Scaling-up Rural Sanitation in India Positive Determinants of Success in Eight Indian States: Results of a Review for the Water and Sanitation Program Presented by Clarissa Brocklehurst and Simon Mead

Problem Statement Note WSP support did not begin supporting in Rajasthan until 2011

WSP Intervention Activities 2002-2013 WSP championed the introduction of demand-based sanitation through: Advocacy with decision-makers: Creating champions Increasing awareness and willingness to act Support to the enabling environment: Building capacity Documenting and promoting best practice Bringing new and innovative implementation models to the sector WSP found success varied between States – and wanted to know why Advocacy with decision-makers: Creating champions through study tours and the pro-active use of champions to create political commitment Increasing awareness and willingness to act though targeted, high quality research and guidelines, such as the research on the economic cost of inadequate sanitation Support to the enabling environment: Building capacity through a series of interventions such as training and focused institutional support Documenting and promoting best practice through development of handbooks and manuals Bringing new and innovative implementation models to the sector, such as the introduction of outcome monitoring Tried various types of intervention, not always successful, wanted to know why

Methodology of the Review Undertaken between October 2014 and May 2015 Desk-based study of WSP activities in eight states and at national level Worked with four Indian consultants, collecting data, conducting 138 structured interviews at State level Timelines developed at State and National level documenting WSP activities alongside State and National milestones in the sector

WSP Interventions and Challenges Creating champions was effective in some States but was highly resource intensive and results were unpredictable Increasing awareness and willingness to act – some resources had significant impact in some States, but less so in “lagging” States New and innovative implementation models – outcome monitoring for demand led sanitation particularly successful but challenges of scale and uptake Hands–on training at State and district levels, often successful but not within WSP’s mandate to go to scale Similar activities were undertaken in many States, but the results were mixed. Creating champions was effective in some States but is highly resource intensive, can be short lived if champion is moved to another position, and does rely on good fortune Increasing awareness and willingness to act – resources such as “ Economic Impacts of Inadequate Sanitation in India” had significant impact in some States – generally those not considered already “lagging” New and innovative implementation models – outcome monitoring for demand led sanitation particularly successful Hands–on training at State and district levels, often successful but impossible to go to scale

Findings- what were the determinants of WSP success? Awareness of poor progress, resulting in decision makers willing to take action An opportunity to initiate action in areas that are not the poorest The presence of “local champions” The presence of few other development actors Enabling cultural factors

Presence of determinants in each State Meghalaya Rajasthan Himachal Pradesh Maharashtra Haryana Jharkhand Madhya Pradesh Bihar Awareness of poor progress results in willingness to take action Opportunity to start in areas that are not the poorest Local champions willing to take action Few actors working in the sector Enabling cultural factors

An opportunity to initiate action in areas that are not the poorest Willingness to take action as a result of awareness of poor progress in sanitation Yes, can be influenced but need other approaches when progress lacking in general. An opportunity to initiate action in areas that are not the poorest Yes, programming may be phased to initiate work in less poor areas. The presence of “local champions” Yes, but study tours are resource intensive and unreliable – find other methods There are 676 districts in India, all with numerous officials who could learn and benefit from study tours, but it would clearly be impossible for WSP to provide opportunities to all of them. It is also clear that participating in a study tour is not always sufficient to galvanise change – many study tour participants have taken little or no action upon their return, and often those who have been motivated through a study tour move to other positions unrelated to sanitation. However, the analysis shows that changing mindsets and creating champions is a key determinant of success so new and more scalable approaches must be found. The presence of few other development actors  No, but coordination with them can certainly be improved. Enabling cultural factors No, but other sanitation approaches can be used instead.

Way forward – how do WSP’s lessons help us? Sanitation must now reach all Indians, in lagging States and in difficult cultural contexts Agencies can’t work only where conditions are conducive to their success New approaches are needed that harness the capacity of others, such as government training institutions, in order to deliver at scale Development partners must innovate and find effective ways to influence decision- making

Way forward – how do WSP’s lessons help us? Development partners must work together, and work to their comparative advantage Improved coordination between development partners (i.e. each working on putting in place certain determinants) Each can support a few key interventions that leverage, complement work of others

Thank you