Gender and Economic Policy Discussion Forum XX:

Venue: Jacaranda-1 Hall, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003

ISST Background Note

Swachh Bharat Abhiyan and ‘Gender Concerns’

“Mahatma Gandhi said ‘Sanitation is more important than independence’. He made cleanliness and sanitation an integral part of the Gandhian way of living. His dream was total sanitation for all.”

Swachh Bharat Mission (Mojumdar 2014:3).

Seeking to achieve an open defecation free India by the year 2019, the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (SBA) launched on October 2nd 2014, jumpstarts the largest as well as the most challenging program on sanitation by the Indian government till date (Kaul 2015). However, ever since the launch of the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP) in 1986, which sought to extend sanitation coverage to rural areas, sanitation as a concerning issue, has been prioritized in most policy agendas in India across political spectrums. The CRSP was later restructured into the ‘Total Sanitation Campaign’ in 1999 and then restored as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012.

PPP’s and Funding: The low magnitude of public spending on sanitation services and rural drinking water emerges as an important concern retracting the performance of the SBA. Although a critical component of the rural sanitation programs, individual household latrines have increased only marginally. Usage of toilets remains affected by lack of water. The Swachhta Status Report by the NSSO shows that only 42.5% households in rural India vs. 87.9% households in urban India were found to have access to water for use in toilets (NSSO 2016). Sustainability of the SBA is also impacted by the lack of resources for maintaining school and angwanwadi toilets that would otherwise deteriorate leading to subsequent non-usage over time. Finally, also concerning is the reduced budget for the Information Education and Communication component (from 15% to 8%), which is essential in triggering behavioral change to encourage use of toilets (Kaul 2015). The reliance on public private partnership (PPP) for sanitation as well as drinking water in the SBA further acts as a constraining agent on the government’s ability to address persisting unequal access of vulnerable sections to these services. Moreover, with PPP projects not investing in public participation of project planning and implementation, it reduces the latitude for accountability and transparency in their functioning (Kaul 2015).

Social Inclusion: Caste based inequities and discrimination against women and socially excluded groups characterize most rural water and sanitation programs. Despite large proportions of scheduled castes and women engaged in manual scavenging, 35% of the total rural population has access to water, compared to 28% of scheduled castes (SC) and 14% of scheduled tribes (ST) households in rural areas. 30.6 per cent of rural households have access to toilets, compared to 23% of SC and 16% of ST households in rural areas (Kaul 2015). Due to caste-based discrimination SC households, have been largely concentrated in the peripheral areas with limited and erratic water supply. Similarly, tribal populations have been located in geographically isolated terrains restraining access to water and escalating costs of construction of toilets. Worse off, nearly 68% of women-headed households in rural areas have no toilets within the premises (Kaul 2015).

Gender Concerns: With hygienic and safe sanitation services closely tied up with the safety and well-being of women, lack of such services intensifies their vulnerabilities to various forms of violence and adverse health implications. These women often wait until dark to use open spaces or drink less water and modify their diet (Kaul 2015). The construction of community sanitary complexes (CSC’s) is also hindered by the mandated 10% contribution by communities, lack of water supply and poor maintenance. The need for safe and enclosed bathing spaces for women also fails to find policy recognition in the SBA. Less scope for women participating in decision-making processes of sanitation programs act as an additional barrier.

Without adequate supply of water to maintain clean toilets, the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) survey reveals that barely half of the toilets built under the SBA are being used (Sharma 2015). Of substantial concern also is the employment of manual scavengers despite being a non-bailable offence, to empty pits of toilets that fill up eventually, a problem that remains unaddressed by the SBA. Slow progress of the SBA with just about 18% of the targeted 100,000 community and public toilet seats to be built by March 2016 (Dasgupta and Kumar 2015), charges of money laundering (Zee News 2016), and solid waste management issues (Pulakkat 2015) are some of the concerns that continue to plague the program. However, with over 80% coverage in individual household toilets, Mizoram sets an exemplary standard worth emulating, by being largely free from the problem of open defecation. This can be attributed to Tlawmngaihna – a traditional practice that encourages community participation by placing the well-being of the community ahead of individual needs (NITI 2015). The success of the SBA largely depends upon the ability of the state governments, line ministries and other actors to own the program and how well it is able to address the concerns of women and other socially excluded groups who depend on the public provisioning of sanitation the most (Kaul 2015).

References

Das Gupta, M., and Kumar, B. (2015, October 1). One year on, PM Modi’s Swachh Bharat drive fails to leave a mark. Hindustan Times.

Kaul, K. (2015). Social Exclusion in the context of the Swacha Bharat Abhiyan. Yojana.

Mojumdar, S. (2014). Swachh Bharat Mission: Draft of Note for Distribution to State Governments for discussion on 25th August 2014 in review meeting. Swachh Bharat, Swasthh Bharat: Action Plan of the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation. Government of India.

National Institute for Transforming India. (2015, October). Report of the Sub-Group of Chief Ministers on Swachh Bharat Abhiyaan. Retrieved from http://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/coop/Report%20of%20Sub-Group%20of%20Chief%20Ministers%20on%20Swachh%20%20Bharat%20Anhiyaan.pdf

National Sample Survey Office. (2016). Swachtta Status Report. Ministry of Staistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India.

Pulakkat, H. (2015, March 3). Swachh Bharat Abhiyaan: Why cleaning up India is serious business. The Economic Times.

Sharma, N. (2015, November 23). Swachh Bharat Abhiyan: Survey reveals not even half the toilets built being used; government withheld findings. The Economic Times.

Zee News. (2016, June 1). Two Swachh Bharat Abhiyan officials arrested for transferring Rs 13.5 lakh to people close to them. Retrieved from http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/two-swachh-bharat-abhiyan-officials-arrested-for-transferring-rs-13-5-lakh-to-people-close-to-them_1890697.html

Information:

Shalini Yog
Program Coordinator
E: shalini.yog@in.boell.org