In previous blogs on Fecal Sludge Management (FSM), we outlined the lack of appropriate attention given to FSM as a formal urban sanitation solution and we presented new tools for diagnosing fecal sludge challenges. In this blog, we provide illustrations from Indonesia and Mozambique of the challenges and opportunities of using FSM.
Ask your child: “Where does our water come from?” And many of them might roll their eyes at being asked such a silly question, and tell you: “Water comes from the tap.”
But how? What is the name of the company that provides the service to you? How much does your water service cost? Is it expensive? Where does your wastewater go? Is it treated prior to discharge? How many people get water from the utility in your town?
You can find answers to these and many other questions on our global website www.ib-net.org. Go to its performance database or its separate tariff database and get your answers! You can be one of nearly 8,000 people that visit the site each month to access a set of standard reports for a range of comparisons, benchmarking and assessments for more than 5,000 water utilities from 150 countries.
Our last blog outlined the neglect of Fecal Sludge Management (FSM) and presented new tools for diagnosing FSM challenges and pointing the way to solutions.
In this blog, we’ll share some lessons learned from the city-specific case studies and analysis to highlight key areas which need to be addressed if the non-networked sanitation services on which so many citizens rely are to be effectively managed.
Also available in: Français
Small towns* typically have not been well served by national or regional water utilities. Decentralization has become increasingly widely adopted, but even if local governments at the small town level have the power to operate a water utility, they often lack the capital and skills to do so. In response, some local governments and public institutions concentrate improvements on upgrading public utilities’ operations or strengthening community based management. In other cases, they choose to bring in the private sector knowledge of how to get clean water and sanitation services to more people more efficiently, affordably or sustainably.
There are many ways in which the public sector can leverage its own resources through partnering with the private sector. For the domestic private sector to fully realize its potential at scale in the small town sub-sector, we found they need capable and enabled public institutions to structure the market and regulate private operators.
Lessons learned from case study countries (Colombia, Bangladesh, Philippines, Uganda, Cambodia, Niger and Senegal) in a new global study published by the Water Global Practice’s in order to build a conducive business climate for market players in small towns Water Supply and Sanitation (WSS) service delivery:
Swachh Bharat Mission Grameen (SBM (G)) – the rural clean India mission – plans to eliminate open defecation by 2019. SBM (G) is time-bound with a stronger results orientation, targeting the monitoring of both outputs (access to sanitation) and outcomes (usage). There is also a stronger focus on behavior change interventions and states have been accorded greater flexibility to adopt their own delivery mechanisms.
The World Bank has provided India with a US$1.5 billion loan and embarked on a technical assistance program to support the strengthening of SBM-G program delivery institutions at the national level, and in select states in planning, implementing and monitoring of the program.
Recently developed Fecal Sludge Management tools to help address this important, but often-ignored, urban sanitation issue.
A global challenge
This requires expensive infrastructure, a plentiful water supply, skilled operators and a substantial and reliable stream of operating funds. This means that in most low- and middle-income country cities, the sewerage service is only available to a small and decreasing proportion of the population, as investments cannot keep up with the explosive urban growth.
How the Water GP and Innovation Labs are partnering to get practical operational solutions
Results verification in the Program for Results (PforR) instrument aims to ensure that reported outputs were actually achieved, and that they meet the performance standards specified in the Disbursement-Linked Indicators (DLIs). The fact that disbursements are tied to independently verified results elevates the role of verification for both the client and the Bank. However, as the rigor of results verification increases, so does the cost, and successful verification systems require significant resources and investment in monitoring and reporting systems. To ensure credibility and sustainability of results verification in PforR, we need to find ways to increase efficiency through the use of technology that can simultaneously reduce costs and enhance rigor.
This scenario is not unique. For many countries like Myanmar, where only one-third of the population has access to electricity, hydropower presents a compelling opportunity to increase energy supply at low costs and make important contributions to development objectives and water resources management.
Myanmar has ambitious future hydropower development plans that mirror the trends seen globally. Projections show that the world is poised to nearly double hydropower capacity by 2040, building as many hydropower dams in the next 25 years as were built in the previous century.
In a report funded by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID), The Nature Conservancy worked with WWF and the University of Manchester to demonstrate a framework that could be applied in Myanmar and replicated worldwide to change the trajectory of water resource development towards a more sustainable path. By adopting system-scale planning and engaging diverse stakeholders, Myanmar has the opportunity to be a leader and global example.
This post by Laura Tuck originally appeared on Project Syndicate’s website on May 4, 2016.
Today, actual wars between countries over water resources are uncommon, owing to improved dialogue and cross-border cooperation. But, within countries, competition for scarce water is becoming a more common source of instability and conflict, especially as climate change increases the severity and frequency of extreme weather events. As we detail in our new report “High and Dry: Climate Change, Water and the Economy,” limited and erratic water availability reduces economic growth, induces migration, and ignites civil conflict, which fuels further potentially destabilizing migration.
Most behavior change approaches and frameworks for addressing open defecation have focused on relatively conscious, “reflective” drivers of behavior, including people’s emotions (such as pride or shame), rational knowledge (e.g., of germ theory), social norms, and explicit action plans (such as commitments to change). Using the framework popularized by renowned social psychologist Daniel Kahneman .<, these factors can be described as “System 2” drivers of behavior i.e., relatively conscious and motivational factors. It is now well established, however, that human behavior can also be heavily influenced by “System 1” drivers i.e., relatively automatic, cue-driven factors .