What works far better appears to be using social pressure instead of govt subsidies. The catch is that those doing so would lose the central money meant for the programme
How do you get communities to become enthusiastic about converting to flush toilets? A relevant query, given the operational, funding and maintenance issues dogging the two-decade project, with half the population still having none.
The trigger was supposed to free toilets built by the government; it remains the basis for giving funds to states under the Total Sanitation Campaign, which has often also brought central and state governments sparring with each other on the issues.
There’s an alternative, which doesn’t involve taking any government subsidy but works on people’s attitudes. Easier touted than done but this Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach can work far better, say its proponents. It has found its most recent convert in the Odisha government, currently deploying ‘change agents’ in 4,000 of its villages to trigger behavioural change in residents.
CLTS uses social workers to create a “feeling of disgust and shame” about open defecation, making the entire community switch to using toilets. A sample is provided by Amit Agarwal, deputy commissioner of Hisar in Haryana, a champion of this approach for making Haryana come close to the coveted ‘Open Defecation Free’ (ODF) status. “Do you know that in a village in Hissar which has 1,000 people, 500 kilos of faeces is generated daily, 15 tonnes monthly and 180 tonnes yearly? Where does it all go? It remains in the area in fields, ponds, and places where food is produced,” he declares.
This message, he says, is spread and it fills people with disgust, forcing them to change their habits of open defecation. Jairam Ramesh, the Union minister for rural development, has himself has lauded the Haryana example, saying ODF villages were not marrying off their daughters to villages which were not ODF.
More From This Section
Yet, even as his ministry is lauding the CLTS success stories, it has doubled the subsidy for toilets and the 12th Plan (2012-17) sanitation allocations are to go up from Rs 8,000 crore to Rs 36,000 crore.
The money issue
“Subsidy is counterproductive,” says Agarwal. “It kills the idea of sanitation.” Planning Commission member Mihir Shah agrees but says subsidies cant be done away with. The costs are high and quality has to be ensured, he says.
So, many states are struggling to find ways to get the subsidy amount without compromising on the CLTS method wherever it is being adopted. In Himachal Pradesh, principal secretary Deepak Salan introduced the CLTS approach as early as 2003, when the state found itself in the midst of a ‘toilet scandal’, with most of the toilets supposedly funded being found to have not been built or not used.
Says Salan: “I chanced upon the CLTS approach which had resulted in defecation-free villages in Maharashtra. We sent teams there and called the innovator of this approach, Kamal Kar, here to train our master trainers. It all started after our state rejected the subsidy approach, realising it led to nothing but scandals.”
The state decided to instead give the subsidy money as a reward to panchayats which managed the process and declared an end to individual toilet subsidies. “For the past five to six years, the state has been fighting with the Centre for releasing its toilet funds, even as each village is today ODF,” says Salan. “How many states can say no to subsidy?”
Odisha officials say that they plan to turn the subsidy amount into a revolving fund in the villages which become ODF. But, are clueless on what would happen if that would mean no funds from the Centre.
“Does anyone wait for a government subsidy to get his daughter married?’’ retorts Agarwal, who speaks with the passion of a social evangelist. He began the CLTS movement in villages in Panipat where he was posted earlier. However, th fact also is that his efforts have not moved outside these districts, as the state is yet to adopt the zero subsidy approach.
What works
“We don’t want to lose the subsidy funds. So, till the central government provides more flexibility on the use of funds, the CLTS approach would be difficult,’’ he admits.
His strategy is to downplay subsidies and keep it to the very end. “We pay the subsidy money to villagers when the entire village gets ODF. It has worked so far. We use funds for information, education, communication, which is about 15 per cent, and also administrative expenses, which is 10 per cent. This helps us run our programme, pay our volunteers,’’ he says.
Kamal Kar an agricultural scientist and innovator who pioneered the approach in Bengal and has taken CLTS to 14 countries abroad, says minister Jairam Ramesh may achieve a breakthrough in sanitation if he gave states flexibility in the matter of subsidies.
“Unless states are assured that they won’t lose funds if they do CLTS, few takers would be there,” he says.