Subsidy-driven Swachh Bharat is a failed, old idea. What is needed to stop open defecation is a community-driven approach that has worked wonders in Bangladesh
Sreelatha Menon | December 10, 2015
On the occasion of Gandhi Jayanti last year, the then newly elected Modi government launched the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan with zeal. A host of ministers, including the PM himself, were seen on the streets with brooms in their hands, promoting and propagating the mission. The programme set up an ambitious target of constructing 12 crore toilets in five years, that is, before October 2019. The government aims to achieve total sanitation.
But does India really need a tsunami of toilets?
The question forces itself to come to the forefront as subsidy-driven sanitation programmes in India have been pumping crores of rupees for the past three decades, without any success in bringing down open defecation.
The goal of all previous governments has been to achieve total sanitation or a complete stop to open defecation. In 1999, the NDA government called its programme Total Sanitation Campaign which was later renamed as Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan by the UPA government in 2012. And now the new government calls it Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (SBA). Moving towards its target, SBA has already provided 95 lakh toilets. But do they work? More importantly, do all of them even exist? These are the questions no one is asking, least of all the government.
The 12 crore target is based on the number of households which are still practising open defecation. If, on average, a household has five members, then the population that would be covered under SBA in five years would be 60 crore.
Despite change in governments over the past few decades, the strategy for achieving total sanitation has remained the same – to provide subsidy for building toilets free of cost. “The philosophy seems to be that people don’t have toilets because they can’t afford them. Or because people are idiots and don’t know how to get toilets,” says Kamal Kar, who pioneered a no-subsidy approach called the Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS). Kar was honoured with the 2015 Sarphati Sanitation Life Time Achievement Award in November this year at Amsterdam.
Interview: Kamal Kar, Chairman, CLTS Foundation
CLTS is a demand-driven sanitation approach where people change behaviour through peer pressure and awareness. People are taught to find out how exactly their neighbours’ faeces is entering their food. Once they know that, they would stop open defecation, subsidy or no subsidy, says Kar.
CLTS has been embraced by about 60 countries all over the world. They include neighbouring Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal. According to Kar, Bangladesh started off worse than India a decade ago but is now all set to declare itself open defecation-free in 2016. Pakistan is also moving in the same direction though it calls CLTS as Pakistan Approach to Total Sanitation (PATS). So is Nepal. But India continues to follow the subsidy approach which is a top-down outlook.
The government’s role has principally been that of a supplier. Kar says this approach has led to supply of a large number of toilets which have crossed the number of households requiring toilets. “If one counts the toilets supplied under all the central and state programmes in the past 30 years, it is a tsunami of toilets that India faces with the SBA too willing to achieve its target.”
The present target for total sanitation under SBA is to construct 65,000 toilets every day, says Kar. To ensure this, the subsidy has been increased three to four times. Earlier it was '7,500 per household, whereas now it is '12,000 per household. The outcome of all these supply-driven programmes has also been much the same. Open defecation continues.
Kar cites the census findings of 2011. It indicates that 70 million toilets are missing. Where did they disappear? he asks. It points to something. But no one is willing to look into it or learn a lesson, says Kar. Besides, 600 million people still defecate in the open as per the census, he adds. So what happened to the toilets? Shouldn’t someone look at the fate of toilets that are already there through government subsidies? Kar asks.
Where India stands
|Year||Population (in crore)||Open defecation (unimproved) in urban areas (in population %)||Open defecation (unimproved) in rural areas (in population %)||Open defecation (unimproved) all over (in population %)|
Steel minister Chaudhary Birender Singh has directed a high-level coordination committee comprising CMDs and top ministry officials to be constituted for pooling and sharing of resources among PSUs. He said, “This will lead to aggregation of demand and economies of sc
India has submitted its first request for establishment of a dispute panel against the US at the World Trade Organisation (WTO)—a request that was blocked by Washington on February 20 stating that this dispute was launched for purely political reasons. According to India, eleven measures ad
The Central Board of Film Certification seems to be fast turning into 16th century Italian theatre Commedia dell`arte, whose special characteristic is the lazzo - a joke. And Pahlaj Nihalani is the prima donna of all that is not right with the censor board. Nihalani, who is frequently quite
India faces significant challenges in the area of trade policy— the global economic slowdown, increasing protectionism, the stalled mega-trade deals that could in time be revived, and perhaps more important, its own domestic preoccupations. For India to achieve its policy objectives, the government a
In 2000, we set out on an uncharted journey. Neither did we have any strategy nor any idea about how far we could go. I still remember the day when we took the first meal to a government school. The children loved it. I did not believe that we would go with food the next day as well, but we did, and now we
Should Pahlaj Nihalani be axed as the chairperson of Central Board of Film Certification?