As agreed and exemplified by most practitioners on my post on linkedin, like any other approach the success rate is not always 100%. Indeed there are alot of opportunities to make it better that may differ by our various contexts.

HI EUPhresia, Thank you for raising this interesting point.
I believe the sanitation market approach has not failed. Compared to previous campaigns centered on health education, market-based sanitation interventions are making progress. However, improvements in governance and the business environment for sanitation companies are still necessary. Key areas for enhancement include tariffs, taxes, licensing, technical support, and business development for these businesses. Additionally, promoting multidisciplinary collaboration is essential.

If you read keenly, every point presents/suggests a solution as well including the close.

Some interesting thoughts you are presenting...  But what is the alternative?  Less government involvement when it comes to sanitation?  Fewer prescriptions that are coming from the funding agencies?

11 Reasons why sanitation 🚽 🚻 market-based approach in Kenya and maybe other countries is still stuck at pilots, number 1-11 will shock 🤯 you:

1. The Gatekeepers of Sanitation:  Most of the Public health professionals are convinced that only 'sanitation people' (whatever that means) are qualified to work in sanitation 
2. Tech Saves Everything:  They believe technology alone can solve 90% issues of our sanitation crisis.
3. Degrees, Please: Local Entrepreneurs are the heroes of the story, theye ven want to work with them but they best hold a degree.
4. Be Creative, But Obedient: They expect you to be authentic, creative and take risks but you must follow their rules and restrictions that got lots of safe alternatives… Even their emails scream, “STOP! That’s not how we’ve always done it!”
5. Original Ideas... That Aren't Yours: They demand “original innovative solutions,” but only if they’ve been tested, stamped, by a Global North organization. Bonus points if you call it a “pilot” instead of “copy-paste.”
6. Borrow, Steal, Adapt: If you pitch a good idea, congratulations! They’ll take it (copy), repackage it, implement it and term it “ adaptation .” You? Oh, you’re just “an inspiration.”
7. Trust Issues: You can only be trusted , if you can be controlled.
8. Bought, Not Built: Stick to their playbook, and they’ll label you “ market ready ,” which means they’ll invest in you (or, more accurately, buy you).
9. The Facilitation Fee Fiasco: They’ll fund you 100%, but with a catch. Staff quietly demand highs of 50% as a "facilitation fee." You’ll still be expected to deliver sparkling results—on half the budget. Good luck!
10. The "Level Playing Field" Illusion: The global north donor said the playing field is even. But what they meant is that they'll bring in their own proven prescribed ideas and technology from their countries, fund their corporates heavily, make them the partner of choice on products and services. The locals will have to compete with them. Odds of winning: slim to none. After all they are not yet proven. They are not endorsed. Eventually the market they claimed they'll disrupt they've now distorted
11. Blaming the Market: When it all inevitably flops, they shrug and say, “The sanitation market in Kenya just isn’t viable.” But how can it be if the rules of engagament including parameters for measurement of impact are foreign and un-localised?

📌 Let’s start giving real sh*t about sanitation. Flush with purpose - Flush away inequalities!