This issue brief reviews Chennai’s public sanitation challenge, reviews different management models used for providing public sanitation in India and makes recommendations for the Corporation of Chennai’s on-going efforts to provide public toilets via a public private partnership.

This issue brief was written by Vinaya Padmanabhan and Satyarupa Shekhar as part of Transparent Chennai’s research on city governance. You can write to the authors at Vinaya.Padmanabhan@ifmr.ac.in and Satyarupa.Shekhar@ifmr.ac.in

Issue brief | November 2012

PUBLIC SANITATION MANAGEMENT MODELSPROVIDING TOILETS FOR THE URBAN POOR IN CHENNAI

People living in slums – both officially recognised and unrecognised – in urban India have inadequate access to sanitation. Seventeen percent of recognised slums and 51 percent of unrecognised slums do not have latrines. Underground sewerage systems are available only in 30 percent of recognised slums and 15 percent of unrecognised slums. It is estimated that more than 37 percent of human excreta is not disposed of safely in urban areas in the country, with significant consequences for

1

Issue brief | November 2012

public health and the environment.1

According to the World Health Organisation, substandard sanitation and inadequate access to clean drinking water are the cause of over 1.7 million deaths each year, approximately one-third of which occur in Africa and one-third in South Asia.2 The urgency of this public health crisis has found expression in the UN Millennium Development Goals. Two targets under Goal 7 aim to improve the access to drinking water and

sanitation facilities. One seeks to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.3 The other target aims to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020. The need for improved sanitation also finds voice in Goal 4 which seeks to reduce by two thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-five mortality rate, for which diarrheal diseases are a major cause.4

India has passed a few policies to achieve the MDGs. The National Urban Sanitation Policy (NUSP) is one such policy which requires cities to be the primary drivers of its objectives to achieve open defecation free cities and integrated city-wide sanitation using a pro-poor approach.5 A recent slew of reforms, most notably the JnNURM, have also pushed cities in India towards more data-driven planning and governance. While the NUSP, the state level sanitation policy, and the JnNURM have adopted a pro-poor approach, at least on paper, and focus on achieving broad outcomes, the policies do not have

comprehensive guidelines for implementation.6 A parliamentary panel report that was tabled in April 2012 found that 4861 of 5161 cities in the country did not have even a partial sewerage network. Cities, including Chennai, were releasing untreated waste in to water bodies. Under JnNURM, only fifteen of 108 approved sewerage projects and eight of 71 approved drainage projects had been completed since 2005. The panel recommended identifying ways to implement sanitation projects at an urgent pace.

The Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India makes a provision for public health, sanitation and conservancy to be devolved to urban local bodies (ULBs).7 Despite the legislative responsibilities of local governments to provide public sanitation services, the strategies they have adopted have been limited in their success by the lack of institutional, financial and technical capacities at the municipal level.

Public toilets are an important amenity for slum-dwellers, the homeless and those working in the informal sector – people who generally do not have access to private sanitation, either at home, or at their workplace.8 Municipalities either construct and maintain public toilets or issue open tenders for their construction and maintenance. However, land ownership patterns are complicated in slums and most slum-dwellers do not own the land they live on.9 This makes service provision a challenging task – one that requires coordination between various tiers of government and collaboration between departments which deal with land, property, slums, urban planning, infrastructure, water and sanitation, electricity etc.

CHENNAI’S PUBLIC SANITATION CHALLENGE

The National Urban Sanitation Policy ranked Chennai thirteenth10 out of 423 cities for its performance on nineteen urban sanitation indicators.11 However, it is still classified as a city which needs “considerable improvement” to achieve total sanitation.12 While international sanitation standards recommend a maximum of twenty persons to a toilet seat13, the national sanitation policy recommends that states maintain a ratio of 50 persons to a toilet seat.14 However, the number of households without a toilet is significantly higher in developing countries. For instance in Tamil Nadu, around 57 percent

1 Ministry of Urban Development, National Urban Sanitation Policy (New Delhi: GoI, 2008), 6; http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/NUSP.pdf2 World Health Organization, “The World Health Report 2002: Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life” ed World Health Organization (Geneva: 2002)3 United Nations, Millennium Development Goals, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/environ.shtml

2

Issue brief | November 2012

of households do not have a toilet within their homes. Clearly, these norms need to be revised in a contextual manner to reflect the needs on the ground.

A Transparent Chennai study of public toilets in the city revealed that there were discrepancies in government data from various sources - data from zone offices indicated that there were a total of 572 toilets in the city, while data from Right to Information (RTI) applications revealed a total of 714 public toilets.15 Even if one assumes that there are 714 public toilets in Chennai, this number is still inadequate for a city with a population of 46.81 lakhs.16 The study, which included a mapping of toilets in zone IV and evaluation of facilities in the toilets, found that most toilets were poorly maintained and under-utilised. The study revealed that most toilets in the zone did not have water, electricity and sewerage connections, were usually locked at night and were not located in areas where they were most needed.17

The institutional structure and organisational arrangements for the provision of sanitation facilities has several implications for the delivery of civic services. In Chennai, the Public Health department of the Corporation is responsible for sanitation in the city; but the Buildings department constructs the toilet structures. At the zone level, sanitation inspectors report to the zone health officers on public toilets and sanitation in the zone; however, zone engineers are responsible for their construction, repair and demolition. These toilets are fitted with electricity connections provided by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB), while the water and sewerage services are provided by the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board. The cleaning and maintenance services are either outsourced or carried out by the Corporation.18

The coordination of each of these agencies is required for a single toilet to be completely functional. The Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board is responsible for the provision of water and sanitation services in recognised slums. The Corporation of Chennai takes a fragmented approach to sanitation and organises the service in terms of outputs of different departments and agencies. As a result, each agency provides what it has been tasked with – water, sewerage, electricity, buildings, but 4 United Nations, Millennium Development Goals, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/childhealth.shtml5 Ministry of Urban Development, National Urban Sanitation Policy (New Delhi: GoI, 2008), http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/NUSP.pdf6 See Annexure 27 Article 243W, The Twelfth Schedule Constitution of India; http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/Const.Pock%202Pg.Rom8Fsss(40).pdf8 Transparent Chennai, “Public Toilets in Chennai” (Chennai: 2011), 2; http://www.transparentchennai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Public-Toilets-Transparent-Chennai-Issue-Brief.pdf9 Banashree Bannerjee, “Security of Tenure in Indian Cities” in Holding their Ground: Secure Land Tenure for the Urban Poor in Developing Countries, ed. Alan Durrand-Lasserve and Lauren Royston (UK: 2002), 37-3910 National Institute of Urban Affairs, “Rank Of Cities On Sanitation 2009-2010: National Urban Sanitation Policy”; http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2010/may/d2010051103.pdf11 Ministry of Urban Development, National Urban Sanitation Policy (New Delhi: GoI, 2008), 36-37; http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/NUSP.pdf12 Ibid, 3713European Commission, Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/evaluation/watsan2005/annex_files/Sphere/SPHERE2%20-%20chapter%202%20-%20Min%20standards%20in%20water,%20sanitation%20and%20hygiene%20prom.pdf, 7114 Shahana Sheikh “Public Toilets In Delhi An emphasis on the facilities for Women in Slum/Resettlement Areas”, (Delhi:2008) http://www.ccs.in/ccsindia/downloads/intern-papers-08/Public-toilets-in-Delh-192.pdf15 Transparent Chennai, “Public Toilets in Chennai” (Chennai: 2011), 2 -5; http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/NUSP.pdf16 Data from RTIs revealed that there were 714 toilets in ten zones. There is no data on how many toilets there are in the newly expanded Corporation. See Census of India, “ Provision Population Totals 2011”, Paper 2, Volume 1 of 2011, Series 34, Tamil Nadu, 4; http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/paper2/data_files/tamilnadu/Tamil%20Nadu_PPT2_Volume1_2011.pdf17 Transparent Chennai, “Public Toilets in Chennai” (Chennai: 2011), 2-3; http://www.transparentchennai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Public-Toilets-Transparent-Chennai-Issue-Brief.pdf18 The Corporation of Chennai had contracted out the maintenance of 450 toilets to Sulabh International till 2007. See “No response from firms to build toilets”, The Times of India, September 24th 2012, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-09-24/chennai/34060800_1_public-toilets-toilet-complexes-sulabh

3

Issue brief | November 2012

they do not total to a functional toilet. The brunt of this fragmented governance framework is borne by slum dwellers and other urban poor who have no other way to cope for the lack of the basic service.

REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT MODELS FOR PUBLIC SANITATION

Public sanitation facilities can be classified in two categories: community toilets, which are provided to meet the basic needs of poor residential areas; and public toilets, which serve mobile populations in public places such as shopping centres, bus and train stations, and parks. Public sanitation has primarily been a responsibility of the state. Under public sector management, toilet blocks are owned and maintained by municipal agencies and usually, no charge is levied on users. However, urban local bodies are often not equipped – both financially and institutionally – to provide this service. The construction of toilets requires medium capital investments, and the maintenance of these toilets involves micro-management and recurring costs. Public toilets run by municipalities have also been criticised for their unimaginative architectural design, the lack of water and electricity supply, absentee caretakers, infrequent maintenance and the absence of community ownership of the amenity.19

In recent years, the central government has pushed for a larger role for the market in the provision of basic services in cities. Urban local bodies in India have involved the private sector in areas like water and sewerage supply, solid waste disposal, healthcare, public transport, education, and infrastructure construction.20 Public toilets have shifted from being the responsibility solely of the concerned municipality to being run by private companies, NGOs, and CBOs, either single-handedly or in partnership with municipalities. This trend has redefined the relationship between the state and citizens as one of supplier and customers.

Public private partnerships (PPPs) loosely refer to a variety of arrangements which include private provision, public-private schemes and private finance initiative.21 PPPs were considered a legitimate means of service provision after the 1990s, after the economy was liberalised in response to debt. There is widespread global debate on PPPs on issues ranging from the pricing of common property resources (like water) 22 to whether private companies are more efficient and effective than the government.

Two types of PPPs in public toilet management are common in India.23

i. Private leasing: Typically, the municipality constructs the toilet and leases out its maintenance functions to a private sector company, a non government organization or community based organisation. The municipality may provide services like water, sewerage and electricity free, or at discounted rates.

ii. Private sector management: The public toilet is financed, built and managed by the private sector. The private sector receives concessions from the government and develops a revenue-generating model which ensures that they are able to recover costs and make a profit from the service. Under build-operate-transfer contracts, ownership of the premises

19 Rosanna Nitti and Sarkar, Shyamal. “Reaching the Poor through Sustainable Partnerships: The Slum Sanitation Program in Mumbai, India”, Urban Notes, Upgrading Experiences, No 7, (2003), 2; http://www.archidev.org/IMG/pdf/The_Slum_Sanitation_Program_in_Mumbai_India.pdf20

N. Muthuraman, “PPP Model, To Deliver Essential Services”, Business Line (2012) Http://Www.Thehindubusinessline.Com/Features/Mentor/Article3361133.Ece?Ref=Wl_Features21 Vinayak Chatterjee, “PPP in India: The story so far”, Business Standard (May 14th 2012); http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/vinayak-chatterjee-ppp-in-indiastory-so-far/474222/22 A classic example of privatisation gone wrong is the Cochabamba water war in Bolivia. The Cochabamba protests, (1999-2000) were a response to the privatisation of water and the consequent increase in water tariff. The national government of Bolivia reversed the privatisation in 2000.23 Jeremy Colin and Nijssen, Sander, “Public Toilets in Urban India: Doing Business Differently. Water and Sanitation Program” (2007), 3

4

Issue brief | November 2012

transfers to the municipality when the lease period expires, typically after five or seven years.

Private sector participation carries both benefits and risks, but requires the city to monitor these partnerships closely in order for benefits to materialize. When municipalities partner with the private sector, they transfer capital investments, recurrent costs and significant financial risk to the private sector. The private sector receives concessions from the government and develops a revenue-generating model which ensures that they are able to recover costs and make a profit from the service. As a result of the partnership, citizens receive access to services that the municipality did not have the capability to provide on its own.24 However, most urban local bodies lack the capacities to draw up an appropriate partnership framework and to monitor the service providers.

A widely accepted revenue model for such partnerships is with the local government providing the land, water and electricity for public toilets while a private contractor provides the sanitation services, and relies on income from advertisements on the toilet walls. However, the focus on recovering costs and generating revenues from advertisements may confine the project to areas where there is heavy footfall rather than cater to the urban poor. The Corporation of the City of Panaji, which relied on such an arrangement, recently realised that it was paying for electricity used to light up the advertisements and that this amounted to a loss for the Corporation.25 Similarly, in the NDMC and MCD areas contractors were permitted to recover their costs from advertising on the walls of the toilet and by charging nominal user fees. Consequently, revenue trumped need and toilets were constructed mainly in crowded areas that had advertising potential; poorer areas were left out.26

Relying on revenue from advertisements to attract private sector participation was feasible only because NDMC and MCD had imposed a complete ban on advertisements everywhere else in the city. Further, the NDMC and MCD failed to effectively monitor their contractors and the companies, which often neglected the maintenance and operation of the toilets. Attempts to extend this management model to low-income areas by cross-subsidising the costs needs further study and, while commercially viable, this initiative did not address the needs of the urban poor. 27

CORPORATION OF CHENNAI’S INITIATIVE

The Corporation of Chennai is currently in the process of revising its tender document because the earlier one did not get a satisfactory response from private corporate players, who – according to media reports – found the clauses too stringent.28 As a result, the new tender is being made to accommodate the demands of the private sector, while no efforts have been made to estimate and understand user needs. There are several examples to learn from but it is imperative for local governments to adopt a combination of management models while keeping the urban poor at the centre of such strategies.

24 JnNURM Technical Cell supported by Price Waterhouse Coopers, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India “Toolkit for analysis of Urban Infrastructure Projects for Public-Private-Partnerships under JnNURM”, (2008), 2, http://jnnurm.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/10.ToolkitPP.pdf25 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-22/goa/32787989_1_ccp-officials-public-toilets-dona-paula-jetty26 Colin, Jeremy and Sander Nijssen, “Public Toilets in Urban India: Doing Business Differently. Water and Sanitation Program” (2007), 5-7;27 Ibid, 9-1028 “From 5000 to 2000: toilets for city dip”, The Hindu, October 10th 2012 http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/from-5000-to-2000-toilets-for-city-dip/article3982148.ece; “Corporation loo plan stinks: fewer toilets to be constructed”, Times of India, October 10th 2012, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-10/chennai/34362663_1_public-toilets-toilet-complexes-bus-depots-and-markets

5

Issue brief | November 2012

This project is being financed under a build-operate-transfer (BOT) agreement,29 where private parties or concessionaires will receive concessions from the Corporation to construct and operate the toilet. These concessions enable the concessionaire to cover the costs of the project and recover its investments on the project. This type of agreement allows the Corporation to outsource building and maintaining toilets, tap into the specialised knowledge of the private sector, and also transfer the risk to a private party.

Under the terms of the agreement, the Corporation is obliged to provide land for the project. 30 The concessionaire is required to construct the toilet in six months and operate it for ten years. 31 After this period, the ownership of the public toilet will be transferred to the Corporation.32 The concessionaire is allowed to collect revenues from advertisements on the toilets. A percentage of this revenue is to be paid to the Corporation as an annual concession fee.33

The concessionaire has to ensure that the toilet is functional for 24 hours, is easily accessible for the elderly and disabled, litter is safely disposed off, and the advertisements on the toilet structure are kept clean. The concessionaire is also required to arrange for the necessary services like water, sewer and electricity connections and garbage disposal. If the Corporation finds that the toilet has been non-functional and poorly maintained for more than a week, the municipality has the right to remove the toilet from its location. 34

The concessionaire is required to submit its plans and programmes for the project and monthly reports on progress to the Corporation of Chennai. The concessionaire is also required to carry out tests to ascertain whether the structure conforms to industry standards. These tests are to be carried out under the supervision of the engineer in-charge. Also, the engineer in-charge is required to submit monthly and quarterly inspection reports and monthly audits of the advertisements to the Steering Group. The Steering Group is required to meet once every fortnight during implementation phase, and once in two months during the operation phase to review progress.35

The tender documents betray the shortcomings of the Corporation of Chennai’s initiative. The documents do not stress the importance of a pro-poor approach, and focus on outputs (number of toilets), not outcomes (sanitation for the city). Also, it is unclear whether the Corporation’s estimate of the number of toilets required was based on an assessment of need. The documents are also silent on where these toilets should be located; and do not have provisions to ensure that that they are located properly. They do not establish whether the chosen management model – BOT – will achieve the Corporation’s sanitation objectives. While the documents do have provisions for monitoring the performance of the private contractor during the construction phases, there are no provisions to monitor the functioning of the toilets on a day-to-day basis.

RECOMMENDATIONS

29 “Chennai to get 5000 toilets soon”, The Hindu, July 5th 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/article3603204.ece; Pratiksha Ramkumar, “You gotta do it when you gotta do it”, The Times of India, July 5th 2012, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Layout/Includes/TOINEW/ArtWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOICH%2F2012%2F07%2F05&ViewMode=HTML&PageLabel=4&EntityId=Ar00400&AppName=1; “Congested localities to get mobile toilets” Deccan Chronicle, July 5th 2012, http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/cities/chennai/congested-localities-get-mobile-toilets-876; 30 Corporation of Chennai. “Concession Agreement for Construction and Maintenance of Modern shell units (toilets) in Zone viii to xv on BOT basis (Chennai:2012), 1231 Corporation of Chennai, “Request for Proposal - Construction and Maintenance of Modern shell units (toilets) in Zone viii to xv on BOT basis ” (Chennai: 2012), 532 Ibid, 1333 Ibid, 2434 Ibid, 40- 4135 Corporation of Chennai. “Concession Agreement for Construction and Maintenance of Modern shell units (toilets) in Zone viii to xv on BOT basis (Chennai: 2012), 17

6

Issue brief | November 2012

Approach

It should integrate slums and informal settlements in all stages of planning and involve citizens in the implementation and monitoring of public sanitation facilities

The Corporation’s concession agreement should focus on public sanitation as a desirable outcome and move away from the focus on outputs such as number of toilets, water and electricity. The Corporation should contract out a “sanitation package” and focus on outcomes and not outputs.

Planning

The Corporation of Chennai should conduct an initial need-assessment survey in order to plan the number, design and location of public toilets.

It should review the performance of existing public toilets on aspects including reasons for their performance, financial and legal barriers to performance, contractual limitations, institutional weakness, gender sensitivity, design limitations.

The Corporation should ensure that the role of the ward and zone level officers in the in providing planning inputs is reflected in the concession agreement. The Corporation should also conduct need assessment studies in the city to ensure that the toilets are located properly.

Management

The Corporation of Chennai should review management models for public sanitation facilities, including public private partnerships, and develop feasibility criteria for sustainable management of public sanitation facilities to support decision making before selecting one or more models.

The Corporation should delegate tasks like planning, construction, maintenance and supervision to different stakeholders and ensure that the stakeholders are accountable to one another.

The Corporation should develop performance indicators to ensure that contractors maintain the toilet.

It should develop a DPR framework that would be integrated with existing facilities and with current projects and schemes supported by the city government, including JnNURM and RAY.

Monitoring

The Corporation of Chennai should ensure the existence of robust monitoring mechanisms. The Corporation of Chennai should create a GIS database that has all existing public

sanitation facilities and can be used to support decision making and disseminating information to the public, and provide means for

It should also develop standard operating procedures for design standards, evaluation of models, procurement, contracting, implementation, maintenance, monitoring, performance and pricing arrangements that are simple and user friendly.

7

Issue brief | November 2012

REVIEW OF PUBLIC SANITATION INITIATIVES IN INDIA

With the Corporation of Chennai planning to install 5,000 toilets in the city through public-private partnerships36, it is worthwhile to examine the how such projects have been undertaken in other cities and draw lessons from their experiences.37

New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD)

In the 1990s, the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) issued tenders inviting local companies to construct, maintain and operate public toilets under Build-Operate and Transfer (BOT) agreements. Under the terms of the agreement, the contractor was required to build and operate the amenity for 5-7 years, after which the ownership of the public toilet was transferred to the municipality. The municipal authority was obliged to provide the land, water and sewage facilities and electricity connections while the contractor was responsible for operations and maintenance. The contractors were permitted to recover their costs from advertising on the walls on the toilet and by charging nominal user fees.38 Revenue trumped need and toilets were constructed mainly in crowded areas that had advertising potential; these were rarely areas in which they were most needed. 39 Further, the NDMC and MCD failed to effectively monitor their contractors and the companies, which often neglected the maintenance and operation of the toilets. Attempts to extend this management model to low-income areas by cross-subsidising the costs needs further study and while commercially viable, this initiative did not address the needs of the urban poor. 40 Just like in Delhi, the focus on recovering costs and generating revenues from advertisements may confine the project to areas where there is heavy footfall rather than cater to the urban poor.

Municipal Corporation of Tiruchirapalli 41

The Tiruchirapalli model, which won the National Urban Water Award in 2010, attempted to involve self help groups operating and maintaining community toilets. The success of this model has been attributed to its emphasis on multi-stakeholder involvement and its community ownership of the asset. Gramalaya, a non-governmental organisation supports people led initiatives for improved and sustained access to water and in the slums of Tiruchirapalli City Corporation. There is a combination of public toilets, provided in commercial areas, and communal toilets used by slum communities. Some toilets are pay-and-use toilets while others are free. Gramalaya conducted a review of existing facilities and a need assessment to review sanitation needs in slums. It also helped form the self help groups that would manage the toilets on behalf of the communities, and trained them on hygiene and sanitation. One of the key achievements of this approach was that 179 of 186 slums in the Corporation area were declared open defecation free within two years of the partnership.

36 See, “Chennai to get 5000 toilets soon”, The Hindu, July 5th 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/article3603204.ece; Pratiksha Ramkumar, “You gotta do it when you gotta do it”, The Times of India, July 5th 2012, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Layout/Includes/TOINEW/ArtWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOICH%2F2012%2F07%2F05&ViewMode=HTML&PageLabel=4&EntityId=Ar00400&AppName=1; “Congested localities to get mobile toilets” Deccan Chronicle, July 5th 2012, http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/cities/chennai/congested-localities-get-mobile-toilets-876;37 See Annexure 238 Jeremy Colin and Nijssen, Sander, “Public Toilets in Urban India: Doing Business Differently.” Water and Sanitation Program ( :2007), 3-7; https://www.wsp.org/wsp/sites/wsp.org/files/publications/519200874857_SAPublicToiletsFN2008.pdf39 Jeremy Colin and Nijssen, Sander, “Public Toilets in Urban India: Doing Business Differently. Water and Sanitation Program” (2007), 5-7;40 Jeremy Colin and Nijssen, Sander, “Public Toilets in Urban India: Doing Business Differently. Water and Sanitation Program” (2007), 9-10; https://www.wsp.org/wsp/sites/wsp.org/files/publications/519200874857_SAPublicToiletsFN2008.pdf41 http://www.waterawards.in/2010-winner-profile-gramalaya.php

8

Issue brief | November 2012

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

The World Bank sponsored Slum Sanitation Programme in Mumbai, implemented between 1996 and 2005 attempted to build partnerships between construction companies, NGOs and CBOs to ensure that public toilets were not only commercially viable but also answered a need by the communities that would utilise and maintain them.42 The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) contracted out a “sanitation package” that consolidated various aspects of sanitation – health, hygiene, education and awareness, community participation and capacity building – and ensured that construction companies, NGOs and communities were all responsible for ensuring sanitation. The design of the toilet was prepared by the construction company and finalised in consultation with the CBO. MCBM issued building permits and CBOs were responsible for maintenance and operation, for which they collected user fees.43 There was some flexibility in how the CBO operated the toilet – they were either directly involved or contracted out the work to private companies.44 328 toilet blocks with around 5,100 toilet seats were constructed under the scheme.45 The scheme attempted to redress the narrow supply-side delivery of basic services by involving communities both in the design and operation of the amenity.

3S Shramik

Portable Toilet Cabins (PTCs) are popular in western countries as temporary toilets at large fairs and construction sites. 3S Shramik has been dealing with portable sanitation systems since 1999 and is planning to install portable toilet cabins (PTCs) across slums in metropolitan cities in India.46 3S Shramik has successfully implemented a pilot of their project in Anand Vihar, Delhi and have implemented a similar project in Dattawadi, Pune.47 In its project areas, 3S Shramik is responsible for installing the toilet and cleaning it on a regular basis. A partner organisation collects the user fee and maintains the toilet.48

Sulabh International

Sulabh International began constructing public toilet complexes in 1974 as part of its sanitation and social reform movement.49 The Sulabh two-pit pour flush toilet system is cheap,

42 Shyamal, Sarkar, Ghosh Moulik, Soma and Sen, Somnath “The Mumbai Slum Sanitation Program: Partnering with Slum Communities for Sustainable Sanitation in a Megalopolis Water and Sanitation Programme.” (2006), 15-16; http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/01/25/000020953_20070125135506/Rendered/PDF/384560IN0Mumbai0slum01PUBLIC1.pdf?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679&entityID=000020953_20070125135506&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=52367943 Rosanna Nitti and Sarkar, Shyamal. “Reaching the Poor through Sustainable Partnerships: The Slum Sanitation Program in Mumbai, India” (2003), 5; http://www.archidev.org/IMG/pdf/The_Slum_Sanitation_Program_in_Mumbai_India.pdf44 Shyamal, Sarkar, Ghosh Moulik, Soma and Sen, Somnath “The Mumbai Slum Sanitation Program: Partnering with Slum Communities for Sustainable Sanitation in a Megalopolis Water and Sanitation Programme.” (2006), 10; http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/01/25/000020953_20070125135506/Rendered/PDF/384560IN0Mumbai0slum01PUBLIC1.pdf?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679&entityID=000020953_20070125135506&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=52367945 Ibid, 2946 “Company Profile- About our organisation” - http://www.3sindia.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=2747 “3S Shramik Blog” - http://businessinnovationfacility.org/profiles/blogs/at-last-new-toilets-at-dattawadi48 Business Innovation Facility. “Project summary for 3S SHRAMIK - India – Portable sanitation and waste management”, http://api.ning.com/files/kw0AND3jQQn7TGi0n6gfZTRZ71lXsd6AVIuczqtdEOBLOxLCsdxrMFyEckZCoyILOSDfn1LIeidebAL3**GXcFsC*VOaVx8T/Saraplastprojectsummary13Jan2012agreed.pdf49 “Sulabh International Social Service Organisation Website – Sulabh Public Toilet Complexes - http://www.sulabhinternational.org/st/sulabh_public_toilet_complexes.php”

9

Issue brief | November 2012

hygienic and environmentally sustainable. A typical Sulabh toilet is connected to two pits – while one pit is in use, the other is kept on standby. Around 2 litres have to be poured into the after use for flushing as opposed to ten litres of water required for flushing in sewerage or septic tank systems. After two years the contents of the pits can be used as manure. Sulabh has constructed its toilets in 1.2 million households, the government of India has constructed 54 million Sulabh toilets and Sulabh has used this toilet model in its 7000 public toilet complexes across the country. Interestingly, the objective of Sulabh’s sanitation movement is not only the provision of basic services, but the restoral of human rights. Sulabh’s sanitation system has been recognised as a global urban best practise by the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) recommends the use of Sulabh’s designs and technologies.50

Eram Scientific Solutions Pvt. Ltd

When the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced their Reinvent the Toilet competition,51 Thiruvananthapuram based Eram Scientific Solutions Pvt. Ltd. was up for the challenge. Delight, Eram Scientific’s electronic toilet is automatic and is managed remotely from a control room. On inserting a coin in a slot, automatic doors swing open, the lights and exhaust fans turn on and a preliminary flush of 100 ml is activated. After the toilet is used, an automatic flush is activated. The amount of water used for the flush depends on the amount of time the user has spent in the cubicle. These toilets are also automatically cleaned and sterilised.52 In areas where it is not possible to connect to a drainage tank, the waste from the toilet is treated by a bio-membrane reactor.53 Eram has been awarded a grant of Rs. 3 crore from the Gates Foundation to “pursue research on maintaining cleaner public toilets while conserving precious resources of water and energy”.54

Centre for Urban Regional Excellence (CURE)

Instead of innovating with toilet design, Julia King a PhD student from the London Metropolitan University in collaboration with the Centre for Urban Regional Excellence (CURE) is attempting to tackle the sanitation problem Savda Ghevra, a resettlement colony in Delhi, by re-imagining conventional sewerage systems. The project aims at connecting households to small sewers at shallow depths which will be connected to a communal septic tank. The contents of the septic tank will be treated by an Anaerobic Baffled Reactor before it is let into the city’s sewerage system. Experiences from the Savda Ghevra pilot project, which will be start construction in 2012, will provide useful insights into sanitation for dense, low-income areas in cities.55

50 Abha Bahadur, “Human Rights’ Perspective Related to Sulabh’s Sustainable Technologies on Water and Sanitation” Presentation at the United Nations Independent Expert’s Consultation with water and sanitation service providers (Lisbon: 2010), http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/water/iexpert/docs/presentations2010_partI/service_providers/India_%20Sulabh%20International.pdf51 Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations “Reinventing the Toilet”, http://www.gatesfoundation.org/watersanitationhygiene/Pages/reinventing-the-toilet.aspx52 See Meenakshi Rohatgi, “India’s first electronic toilet”, Technology Review India, July 2011, http://www.technologyreview.in/computing/38122/; Shoba Warrior, “Interesting story of India’s first E-toilet”, Rediff.com, December 16th 2011, http://www.rediff.com/business/slide-show/slide-show-1-special-interesting-story-of-indias-first-e-toilet/20111216.htm; R Gopakumar, “An aesthetic solution to a stinking problem”, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/content/168142/an-aesthetic-solution-stinking-problem.html#;Sangeetha Unnithan “E toilets with embedded hygiene”, The Hindu, Property Plus http://www.eramscientific.net/uploads/news/910c38ed947fbc7528a39769d811a5b5.pdf; “Eram Scientific Website – Delight Page” - http://www.eramscientific.net/sitepage/solutions/delight53 R Gopakumar, “An aesthetic solution to a stinking problem”, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/content/168142/an-aesthetic-solution-stinking-problem.html#54 “Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation grant for Eram Scientific’, The Hindu Business Line, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/article3795761.ece

10

Issue brief | November 2012

11

Issue brief | November 2012

A tripartite partnership was formed between UN-HABITAT, Water-Aid and Gwalior Municipal Corporation, to implement the Slum Environment Sanitation Initiative (SESI) project for achieving open defecation free slums in the city. Nirmal Samiti, a community-based organisation (CBO), was formed to create awareness amongst community members about the benefits of household toilets. For households that do not have sufficient space for individual toilets, community toilets were proposed. It was decided that the existing defunct community toilet should be demolished and a new community toilet should be constructed at the same place. Nirmal Samiti took the responsibility to supervise the construction of toilets and their maintenance. To meet the initial operation expenditure on water and electricity of the community toilet, the Gwalior Municipal Corporation provided free electricity and water for a period of one year. A five-member team of Nirmal Samiti was formed to act as caretaker on a rotational basis. One community toilet that services 139 households and 203 individual toilets were built under this project in one slum. It is being replicated in 28 other slums in Gwalior.

Kerala Connected E-toilet Infrastructure (CETI)

Kerala is planning to introduce its Kerala Connected Toilet Infrastructure technology which will be allow a user to view the nearest public toilet, check if the toilet is operational, view available parking space in the area etc. This information could also be useful for planning for urban sanitation

12

Issue brief | November 2012

in the future. The Connected E-toilet Infrastructure (CETI) funded by Kerala’s state sanitation

13

Issue brief | November 2012

mission is modelled around the Australian National Public Toilet Map.57

14

Issue Brief | November 2012Annexure 2

Comparison of national and state level sanitation policies

SALIENT FEATURES

NATIONAL URBAN SANITATION POLICY

TAMIL NADU URBAN SANITATION POLICY

JAWHARLAL NEHRU NATIONAL URBAN RENEWAL MISSION

Approach

Pro-Poor Access for un-served and poor households Access for un-served populations of the urban poor at the state level

Provision of basic services to the urban poor - (security of tenure, improved housing, water

supply and sanitation etc)

Focus on Outcomes

Three types of indicators: process, output and outcome related

Outcome: no open defecationNot merely measuring access and existence

of toilets, but actual use

Focus on awareness generation and behaviour change

Outcome: open defecation free cities Aims for the overall development of cities

Planning

Needs Assessment Studies City Sanitation Plans City Sanitation Plans – Tamil Nadu City development Plans

Responsive to Demand

Demand-based participatory approach to sanitation.

Participatory planning and mapping

ManagementReview public-

private partnerships in sanitation

Promotes community-planned and managed toilets

Allows ULBs to invite public, private and community agencies to provide services

Strengthens the capacities of ULBPromotes public-private partnerships

Encourages public private partnerships

Implementation

Design

Accessibility Access and use of toilets by floating populations and the urban poor.

Toilets should serve the needs of women, children, men, the elderly and the disabled.

Operational guidelines

States are required to issue guidelines for participatory approaches, planning,

sustainable management and service delivery.Accountability Monitoring/ Rating of cities Rating of cities – Tamil Nadu Project monitoring and reforms monitoring

55 See “Julia King’s research webiste” - http://julia-king.com/research/savda-ghevra/; Julia King “Tackling the sanitation challenge”, Indian Express, February 18th 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/tackling-the-sanitation-challenge/913462/; Gayathri Sreedharan, “Cluster Flush”, Time Out, http://www.timeoutdelhi.net/aroundtown/aroundtown_preview_details.asp?code=13756 http://waterawards.in/2008-finalists-profile-gmc.php

57“Connected e-toilets in Kerala soon”, Business Standard, January 21st, 2010http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/connected-e-toilets-in-kerala-soon/462428/15

Issue Brief | November 2012Annexure 2

Performance Indicators

Mapping of facilities

City sanitation task force to maintain a GIS database

GIS mapping of slums colonies and sanitation facilities

Introduction of e-governance, GIS and MIS for various urban services

16

Issue Brief | November 2012Annexure 2

Review of Public Toilet Initiatives

17

CITY/ SERVICES

CHENNAI (EXISTING)

CHENNAI (PROPOSED) MUMBAI DELHI KERALA TRICHY GWALIOR SULABH

MODEL

Land CoC CoC MCBM MCD or NDMC

Local government/ NGO

Toilet structure CoC Private

contractorConstruction company

Private contractor Purchased

TCC/ built by community with grants from NGO

Local government/ NGO

Water CMWSSB Private contractor CBO Private

contractorIn built tank

TCC piped water, borewells and overhead tanks

Sulabh

Waste water CMWSSB Private contractor CBO Private

contractor

Can be connected to nearest drainage line

Sewerage network, septic tanks, DEWATS

Two pit pour flush system

Solid waste CoC CoC CBO Private contractor Community Sulabh

Electricity TNEB Private contractor CBO Private

contractor

Solar panels/ local government

TCC

MaintenanceCoC - Public Health Department

Private contractor CBO Private

ContractorPrivate contractor Community Sulabh

Issue Brief: Public Sanitation FacilitiesAnnexure 3

Review of the Corporation of Chennai’s tender document

OUTPUTS MONITORING

ApproachPro-PoorFocus on Outcomes

PlanningData

Spatial Analysis

Management Type of contract Build Operate and Transfer

Implementation

The concessionaire will prepare drawings of the modern shell in accordance with acceptable standards

The Engineer-in-Charge shallreview the Drawings; the drawings will have to be revised by the concessionaire if they do not conform to standards and specifications

The toilet will have to be constructed in a way that causes minimum damage to the public (e.g.construction at night)

The Engineer-in-Charge shall inspect the facility att regular intervals

Cleanliness of the facilitySafety and Security

Routine maintenance including prompt repairs of pot-holes, cracks,concrete joints, lighting and signageUndertake maintenance works in accordance with Maintenance Manual and the Maintenance ProgrammePreventing encroachment and unauthorised usage

Maintain drainage system - no accumulation of water, liquid or night soil

The required quantity of scented Phenyl, acid, naphthalene balls and other cleaning agents must be used to ensure cleanlinessLighting arrangement ("shall be of the fluorescent tube of requisite lighting density")Ensure a clean, tidy and orderly condition free of litter and debris. The Concessionaire shall clean and empty the litter bins into suitable garbage bags.

CoC shall remove the garbage from the modern shell units (toilets).

Accountability

Performance The concessionaire will furnish monthly reports on construction

The concessionaire is required to carry out tests to ensure that the project is in compliance with industry standards

Tests wil be carried out under the supervision of the Engineer in Charge; The Engineer in charge furnishes the details of the tests to the Steering Committee

GIS/MIS

18

Issue Brief: Public Sanitation FacilitiesAnnexure 3

19