1. Sanitation as a Business in Peri-Urban Areas: Innovations and Opportunities Jeremy Colin (Water and Sanitation Specialist) IGP Innovator Forum, Lusaka October 8 th, 2014

2. Sanitation challenges in peri-urban areas Facilities Mostly on-site facilities (pits, tanks) - little access to sewer networks and treatment Variable quality of facilities Rarely emptied Pit emptying, removal and treatment / disposal Access problems Sludge compacted, often mixed with solid waste Final treatment / disposal points absent or distant Much indiscriminate local dumping

3. Who are the players in peri-urban sanitation? StakeholderKey Points Service users (customers) DIY toilet construction, pit emptying (health hazard) Public service providers Minimal presence Possibly a few trucks for sludge removal Rarely: sludge treatment Formal private sector Little involvement Very few entrepreneurs involved in sanitation Informal small operators Main players but limited skills, equipment and capital Not professionalised Unregulated Not co-ordinated with municipal operations External support agencies Innovations but not always commercially viable NGOs tend to link with CBOs; less with private sector But growing attention to sanitation as a business

4. What business opportunities? Household Sanitation. Communal Facilities Treatment Reuse / Disposal Transport Emptying Containment Transport Sludge Removal Affordable Toilet Designs Produce Fuel, Soil Enricher Sale of Recycled Products Manage Public Toilets/ Baths

5. FSM in Maputo Extensive use of on-site sanitation but little government involvement in faecal sludge management HH toilets often poor quality, many built by SSPs. Most emptying is by SSPs and manual, charge $7-$13 Some NGO-supported micro-enterprises (WaterAid, WSUP) with small tankers / handpumps; charge $15/m3, but unaffordable to poorest Many pit latrines abandoned when full No dedicated treatment plant for faecal sludge; small % is treated at STP which is not operating effectively

6. TypeServicesTechnologyPriceChallenges Individual emptier (IE)  Emptying latrines and septic tanks (dry season)  Labour for latrine, drain construction  Buckets  Yard burial  Petrol / creosote Depends on type, size, ability to pay: Latrines US$ 7-13 Sep. Tanks US$ 30-70 + creosote, alcohol!  Unsafe latrines  No safety equipment CBOs  Empty pits / tanks  Construct toilets / components  Hygiene / San. Promotion  Primary solid waste collection  Mini vacuum tankers  Storage (transfer tank)  Transport to STP by vacuum tanker US$ 7-13 per 0.5m 3 depending on distance  Equipment repair and replacement  No commercially viable business model Micro- enterprise (MSP)  Empty pits / tanks  Primary, secondary solid waste collection  Transport (taxi)  Car wash  Micro-finance  Buckets, hand pump, mechanized pump  Transport to STP (plastic tanks on small truck) Varies: US$ 20-60 per latrine  Low demand in dry season  Ability/willingness of low-income HH to pay  Marketing strategy

7. FSM in Maputo Variety of SSPs: micro-enterprises, CBOs. Valuable but incomplete service, with challenges to sustainability – Some CBO services struggled when NGO support ended In 2011, micro-enterprise UGSM (SWM contractor) began pit emptying service with WSUP support, using commercial model (starting to repay capital) – flexible (manual and mechanical services) – challenges with storage and transport (no transfer tanks) No strategy to incorporate SSPs into a ‘joined up’ FSM service addressing all steps in the service delivery chain

8. Maputo: New Initiative Partnership between service providers’ association, Maputo Municipal Council, World Bank/WSP and WSUP in Nlhamankulo Municipal District Eight operators participating Objective Develop and implement sustainable business models for low- cost FSM services in peri-urban areas Integrate SSPs into municipal operating framework Provide technical and financial support (esp. access to capital) Critical aspects – Safe, hygienic and environmentally friendly (all steps in FSM process) – Without prejudice to public health (operators, households, neighbours) – Close monitoring of technical and financial progress, lessons to inform future expansion

9. Maputo: Project Components Promotion and Monitoring by Local Leaders Construction of Infrastructure FSM Services by Private Operators

10. Pit emptying in eThekwini, RSA Reliance on on-site facilities in informal settlements: around 35,000 VIP and 80,000 UD toilets, provided by the municipality Largest pit emptying service in Africa – VIPs emptied free once every 5 years – Householders responsible for emptying UDD toilets (easier) – Municipality encouraging greater private sector role (mixed results) Extensive use of private contractors by municipality – Manual emptying most effective option (solid waste in pits) – Workers provided with protective clothing, long-handled shovels etc. Treating sludge in conventional STPs is problematic, other solutions sought: – Convert sludge into fertiliser pellets (LaDePa process) – Deep trench burial

11. Kumasi: ‘Clean Team’ Low-income areas with few household toilets; reliance on unhygienic public toilets Response to research on what low-income households want: affordable, durable, hygienic flush latrines Innovative business model, very different to typical approach of latrine promotion, mason training, seed materials etc. Began with consultation, development and testing of prototypes and business models among low-income households, leading to development of the ‘Uniloo’ – Moulded plastic UD chemical toilet with removable cartridge Commercial operation but with external technical support (WSUP, Unilever, IDEO)

12. Clean Team: Uniloo

14. Clean Team: Uniloo Servicing

15. Clean Team: Operational Model

16. Clean Team: Branding

17. Clean Team Approach: Key Facts Initial price $10/month/family (emptied twice-weekly). – Compared with $30/month for use of public toilet by family of 5 100 users in 2012, currently over 4,000 Unilever directly involved, franchised operators must maintain high standards of the Clean Team brand – Complete brand strategy (IDEO): uniforms, radio spots, posters etc. Not targeting the poorest at first, instead creating an aspirational product – Costs/charges will come down if goes to scale Treatment? – Neighbourhood holding tanks tankers existing STP – Potential for re-use /recycling and sale of waste in future

18. Innovations in Public Toilet Provision India: Delhi Public Toilets Businesses bid for licences to build and operate facilities and use external walls as advertising space; municipality provides land and receives monthly licence fee Initially very profitable for operator, provided facility was in good location for advertising – Operator preference for high volume commercial centres, not low-income residential areas (occasional not daily use) Quality of management highly dependent on contract supervision and monitoring by municipality

19. Delhi: Public toilet in shopping centre

20. Innovations in Public Toilet Provision Kenya: Sanergy Network of ‘Fresh Life’ branded public toilets in Nairobi slums, franchised to local micro-entrepreneurs. UD toilets with removable cartridges (similar to Uniloo) Sanergy employees collect waste daily, deliver to central processing facility for conversion into fertiliser Vertically integrated service (facility, storage, transport, treatment) Since 2011: now over 170 franchised toilets in three slum areas, over 8,000 users per day

21. Important Lessons The sector is learning, commercial models still evolving Not all innovations are commercially viable Not all small service providers are entrepreneurs! Match tasks to the skills and resources of service providers Adopt a commercial model from the start (avoid reliance on external subsidy) Key decision: stand-alone service or partnership with municipal / utility operations? Government has a vital co-ordinating role Support agencies can provide valuable technical support and access to finance

22. Thankyou!

23. Sanitation challenges in peri-urban areas Service Providers Few government or formal private sector operators Informal operators (pit emptiers) available but have limited skills, equipment and access to finance – not professionalised – unregulated – not co-ordinated with municipal operations – few real entrepreneurs Donor-funded innovations not always scalable or commercially viable – Example: pit emptying technologies – NGOs tend to link with CBOs; less with private sector – But growing attention to sanitation as a business – Some promising pilots

24. Covered over when full Safely emptied Not safely emptied 38% 43% Treatment Reuse / Disposal Transport Emptying Containment 1% WC to sewer On-site facility POpen defecation Residential environment Leakge Illegally dumped Legally dumped 5% 7% Drainage system Treated Not treated 2%1% 3% Receving waters 46% 54% Current Sanitation Situation in Maputo