Capacity is an essential factor in the delivery of safe, sustainable Inclusive Urban Sanitation (IUS), without which progress can be hampered and vital efficiencies missed. Osward M Chanda and Annabell Waititu share their perspectives.
What are the key challenges for capacity building in the sanitation sector for amplifying/mainstreaming or institutionalising the Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS) framework and principles?
Osward M Chanda, IUS Advisory Board member
To empower relevant stakeholders and organisations in general – and onsite sanitation in particular – advocacy and awareness campaigns should be the starting point for decision-makers to understand and prioritise onsite sanitation systems in addition to conventional sewerage systems.
Service providers do not consider non-sewered systems as part of their scope of responsibilities. New sanitation approaches, including non-sewered sanitation, and non-conventional approaches to sewerage services will require a change of mindset. Thus, there is a need to prioritise capacity enhancement around CWIS frameworks and principles for all sanitation professionals.
There are insufficient financial resources and incentives to undertake capacity building activities at local level. There is the need for a sustainable sanitation financing framework with specific allocation towards capacity building activities, and work must be undertaken to address the unclear legal and regulatory environment to improve action on capacity building.
Stakeholder coordination for mainstreaming CWIS principles is critical for the institutionalisation of CWIS principles among communities, community-based organisations, local authorities, service providers/utilities, funders and line ministries.
As little attention is paid to the poor and the most vulnerable in society – those who stand to benefit more from the CWIS framework and principles – for CWIS to be successful there is the need for advocacy and capacity building, so the people who stand to benefit the most are carried along in the mainstreaming process.
Engagement through mobilisation, sensitisation and advocacy (as part of capacity building activities with communities, including social and gender mainstreaming) would enable the CWIS framework to be better tailored to offer solutions that address the distinct requirements of communities.
Finally, data collection remains a challenge. Data is essential to drive the process of institutionalising CWIS, as the sanitation sector traditionally has lacked the technical capabilities and proper tools needed to gather, manage and analyse sanitation data across the sanitation value chain.
There is a need for robust data collection and management systems to provide a basis for evidence based policy decision-making, and ensuring that these data systems can inform and monitor city-level, sector and national progress of CWIS.
Annabell Waititu, IWA IUS Task Force member and Vice President of Programmes at Big Five Africa
CWIS is a significantly new shift from the traditional model of sanitation. In the past, everybody looked on sanitation as the responsibility of the household. Because of this, policies are inadequate to support institutions adopting CWIS. So, we need to be thinking where we should begin.
In terms of capacity building, it is very important for us to ask ourselves who needs what training and what policies are available. For example, in Kenya the regulator was only focused on water services, but now they must regulate sanitation as well – yet they don’t have standards for sanitation, and it is difficult for these to be decided upon. Regulation is difficult if the standards are not there, and it is unclear what the rules are for different organisations. Things are very unclear, and policies are needed to guide decision-makers.
Service providers such as the water utilities in Kenya were not dealing with civil sanitation previously, so we need to look at the kind of staffing and the skills we have – expertise in non-sewered sanitation for example. It will take time to come up with good policies that will address all the issues and all the interests of the individuals concerned, as well as introducing the different kinds of technologies that should be working to improve sanitation for communities. Water service providers have engineers who can deal with civil engineering, but they don’t have expertise in CWIS.
Please could you provide an example of success that would be valuable to others in the sector.
Chanda says:
Incorporating the CWIS approach in infrastructure planning has not only proven to be efficient, but has also provided a range of solutions/models that have shown a lot of positive impacts.
In Kenya, during feasibility studies for four water supply and sewerage projects, the approach led to the scaling up of CWIS integration in most programmes implemented by other water and sanitation development agencies.
The CWIS SAP tool for investment decision-making led to modelling of different investment scenarios, such as use of sewer only, mixed use (sewer and non-sewered sanitation) and onsite sanitation, to determine the best investment option.
The implementing agencies gained from additional data collected on the number and type of containment, transport and treatment systems, which informed decision-making. They then came up with service delivery mechanisms and different business models to incentivise the private sector and ensure there are options for revenue generation for the utility. Those agencies used the improved terms of reference that incorporate CWIS activities and qualified CWIS personnel in their new consultancy assignments.
In Zambia, the Lusaka sanitation programme has carried out a successful city-wide capacity building intervention, involving all actors and laying the foundations for understanding the city’s sanitation challenges, inculcating and equipping them with the essential knowledge framework and resources to plan, execute and oversee the CWIS approach as part of their day-to-day mandate.
The actors are the Lusaka City Council, Ministry of Health, and Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company (LWSSC). As part of capacity building initiatives, the project supported and operationalised the LWSSC sanitation monitoring system. This is fully integrated with other software systems of the Lusaka City Council and the Ministry of Health, enabling data aggregation, reducing duplication, and enabling actors to implement and manage their various programmes and projects in the sanitation sector. It also provides them with analytical tools to analyse and improve decision-making. At the strategic level, it enables government, through the Ministry of Water Development and Sanitation, to transparently see the performance of the sanitation sector.
Waititu says:
We have had quite a bit of success in Nairobi,because we have seen a few projects that are really addressing the issue of non-sewered sanitation, looking at the entire value chain and making sure that the construction of sanitation facilities is appropriate. These projects have worked with local communities to ensure that sewage is captured and contained. They have also provided education on the importance of appropriate containment. This environment has helped develop partnerships and improve opportunities for investment.
Attention is being given to the safe transportation of sewage for treatment. The waste is then treated and turned into fuel, with products produced for industrial and household use.
There is also work being done to professionalise manual sanitation work, providing better training, uniforms, PPE and other equipment, accompanied by education for communities about what is suitable to be disposed of in sanitation facilities, which has helped sanitation workers do their work more efficiently. This has made a huge difference. Manual sanitation workers are now professional and respected, and they are supporting the whole process of sanitation in informal settlements in urban areas. l
More information
iwa-network.org/projects/inclusive-sanitation
