Thank you for your replies, Nitya and Cheng.  All sounds great!  I did not realize that this document was intended only for Indian FSM.  I was reading it from a global perspective and believe that it applies globally with the exception you and I noted of the local acronyms about certain organizations.  I would suggest making the document applicable globally by just replacing the acronyms with their more general descriptions (e.g., provincial level government, local government) and then providing the India-specific acronyms in the explanatory document. 

Thank you very much again!  This is a great addition to the sector.  

Hi, Nitya,

I like this decision tree. I am working on FSM as well in China. 

Here is download link from Strande ：

Faecal Sludge Management Systems Approach for Implementation and Operation

iwaponline.com/ebooks/book/384/Faecal-Sl...Systems-Approach-for

Maximum of Attachment file size is only 19Mb. this file exceed limit allowed by configuration. so i can't attach. 

Kind regards

Cheng

Hi James,

Thank you for the comments. The orange box already says safely empty the pit after 2 years, but we can add PPE to it. For the BCC part, we can add a box on top saying we need to study local FSM practices...

Can you share the link to the study from Strande so we can add it to the diagramme.

The diagramme is peculiar to India given the multiple agencies and sources of finance, which is why some of the acronyms are confusing. They have been dealt with in the discussion and synthesis document. We can add an explanation for them.

Warm regards,
Nitya

Dear Member James Harper and Nithya Sir,
Nice notings 
FSM in our Rurals have been on ..

Hello, Nitya et al!

This is genuinely excellent.  Wonderful work!  Thank you for putting in the time and effort to create this document.  Now, we have a great way to talk about rural FSM and improve it!

A few notable accolades (many others not mentioned):
- I really like the division of the tree by population density!  This is a great way to think about sanitation in general and helps us focus on the local contextually relevant issues.
- I also really like deep row trenching instructions in dark blue on the left.  This really is the best way to manage FS in sparse rural areas.
- I love that you mentioned "spare capacity" regarding STPs.  This is a big issue that is important to remember.
- I love the Do's and Don't's table!

A few comments/suggestions/talking points:
- Developing local FS standards seems unnecessary.  Why not just adopt ISO or ANSI standards?  They are readily available and internationally accepted by many (most?) countries.
- Red boxes on right: Above "Initiate SBCC for safe FSM practices, and emptying & disposal of FS", I would add "Perform primary research to describe local FSM practices including decision motivators and barriers to desired practices"
- Orange boxes on left: Unfortunately, the WHO standard that says that emptying after 2 years is safe is not accurate in the real world; the pathogens have degraded but are not gone and still pose a public health risk.  I have a small study clearly showing that, and others have as well.  So, I would change "Safely empty compost after 2 years" to "Empty pit with proper PPE with lower health risk".
- Purple boxes on right: Setting up an FSTP and developing all the details of the market and service to support it is a huge undertaking.  I think you highlight the major points in this process, but perhaps we could break these out in more detail using existing documents, like "Faecal Sludge Management: Systems Approach for Implementation and Operation" by Strande et al.  They have a lot of details in there that we could incorporate into this decision tree without adding too much complexity.
- Light blue boxes on right: I don't really understand these boxes because of all of the acronyms used.  Are these acronyms applicable in all contexts?  If not, we should make these boxes more broadly applicable.  Also, we should add a list of acronyms to this page for easy reference.

I would be happy to work on this document if you like.  I would also be happy to chat more with you about these proposed changes.

Thanks for all of your hard work on this!  A true asset to the community.

Dear all,

I am pleased to share the decision tree developed as a result of your inputs (and some additional research). Please note, it is highly contextual and as it stands, it applies to India given the peculiarities of local government.

Happy to have your comments.

Regards,
Nitya

Completed "Introduction to Faecal Sludge Management" a MOOC produced by EPFL, about a year ago. It is an intensive (free at the time) and extensive course providing a huge amount of resources, including those useful in the referenced Topic.

Dear all

Here is the final synthesis document. Thanks to Sandhya for facilitating the discussion, and Mitali for the webinar.

Regards,
Nitya

Dear all,

We are happy to share the draft synthesis document on the discussion and webinar. The document is being reviewed and will be updated subsequently. We are also working on the decision tree and will share it here for your comments.

Thanks to all of you who responded to the discussion.

Regards,
Nitya

Dear Dr P K Jha Sir and others

We are needed to appreciate Rural citizens for nicely dealing with voluminous excreta from live stock - cattle, goats and others.

If this excreta matter is duly handled and evolved as produce ie compost or cow dung fuel-cakes or others, then FS ex human excreta, could be easily dealt with.
In this Pandemic times, it is all the more important to ensure safe and secure dealing with this matter, bio- waste and waste-water too.
Even ensuring disposal by incineration method, may be done at local village level itself.
For all the above mentioned practices, it will be needed to provide OJT Training to designated GP officials and local villagers Etc.

If school or PHC premises or common spaces exist at the village level, then these locations can be used for handling safely the FS, and other bio waste matter termed as resource matter.
The principles may be formulated with practices demonstrated and put to service for the communities, and produces evolved in these processes are duly consumed for overall benefit of communities. 

Doing it right, will locally address
all the pollution issues,
SDG targets achieved .
Even the scrupulous habit of open- burning of agri- waste and waste from other paths may be curtailed totally.

Above notings issued in the social and environmental interests of the rurals.

Well wishes to All
Prof Ajit Seshadri. 

Dear Tejas
Do you have number of functional STPs in Gujarat, meeting the norms of effluent discharge as per the NGT. I don't expect even a single. Pl. correct if you have authentic data with location of STPs.
What will be cost and who will bear it in transporting septage from 10 - 50 Km. Do you expect households to bear additional cost? 
Co-treatment is feasible only when a nearby functional STP, capable to take additional organic load, is available.  
pawan

Thank you Mr. James for your wonderful suggestion on starting the Wikipedia page.  We will definitely look into it and if possible start it as soon as possible.