In India, Swachh Bharat Mission aims to achieve ODF by 2019. To support this, the Government offer subsidies to lacs of families in India living below BPL without access to sanitation. But to understand the limitations of this policy, we must first the challenges involved in this sort of financing support.

For Individual Household Latrines:
1. The subsidy for toilet construction is only provided post-construction. Many families are unable to fill this gap between beginning construction and receiving the subsidy.
2. Aspiration toilets cost above the subsidy amount, and without access to funding for this, families are often not motivated to use these toilets, which means long-term behaviour change is not possible.
3. APL families may not feel the push to build toilets as they are not eligible for the subsidy.
4. Existing defunct toilets are not eligible for subsidy to refurbish the existing facilities.

To address these issues, micro-finance institutions (MFIs) can play a big role in providing funding at the household level. Further to this, to strengthen the ecosystem of sanitation, MFIs can also play a role in bringing out innovations and entrepreneurship, in helping individuals create capital-generating sustainable models.

The dashboard in the MDWS website (sbm.gov.in/sbmreport/home.aspx) will have us believe that we are indeed marching towards achieving the 2019 deadline. Crores of latrines are being constructed and thousands of villages have already become ODF. Time to feel optimistic that come 2020 we shall have put our national shame behind us? I do not think so. Already in the discussions are issues such as " we need to increase the subsidy" , " water needs to be provided " etc etc.

Wasn't the silver bullet to India's open defecation problem - "behaviour change". Yes, that is what everyone will agree, but do we really have a fix on how this "behaviour change" was / is to be achieved. There are currently many theories on how this can be achieved including such theories as extensive & exhaustive IEC followed by the provision of a standardized concrete latrine with or without the provision of water, use of "triggering" followed by provision of latrine and a lot of local variants all emphasizing the provision of a concrete latrine. The assumption that if people are provided a concrete latrine and are told (in different ways, including by Vidya Balan) to use it, they will begin to use them and open defecation will this be eliminated. So what is different from what was being done earlier - essentially more IEC and this is supposed to change the destiny of India?

We already have some who propose that we can achieve an ODF status only if we increase the subsidy and also provide water close/at the latrine. This will only increase the "Swachh Bharat" cess. Behaviour change cannot be induced by increasing subsidy and providing only some "eligible" households with standard concrete latrines.

Sanitation has not worked in India, because of the nature of popular politics pursued in our country. The subsidy approach not only guarantees "cut money" it also ensures that "providers" retain control over the population. People's representatives sustain their existence from having the power to ensure "who gets" and "who does not get" to be a beneficiary in a government scheme. The people of India have for long accepted the practice of waiting for dole.

Common wisdom is "wait", do not be rash and sign up now. Just as the subsidy has been increasing over the various phases of the national sanitation programme, it will increase further. Again, wait till you start using your latrine before water has been provided to you.

My contention is that, unless we can get people's representatives to abhor their influence of dole on "beneficiaries" and get them to realize the greater good, we shall note be able to solve our sanitation problem ever.

Why are people's representatives not willing to take the bull by the horns and disown "subsidy"? Why are they in the land of Gandhi, unwilling to let people attain true independence? The answer to these questions will define policy and the institutional arrangement, required to make the country truly ODF.

Our Prime Minister started this unique noble flagship programme to make India "Swachha Bharat" by 14th Oct 2019.

In Odisha, we have started this movement in business model to support to NGOs, SHGs,educated unemployed youths, Village Committes, social activists, Bharat Nirman volunteers, Gaon Sathis, AWWs, Ashas to scale up qualitatively in ruaral areas under SBM(G).

While implementing this programme our partners facing lot of programme in arranging local materials, non local materials & skilled masons & labour.

Local materials like, quality sand, fly ash bricks, rings for litch pit are rarely available for many habitations. Skilled masons are very scanty in villages. Some times our partners are working with semi skilled masons for which expectation of quality toilet is a day dreaming of the beneficiaries.

Non local materials like standard pan, p-trap, quality pipes , doors & roof sheets are not available in one hard ware shops. So, implementing agencies, beneficiaries facing lot many problems to collect one set of toilet materials from one vendor.

Beneficiaries, implementing agencies are also facing lot of problems in getting their biolls though GoO has issued a stringent circular to clear the bill of implementing agencies in a maximum of 15 days.

Here in Odisha,Svadha is a subsidiary of eKutir Rural Management Services Private Limited, &is a socially focused venture engaged in innovating new products, services for a sustainable model for Sanitation, Hygiene & water for rural customers. Products & services created through innovations are ideated, tested in the field, improved, validated, packaged and released in the market

Our business model has a market based sustained approach - PIE
• Participatory: Consumer inputs taken while innovating toilet designs
• ICT Based: Tablet based Sani Tool to provide all stakeholders an objective analysis of current sanitary trends & issues
• Entrepreneur Lead: Sani Mart facilitates sale of quality toilets with branded, high quality but affordable input material from established national suppliers in India like TATA, Oriplast, Vishaka etc. Also, it provides necessary hygiene products’ kit & awareness on harm caused due to lack of sanitation (innovating more designs like ready to built, bio digester eco-san toilets etc)

Our Value Proposition: The core value proposition is Design as a Service; Complete Sanitation Solution (includes toilet elements, pre-fabricated toilets, sanitation kit); Quality Products at competitive price; Door step delivery; proper training and handholding of entrepreneur; felicitating finance; Convergence of all stakeholders & ICT based interventions.

REACH: Already have approximately 70 + entrepreneurs across Odisha working on this model to provide sanitation for all and most of them are economically sustainable. This model is attracting educated unemployed rural youths & active SHG groups for gainful employment. Entrepreneurs are taught for quality & sustainability of the programme. This model will ensure resolve of local sanitation issues through convergence of local service providers & will guarantee optimal use of local resources

Last year, we have also started intervention in green technology. We started providing Bio Toilets. We started this with a pilot in Pankhua Village in Daspalla Block of Nayagarh. The results were so overwhelming that we did another 30 in near by village with the partnership of Care Today( CSR wing of India Today Group) and 351 in Maharashtra with Art of Living Group. We are going to implement of phase 2 Care Today project in Daspalla only which will make 2 villages entirely open defecation free in a green technology manner.

In this technology, we need not clean the pit for 25 years and after 24 hours one can start getting the manure also. Apart from these no bad odour and flies will be around the pit. The filtering mechanism is such that it’ll not pollute the ground water sources as well as environment.

As a social organization, we have the commitment towards the society by providing a solution to one of the key challenges under the Swacch Bharat Mission for sanitation (toilet construction), i.e ensuring that the created asset (toilet) is maintained and used by beneficiaries. We are the only providers in the market offering Toilet Insurance which insures any toilet for 5 years against any damage due to natural calamity or fire only for Rs 1 per month/ Rs 60 for 5 years. Due to implementation of this the quasi form of assets of the govt is protected & the status of ODF is remains intact.

Now people have already under stood the need for a toilet.During sensitization meetings in villages, people are elaborating the problems in getting some local & non local materials in constructing a toilet.Some are fed up with non availability of quality local 7 non local materials , where as some of them are quite fed up with not getting the bill in time, which demotivates the new entrants to built toilet first.

At the same time, if govt will think on approving Pre-fabricated toilets for installation under SBM(G), then we can maximize installation of quality toilets with all specifications in short period.

Still, we are hopeful the that institution like us will come forward to support all the partners involved in SBM(G) can achieve the target in time.

Thanks for your in-depth analysis. No doubt there is substantially increase in toilet construction but not sue. I would like to add few more points.

• The challenges faced include the institutional ones of reducing financial leakage, setting and monitoring qualitative indicators of achievement and creating an environment where all agencies come together through a holistic approach at village level.
• Many of them already have a toilet but prefer to defecate in the open. The biggest challenge therefore is triggering behaviour change in vast section of rural population regarding need to use toilets.
• Frequent change of Govt policy and subsidy. People are expecting more are more subsidy
• The biggest reason of lack of usages of toilets is non-availability of water. So any attempt for universal coverage must have a co-joint programme of water and sanitation as one component rather than two separate ones.
• The toilets which have become defunct (built in early 2000s) because of low quality and also due to ghost reporting. As the same number of households cannot be re-incentivised again, it will be a huge challenge for all the stakeholders to address this issue to reach the target of Swachh Bharat by 2019.
• Clearly there is a severe lack of motivated and skilled manpower at the field level to implement the well-intended policy. With the anticipated acceleration of WASH programme post Prime Minister’s clarion call for Swachh Bharat by the year 2019, more skilled and motivated man power will be needed to achieve the goal.

In spite of very large fund allocations for drinking water and sanitation in India, access of a vast majority of rural population to safe and sustainable drinking water remains incomplete. The issues of coverage being an ineffective indicator and access being denied to the poorer sections of rural society are largely ignored.

Effective utilization of funds in the drinking water sector and the need for a massive increase in demand and use of sanitation facilities are major causes for concern. The weakness of PRIs and the poor capacity of NGOs and civil society further exacerbate the outcome of sector interventions and capacity building still retains a very low ranking in importance in the minds of administrators, agencies and politicians alike.

(Posted on behalf of Aasha Ramesh)

While agreeing with Naina Kidwai on the progress that SBM has made, it still has a long way to go. As rightly pointed out, while the common person is aware about the need for sanitation and even the fact that government is providing subsidy for toilet construction, yet what perhaps is more critical, is its usage. Now under the SBM, there is also some allocation made to have a water connection. In the first instance, is that viable and functional, given the fact that even metropolitan cities like Bangalore also suffer from water crisis. A key concern certainly is behaviour change to ensure that all members in the family use the toilet.

The celebrities campaigning for sanitation certainly has given the mission the needed impetus. However, if attention could consistently focus on children as key change agents, perhaps this would add momentum to the initiative. Maintenance of the toilets is another area that deserves special attention as it has caste ramifications and therefore tends to get neglected. Another fact which then results in the non- use of toilets. Or the responsibility of maintaining the toilets becomes again an additional burden to the already weighing responsibilities of domestic chores.

The effort to make use of SHGs as contractors for building toilets is being done in some areas, maybe this could be strengthened. It will help women to improve their economic status, build other skills of team management and leadership and help women to take on decision making roles. However, the responsibilities of the SHG collectives should not be limited to infrastructure related activity, but they should also be utilised for soft skills.

SHG collectives in Dalit hamlets and adivasi areas should be prioritised for this effort.This would help in bringing sanitation to the neglected areas and force the GPs to work through these SHG groups, rather than the affluent SHGs.

Aasha Ramesh

Well ,an amount of 12000 is in itself enough to accrue to the minimum requirements of a twin pit toilet. No country in the world is even close to giving an incentive of such magnitude. Therefore, I would not support any push for further increase in the amount. Important factor is to concentrate on the 3 MDWS certified indicators for ODF, the third indicator of which is on SLWM. Thousands of gram panchayats are being declared ODF! Collectively, we can be pretty sure that almost none of those panchayats have achieved the third indicator. Then why this drive of hurriedly declaring ODFs when a vital indicator is still waiting to be achieved. Like CLTS, a mammoth drive needs to be initiated for SLWM which includes mass capacity building across all levels, strategic implementation and effective monitoring.

Dear Sunetra,

I do agree with this submission that, greater part are the children. They lead towards the movable change. We are lagging behind on that aspects as such. Long way to go to reach the mile stone.

Regards
M S Khan
BBSR

Rs 12000 is the incentive per toilet, not the cost. People should realise it. When incentive was Rs 4600 / 9000 states raised this issue to enhance it to Rs 12000. Perhaps India is the only country where such incentive for a household toilet is provided by the government. And perhaps this is one of the major hindrances of the program.

CLTS is a better tool for improvement of sanitation at community level. But due to present supply driven approach through subsidy / incentive, CLTS is not applicable to meet its objectives.

Costs are a factor. People I have met in villages say 12000 is not enough and toilets they would like to use cost them upwards of 20,000. This makes me think sanitation and toilets is an aspirational goal, sort of like owning a mobile.

Dear Nitya

I agree with the fact that there is reasonable improvement during the last 2 years of implementation of SBM, comparing to two & half years of NBA implementation. Though some collectors are showing interest in the program, it is not the case with all the collectors. In every state 20% of the collectors show great interest to support the mission. However 80% of the districts yet to give priority SBM implementation in a mission. It is a huge task.

More and more orientation programs to be organised for the district collectors, especially the better performing district collectors sharing experiences with poor performing districts. Even the champions are centered over this 20% districts and there is an imperative need to focus on the other districts to create more and more champions.

An area which requires immediate attention is that each state should bring together all the stake holders together to reach out to more an more districts. Presently this is happening with few organisations like WaterAid, WSP, UNICEF and WSSSO. State or districts should reach out to other organisations engaged in Health, Livelihood, Education etc and get their support to reach out to the districts, blocks and panchayats unreached.

Dear member,

We are having an interesting discussion on two years of SBM, focusing on policies and institutions. We have received comments from Naina Kidwai, who initiated the discussion, and several members. A summary is given below:

SBM has made a difference to perceptions about sanitation in India and created a buzz around it in the country and abroad. Two years into the programme, it is becoming clear that state governments, districts and panchayats have definitely given higher priority to sanitation. However, challenges around implementation continue to persist. For example, while the common person knows about the programme and what it entails, he or she does not necessarily understand what is to be done. Knowing he or she should use a toilet and if eligible, will get an incentive on making and using one, is not the same as knowing what to make and how to use it. For a person who has defecated in the open since childhood, adjusting to a toilet takes time. It also takes time to engineer social change that is needed for this to happen.

Several champions have emerged across the country – local people, officers, elected representatives – to lead by example. This is a welcome outcome and shows the potential of local leadership. But what’s missing is institutionalising the processes that lead to success with sanitation. An individual will lead for only so long, the system needs to take up the cause and run with it. Sanitation has succeeded in some districts because the administration launches the campaign in mission mode to complete a ‘target’ within a given time. The system gears up for this but its innate functioning needs to change.

Trained motivators, masons and others were a missing link. Several states have addressed this in creative ways. More people are needed to make this a mass movement. As funds are not a problem this army of sanitation workers can be rewarded for their efforts.

Technical issues still remain a problem area – localizing nationally mandated designs for toilets, where to make them so as not to contaminate water and ensuring they meet the needs of the disabled – should be addressed. Equity in planning and execution is another area for improvement especially intra-GP inequities where affluent villages in a GP garner most of the resources.

I hope you will continue to provide your comments and inputs on this theme. Please note, you can continue doing so while we move to the second theme from tomorrow.

Regards
Nitya Jacob

One of the significant changes in the past 2-3 years has been the appointment of mission directors in states. An officer of the Indian Administrative Service has been given full-time or part-time charge of SBM. This has lent weight to the programme, I feel. Also, collectors/magistrates in districts have become involved with SBM again helping to prioritise the mission at the operational level. At the grassroots level sarpanchs, pradhans and frontline workers have also been involved. This has made a sea change in the way sanitation perceived and prioritised. From being at the bottom of the list of development priorities it has moved up the agenda for both the bureaucracy and politicians.

Along with this in some place where results are seen work is being done at scale and with the objective of making communities, blocks and districts ODF rather than merely constructing toilets. Various means are used for this though what counts is the administrative will to make it happen, that was lacking.

However, ODF and construction can easily be conflated to pursue targets unless the administration steps back and lets politicians and people take charge. For a true demand-led programme, this process is essential and time-consuming. Plans for ODF need to stretch beyond the usual government annual planning horizon and span 2-3 year, or even more depending on the scale of the challenge.