This statement powerfully highlights a critical yet often overlooked truth that true sanitation innovation goes beyond technology; it’s about inclusivity, equity, and understanding human experience. While advancements under initiatives like the Reinvent the Toilet Challenge are transforming how we think about waste treatment and resource recovery, the study reminds us that innovation cannot be fully effective if it leaves anyone behind.Gender-responsive design ensures that sanitation solutions reflect the realities, preferences, and safety concerns of all users  women, men, and gender-diverse individuals alike. The examples shared, such as improving privacy, lighting, and comfort based on direct user feedback, demonstrate how listening to communities can lead to meaningful, practical improvementsHowever, the research also exposes a major gap: while many innovators recognize gender differences, few have the frameworks or confidence to systematically address them. This calls for a shift in how we design, fund, and evaluate sanitation innovations. Gender perspectives must be built into every stage from research and design to implementation and scaling.Collaboration between engineers, social scientists, and end-users can help ensure that new sanitation technologies are not only functional but also socially inclusive and culturally appropriate. Funders and policymakers also play a key role by setting clear expectations for gender integration and providing tools and training to make it achievable.In the end, the goal is simple but profound  to create toilets that truly serve everyone. Because sustainable sanitation is not just about waste management; it’s about dignity, equality, and designing with humanity at the center.

Hi Chaiwe,

Thanks so much for your thoughtful comment and for steering this conversation in such a meaningful direction. I really value your perspective on how designs still fall short in meeting women’s sanitation needs, especially around safety and menstrual hygiene.
When I mentioned that designs often seem to focus more on women, my point was that while we’ve rightly made progress in addressing those long-overlooked areas, we may have unintentionally left some gaps in understanding men’s specific sanitation realities.
For example, many male facilities are designed purely for function open urinals with little to no privacy, poor lighting that discourages night use, or designs that don’t consider older or differently abled men who may need seated or enclosed options. In schools too, boys’ sanitation needs are rarely discussed beyond access, even though privacy and hygiene are just as important for them.
I believe true gender-responsive design isn’t about shifting focus from one group to another it’s about balancing the lens so that no one’s needs are assumed or overlooked. After all, a toilet that works for everyone has to listen to everyone.
Would love to hear more experiences or examples from others on how male-focused or inclusive sanitation designs have been handled in your contexts.
Regards,

Benny

Hi Benny,

Thank you for such an interesting post!

I agree with you and believe that truly impactful innovation should come from the very people who are usually seen as the recipients of services. They should be the drivers of these innovative approaches.

Regarding your point about innovators acknowledging gender needs in designs, but only sparingly implementing them. I completely agree. This is a real challenge on the ground. Too often, we see infrastructure that lacks detailed gender considerations, and I believe there’s much more we can do, especially when serving disadvantaged gender groups and addressing their specific needs, such as those of menstruating persons.

On your observation about how designs address women, I feel that many sanitation designs still fall short of meeting women’s needs, particularly in terms of safety and menstrual hygiene. So I was a bit surprised when I read the comment suggesting that designs are focused on women rather than men. I’d appreciate if you could elaborate a bit more on this, specifically, what gender-related needs for men are currently overlooked, and in what ways are designs falling short for them?

From my experience, there tend to be more urinals available for men, whereas facilities that cater to women’s menstrual hygiene management are often inadequate. These include access to washrooms for privacy, spaces for cleaning up in case of accidents, proper disposal options, and access to sanitary materials such as pads or napkins.

This calls for an interesting discussion. Looking forward to your response and other thoughts from other members. 

Regards,
Chaiwe

Flushing Out Bias: Designing Toilets That Work for Everyone

As the world works toward closing the sanitation gap, innovators are reimagining what toilets can do from safely treating waste onsite to recovering energy and resources. But amid this technological progress, one vital factor still needs greater attention: gender.

A recent study under the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Reinvent the Toilet Challenge (RTTC) explored how gender influences sanitation technology design and innovation. Through surveys and interviews with 41 global R&D teams, the research found that while most innovators acknowledged gender differences, many still integrated them only superficially.

For instance, most designs addressed women's needs around comfort and menstrual hygiene, but few considered the experiences of men or gender-diverse users. Yet even seemingly neutral features like odour control, lighting, or toilet height revealed distinct gendered preferences once user feedback was collected.

Some of the most meaningful improvements came from listening closely to users. One team redesigned their toilets after women expressed privacy concerns about louvred windows, replacing them with ventilation fans that maintained airflow while enhancing safety. Others adjusted lighting and layout to better accommodate the needs of girls and women in schools and public spaces.

The study also revealed that teams with gender-diverse leadership or social science expertise were more likely to integrate gender perspectives effectively. However, many innovators still lacked the confidence, tools, or frameworks to do so consistently.

The message is clear, gender-responsive design isn't optional, it's essential. Toilets must serve everyone safely and comfortably if they are to be sustainable and widely adopted. This calls for stronger collaboration between engineers, social scientists, and communities; clearer gender guidelines in funding programs; and practical tools to help innovators apply gender-lens thinking from the start.

Ultimately, the future of sanitation innovation depends not only on what technology can do, but on how well it understands the people it serves. After all, the best toilet isn't just one that works, it's one that works for everyone.

References

doi.org/10.2166/washdev.2013.090

doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1180

doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112562 ascelibrary.org/doi/full/10.1061/%28ASCE...#core-collateral-c10