hence ground realities were
intertwined within the design. The execution processes had also been intricately planned in
collaboration with a local NGO with respect to location identification, feasible design
28
options, finances, coalition, time frames, bank procedures and coverage and so on. This
further aided in understanding the local contexts, demand and preferences of the local people.
Rewards and recognition approach at various levels can also go a long way in motivating all
the stakeholders concerned.
As for Legal and Contract Management, all the legal MOUs were signed for ensuring
conflict-free management and quality work assurance. Risk Management had been well
planned. Issues of conflicts, finance mismanagement, withdrawal after acceptance were
issues encountered and were handled in consultation with the team members.
Stakeholder Participation
Stakeholders have to be part of the programme from the inception of the project. This
was an important learning from all the successful cases reviewed 5. Involvement of
stakeholders at all the stages of planning and implementation with roles and responsibilities
made clear would provide a platform for negotiation, expression of views and sorting
problems. Community involvement, involving women is important as they play an important
role in promoting and maintaining hygienic practices in a sustainable manner which have
been reiterated in several studies. Case studies from other cities have indicated that NGOs
play an important role in awareness creation and community motivation. Political will at the
ward level have improved sanitation services. Also, there are several volunteer groups and
institutions working on improving sanitary conditions in slums. To ensure that their efforts
last after intervention, education is the key to make the urban poor responsible. PI case has
proven to be a success with involvement of stakeholders, Personal visits and continuous
follow ups at all stages of toilet construction. Besides, monitoring at all stages aided in
rectifying problems, if any.
Education and Awareness
Promoting awareness in a way that is effective is important for sustainability of any
programme. This was observed across all the success stories we reviewed during the study6.
One emotional health benefit observed across several studies was related to prestige. Several
individuals, toilet construction and usage were seen as an entry for achieving a good life
(Jenkins and Curtis, 2005). Effective dissemination of knowledge and information has to be
innovative. Interesting approaches suggested by Jack Sim, a leading social entrepreneur and
Founder of the World Toilet Organisation (WTO) can be tried in some slums. Jack Sim
believes that toilets have to be made fashionable, desirable as a matter of status, pride, and
convenience. Also, toilets have to be made desirable in design, colour and aesthetics, to
provide choice. Addressing the psyche of people effectively to get positive results as people
by nature are insecure and look for ways to show supremacy, pride etc. Hence, in the context
of social pressures would want to own a toilet if their neighbours have them. Promoting
through ads with celebrities featuring is seen as a certain way to promote a sustainable usage
of toilets. Travel to urban areas and exposure to urban life style, through government jobs,
education and marketing of commercial produce transforms perceptions about open
defecation. Awareness of other lifestyles where open defecation is not practiced makes
people to question their current practices and feel open defecation as a sense of
embarrassment, a barrier towards a superior lifestyle and status. In other words, usage of
toilets will be seen as a modern or luxurious activity. This was supported by a study
5 17 case studies representing states and cities were reviewed and lessons drawn.
29
conducted by O’Reilly and Louis (2014) in India and found similar results regarding the
influences of urban lifestyles.
As seen in Parishudh Initiative, special awareness drives included involving religious
heads, political leaders etc. to influence toilet construction. During weekends, employees of
Inforsys Foundation volunteered to sensitise people on sanitation. Programmes to include
children by having painting competitions about sanitation also helped considerably.
Organising toilets summits, toilet exhibitions were advantageous as it was visual and gave
scope for more awareness and understanding. All these events had broad coverage at media
level making it a point of attraction and pride to the villagers who achieved 100% toilet
construction. This motivated the neighbouring villages to opt for the programme and visits
were organised for neighbouring villages to visit the village with toilets constructed, thus,
turning it into a movement towards improving sanitation.
Design is Vital
Design is another important aspect as it impacts access as well as usage to a large
extent. There is need for improved toilet designs – low cost lighting, ventilation, and user
friendly options. Toilets must be designed in ways as to shape positive user behaviour.
Understanding the dynamics, ergonomics and all the behavioural issues is important prior to
designing. Topography and soil conditions are to be considered prior to construction. Designs
should be context-specific as the slums are severely congested and unplanned. There is scope
for innovation in equipment to improve cleaning efficiency to avoid people from cleaning
toilets with flimsy equipment/bare hands. Alternate options/preferences like e-toilets, bamboo
toilets, eco-toilets are desirable so that installing newer designs/options toilet types where
people are more pro-active to see its applicability. Delhi Urban Arts Commission organised a
competition with respect to public toilets where designs and prototypes of ergonomically
designed on-site assembled high tech toilets were shortlisted for installation in slums. These
toilets are pre-fabricated, easily installable and can be maintained easily, besides being
economical. Bamboo toilet is another innovative design, cost effective, eco-friendly and easy
to build.
PI highlighted the ways in which technological issues were addressed. Technological
options in toilet designs like -Stone-biotech model, septic tank model, ring pit model have
helped in overcoming some of the geological limitations in the region and also managing
with limited water in water scarce regions. Biogas model was a success in few villages.
Besides, preferences of the users were taken into consideration which is most important
aspect of improving sanitation. It provided an option for them to choose the model, cost to
suit their conditions.
Community Empowerment
It is crucial to develop leadership qualities across gender and age to promote various
activities, of which sanitation can be one among them. However, understanding the
community’s psyche before undertaking the leadership programme and designing it
accordingly is important, while keeping the larger approaches of leadership same. Using
existing networks for upgrading water and sanitation systems would be effective with several
networks in place via, religious organisations, women help groups, youth organisations.
Training people to operate systems and handling simple technical problem would be useful.
This will empower them to resolve issues without depending on external help or delay in
handling problems that do not need specialised intervention.
30
In the PI, an interesting component of the program that can aid in implementing large
scale implementation and may be cost effective is tapping of the social capital. It was
interesting to watch the volunteers narrate stories of their zeal to spread sanitation awareness
and increase the numbers of toilets constructed. In total, more than 1000 volunteers
contributed to the success of the program.
People’s Preferences matter
It is of utmost importance to involve the community during the construction of toilets
besides ensuring that they are comfortable with the design and the technology type of toilets.
People have strong views which have to be taken into account while implementing
programmes, else, toilets do not get used, defeating the very purpose. For instance, in some
slums people felt that the size of the toilets were small, similarly, in another slum, people
were not comfortable with toilet cum bathing facility in one unit, thus, affecting usage.
Identification of the location of individual/public toilets should be undertaken by involving
the community. For instance, culturally, majority of the people living in slums have been
used to open defecation for a long time, more so because, they happen to be migrants, hence
prefer public toilets compared to individual toilets. In other cases, people from different
communities are reluctant to using common toilets. Within a house, men and women using
toilets located in same complex is not acceptable, hence practice open defecation.
In the PI case, there were innovative ways used to manage this wherein monitoring
and evaluating the construction of the toilets and its quality. Depending on the context, the
toilet models, design, costs were tailor made to suit the requirements of the beneficiaries.
This is also an important lesson to learn as it included the preference of the beneficiaries.
Improving Financial Management
It would be useful to think of innovative ways to improve finances to improve toilet
usage and also use toilet complexes and drawn from review of best practices that are
applicable to Bengaluru. Financial assistance may be provided for the construction of
individual toilets by agencies, Banks or any other financial institutions with proper tie-ups.
The success stories have depicted that this has been a positive initiative, particularly with
women. Defining contributions wherein households can be given the option of contributions
either in cash or kind. Besides, people can be employed for monitoring the maintenance of
toilets. This model has been successful in Tamil Nadu. The usual practice in respect of
operations and maintenance is to levy user charges wherein evasion of payment is an issue.
There is scope for collecting funds well in advance and the use of token system has worked
well mostly. Another interesting approach is to tap Corporate Social Responsibility7 Funds
for improving Toilet Access. There are various initiatives in water and sanitation sector in the
country, for instance- Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited (HUDCO) is
also undertaking several CSR activities. Specific to toilet infrastructure, HUDCO has
extended support for construction of Community/Pay and Use Toilets in Kotputli, Kota,
Rajasthan, Seemapuri, Delhi, Bangalore Rural Dist, Karnataka etc. Similarly, as a part of the
“Swachh Bharat Mission”, the Public Sector Undertakings under the Ministries of Power,
Coal and New & Renewable Energy plan to construct 50,000 toilets in schools across the
7 Recently, The Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India has notified the section 135 of
the Companies Act, 2013 along with Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014 to make it mandatory (effective from April 2014), to comply with the provision relevant to
Corporate Social Responsibility. Under CSR guidelines, all Central Public Sector Enterprises
(CPSE) are supposed to spend a certain earmarked fund each year in creating and sustaining
socially beneficial projects.
31
country. Several other corporates like TCS, Toyota Kirloskar, Bharti Foundation and Ambuja
Cements are constructing toilets. Specific to Bengaluru, Wipro Limited has constructed toilet
blocks in the government school of Vivekanagar. In the case of PI, financing for toilet
construction and building trust with people was a challenging responsibility. It was important
for the Parishudh coordinators to enable that the promised subsidy reached them on time to
ensure trust and confidence among the people. The focus was to motivate people to construct
toilets; hence, all ways were explored to complete the task.
Novel Ideas for Value Added Benefits
There is good scope for innovative value added services that benefit the slum
residents as is evident from reviewed case studies. Wealth from waste - Biogas for common
cooking, can become a win – win situation for both the slum dwellers and the implementing
agencies in achieving open defecation free slums. Slum residents are provided with
community toilets fuelled by methane gas generated from human waste. While designing
public toilets, installing innovative structures of conserving natural resources can be
attempted. This is adopted by Triratna Prerana Mandal where solar panels have been installed
in managed toilet blocks of Mumbai. The solar panels generate electricity to meet the lighting
demand of the toilet complex, office and computer institute cutting power costs by 40% .
Implementation of rain water harvesting initiative aids water conservation as well.
Similarly, the Rewards Approach or Social Capital Credits Approach can be
promoted. This approach has interesting components like - partnering with municipal
agencies and leveraging public infrastructure for creating community, tapping hub of
commerce with scope for creating job opportunities, habit formation through focusing on the
key rational and emotional behaviour, promoting workable reward initiatives, maintenance
through human-centred bottom-up design, deconstruction of decision making process.
Similarly, another interesting approach has been the ‘Social Capital Credits’ (SoCCs),
constitutes a new medium of exchange to reward socially relevant tasks undertaken by
individuals and the community, which will be redeemed for critical products and services.
Communities or individuals can earn SoCCs for various tasks like managing waste, planting
trees etc., where SoCCs earned can be redeemed for products and services like water filters,
health check-ups, loans etc. The above approaches have not been tried in slums of Bengaluru
and would be an interesting way to involve community. SOCCs approach has been used
successfully in some cities in India, Costa Rica, Ghana, Kenya.
Several institutions and interventions are involved in providing improved sanitation
facilities; however, complete sanitation access is yet to be achieved in Bengaluru city. The
findings of the study highlight the complexities involved in providing toilet access, reasons
for the persistence of open defecation across the study slums and the major problems
encountered with no access to toilets. It is possible to improve toilet access and usage in
slums if the interventions if appropriate interventions are made. In totality, sanitation
challenge is complex and has to be addressed holistically to attain the goal.
With reference to PI, there was ample scope given to the employees to implement
innovatively. For instance, the partnership taken with a local NGO in Raichur to implement
the programme has been innovative and within the broader framework of implementable
guidelines. The NGO evolved an approach where the beneficiaries would deposit the fund in
instalments into the SHG so that it served as a revolving fund for others to construct toilets.
Similarly, the staff’s working in the grassroots were given freedom to influence the people.
This motivated them to think creatively to influence people to construct toilets. The staff
32
explored local strengths - using local resources, tapping the success of SHGs, influence of the
religious leaders/political leader, motivating the youth etc. by understanding the local
dynamics.
Conclusion
Providing access to toilets is one of the sanitation aspects that need to be addressed
urgently to improve health and wellbeing of urban and rural poor. Several issues discussed
have highlighted the concerns related to toilet access among the poor. Based on our study, we
have highlighted several policy options suitable to both urban and rural contexts. To sum up,
we see there is large scope for improvement in governance and it needs to be holistic
inclusive of socio-economic and cultural dimensions keeping in view local contexts and their
connectedness with the respective institutions providing sanitation facilities. Focus should be
more on the demand, requirement, convenience rather than quantification. Innovation in
awareness and communication plays a significant role while stakeholder participation is
crucial as preferences matter. There is large scope for innovative options like newly initiated
e-toilets role in Bengaluru, drawn from Kerala’s experience. Using technology to improve
database besides transparency and accountability is an interesting option. Similarly, the
biogas option that was successful in few villages can be popularised, it has worked
successfully in urban slum of Chennai as well. Intervention in rural contexts proved to have
positive implications on health and wellbeing of people, particularly women.
References
Ahluwalia, Montek (2011) “Prospects and Policy Challenges in the Twelfth Plan”, Economic
& Political Weekly, 46(21): 88-105.
Ana Hardoy et al (2005). Governance for water and sanitation services in low income
settlements: experiences with partnership based management in Moreno, Buenos Aires,
Environment and Urbanization, Vol 17 No 1 April 2005
Annual Report 2013-14, Karnataka Slum Development Board
Asian Development Bank. 2009. India’s Sanitation for All: How to Make it
Happen. © Asian Development Bank.
Benjamin, S. (2000). Governance, economic settings and poverty in Bangalore. Environment
and Urbanization , 12 ( 35), 1 - 23.
Berna I.V. (2006). India: From Alienation to an Empowered Community - Applying a
Gender Mainstreaming Approach to a Sanitation Project. In: Office of the Special Adviser on
Gender Issues and Advancement of Women, Gender, water and sanitation case studies on
best practices. New York, United Nations.
Bert van Woersem, Mark Keen, Edwin van Someren, (2011), Water Supply and Sanitation
Collaborative Council (WSSCC) External Review 2005 - 2010 Final Report, April 2011, IOD
PARC, UK
Bhagat (2011), Emerging Pattern of Urbanisation in India, Economic and Political Weekly,
August 20, 2011 vol XLVI no 34
33
Census of India, 201, Government of India.
Reed A Craig, (1961), The impact of mass society on rural communities, M.S. Thesis,
Columbus, Ohio State University.
Diligent Media Corporation India, (2014) Cabinet nod to 5 year long Swachh Bharat
Mission’ September.
Krishna Prasad Sigdel, (2014), Sanitation, Hygiene and Nepal’s Scenario.
Karina Derksen - Schrock, Kate Schneider, Mary Kay Gugerty and Claus
Pörtner, (2010), Sustainable Agricultural Productivity Recommended Readings EPAR
Brief No. 103, Prepared for the Agricultural Development Goals
Deliberation Group Of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, November 8.
Datta Pranati, (2006); ‘Urbanisation in India’, paper presented at European Population
Conference, 21-24 June, 2006.
Dasra (2012), Squatting rights: access to toilets in urban India, Report, Mumbai.
Harpham and Kwasi Boateng, (1997).Urban Governance in Relation to the Operation of
Urban Services in Developing Countries, Elsevier Science Ltd, Pergamon, HABITATINTL.
Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 65-77, 1991
Jenkins MW, Curtis V. (2005). Achieving the 'good life': why some people want latrines in
rural Benin, Soc Sci Med. 2005 Dec; 61(11): 2446-59. Epub Jun 9, 2005
Kulkarni, V. and Ramachandra T.V. (2006). Environmental Management, Commonwealth Of
Learning, Canada and Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru.
Kundu (2011): “Politics and Economics of Urban Growth”, Economic & Political Weekly,
46(20): 10-12.
Kathleen O’Reilly and Elizabeth Louis (2014), The toilet tripod: Understanding successful
sanitation in rural India, Health and Place, Volume 29, September 2014, Pages 43–51
Manasi S, Latha N, (2016), ’Pathways to Sanitation: Growing Challenges and Access to
Urban Poor - A Study of Bangalore City’CRUA Report 2, Institute for Social and Economic
Change, Bangalore.
Manasi S, Sunil Nautiyal, B.R. Hemalatha, S. Poornima, M.S. Shruthi (2013) Towards
Improving Rural Sanitation in Karnataka -Understanding the Institutional Dynamics,
Performance and Benefits of Constructing Private Toilets under Infosys Foundation Assisted
Project – Parishudh Initiative, CEENR Report, 2013, Institute for Social and Economic
Change, Bangalore.
Nelson Ekane, Bjorn Nykvist, Marianne Kjellén, Stacey Noel and Nina Weitz, (2015) Multi-
level sanitation governance: understanding and overcoming challenges in the sanitation sector
in sub-Saharan Africa, Published Online: January 30, 2015
34
Rajaraman, D, Travasso S, Heymann J. (2013). A qualitative study of access to sanitation
amongst low-‐income working women in Bangalore, India. Journal of Water, Sanitation and
Hygiene for Development, 3(3):432-440
Rogers M Everett, (1965). Diffision of Innovations, The Free Press, New Yotk. Habitat Intl.
Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 65-77
Ramani V Shyama, Shuan SadreGhazi, Suraksha Gupta, (2016), Catalysing innovation for
social impact: the role of social enterprises in the Indian Sanitation Sector, Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, (in press).
Sanbergen, Loes-Schenk (1996), “Women, water and sanitation in the slums of Bangalore: a
case study of action research” in Schenk, H (editor), Living in lndia’s Slums: A Case Study
of Bangalore’, New Delhi: IDPAD: Manohar
Sridhar, Kala Seetharam and A.Venugopala Reddy (2011). Investment and economic
opportunities: Urbanization, infrastructure and governance in the north and south of India,
Asia Pacific Development Journal (UNESCAP), 18 (1) June 2011: 1-46.
Tanu Kulkarni, ‘More than a lakh households in Bangalore don’t have toilets’ The Hindu
date 07 August, 2012
Trudy Harpham and Kwasi A. Boateng, Couvrieht Q (1997), Urban Governance in Relation
to the Operation of Urban Services in Developing Countries, Elsevier Science Ltd South
Bank University, London, UK
The World Bank, Brief on Sanitation: Facts, Figures, Resources, September 23, (2014)
available at http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/sanitation/brief/sanitation-facts-figures-
resources
Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborate Council, (2010)
Websites referred
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.936.5197&rep=rep1&type=pdf
http://www.who.int/choice/demography/seasian_region/en/
http://www.who.int/topics/sanitation/en/
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/8680WTD_Concept.pdf
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=13&nr=1785&menu=16
34
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15949883
athttp://www.developmentbookshelf.com/doi/abs/10.3362/1756-3488.2014.024
35
http://www.dasra.org/pdf/SquattingRights_Report.pdf
http://trn.gorkhapatraonline.com/index.php/op-ed/4997-sanitation,-hygiene-and-nepal%3Fs-
scenario-krishna-prasad-sigdel.html
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report cabinet – nod – to – 5 - year-
Long - Swachh - Bharat - Mission – 2021333.
http://hdl.handle.net/11540/2535.
https://www.dasra.org/cause/improving-urban-sanitation
TheUNU‐MERITWORKINGPaperSeries
2017-01 TheeconomicimpactofEast‐WestmigrationontheEuropeanUnionbyMartin
KahanecandMariolaPytliková
2017-02 Fosteringsocialmobility:Thecaseofthe‘BonodeDesarrolloHumano’inEcuador
byAndrésMiderosandFranziskaGassmann
2017-03 ImpactoftheGreatRecessiononindustryunemployment:a1976‐2011
comparisonbyYelenaTakhtamanovaandEvaSierminska
2017-04 Labourmobilitythroughbusinessvisitsasawaytofosterproductivityby
MariacristinaPiva,MassimilianoTaniandMarcoVivarelli
2017-05 Countryrisk,FDIflowsandconvergencetrendsinthecontextoftheInvestment
DevelopmentPathbyJonasHubFrenkenandDorcasMbuvi
2017-06 Howdevelopmentaidexplains(ornot)theriseandfallofinsurgentattacksinIraq
byPui‐HangWong
2017-07 Productivityandhouseholdwelfareimpactoftechnologyadoption:Micro‐level
evidencefromruralEthiopiabyTigistMekonnen
2017-08 Impactofagriculturaltechnologyadoptiononmarketparticipationintherural
socialnetworksystembyTigistMekonnen
2017-09 Financingruralhouseholdsanditsimpact:Evidencefromrandomizedfield
experimentdatabyTigistMekonnen
2017-10 U.S.andSovietforeignaidduringtheColdWar:AcasestudyofEthiopiabyTobias
Broich
2017-11 DoauthoritarianregimesreceivemoreChinesedevelopmentfinancethan
democraticones?EmpiricalevidenceforAfricabyTobiasBroich
2017-12 Pathwaysforcapacitybuildinginheterogeneousvaluechains:Evidencefromthe
caseofIT‐enabledservicesinSouthAfricabyCharlotteKeijserandMichikoIizuka
2017-13 Isinnovationdestroyingjobs?Firm‐levelevidencefromtheEUbyMariacristina
PivaandMarcoVivarelli
2017-14 Transitionfromcivilwartopeace:TheroleoftheUnitedNationsandinternational
communityinMozambiquebyAyokunuAdedokun
2017-15 Emergingchallengestolong‐termpeaceandsecurityinMozambiquebyAyokunu
Adedokun
2017-16 Post‐conflictpeacebuilding:Acriticalsurveyoftheliteratureandavenuesfor
futureresearchbyAyokunuAdedokun
2017-17 Effectsofhealthinsuranceonlaboursupply:AsystematicreviewbyNgaLe,Wim
Groot,SonilaM.TominiandFlorianTomini\
2017-18 Challengedbymigration:Europe'soptionsbyAmelieF.ConstantandKlausF.
Zimmermann
2017-19 Innovationpolicy&labourproductivitygrowth:Education,research&
development,governmenteffectivenessandbusinesspolicybyMueidAlRaee,Jo
RitzenandDenisdeCrombrugghe
2017-20 RoleofWASHandAgencyinHealth:Astudyofisolatedruralcommunitiesin
NilgirisandJalpaiguribyShyamaV.Ramani
2017-21 TheproductivityeffectofpublicR&DintheNetherlandsbyLucSoete,Bart
VerspagenandThomasZiesemer
2017-22 Theroleofmigration‐specificandmigration‐relevantpoliciesinmigrantdecision‐
makingintransitbyKatieKuschminderandKhalidKoser
2017-23 RegionalanalysisofsanitationperformanceinIndiabyDebasreeBoseandArijita
Dutta
2017-24 EstimatingtheimpactofsericultureadoptiononfarmerincomeinRwanda:an
applicationofpropensityscorematchingbyAlexisHabiyaremye
2017-25 Indigenousknowledgeforsustainablelivelihoods:Lessonsfromecologicalpest
controlandpost‐harvesttechniquesofBaduy(WestJava)andNguni(Southern
Africa)byLeejaCKorinaandAlexisHabiyaremye
2017-26 Sanitationchallengesofthepoorinurbanandruralsettings:Casestudiesof
BengaluruCityandruralNorthKarnatakabyManasiSeshaiah,LathaNageshand
HemalathaRamesh
