03 Sanitation Spectrum
1 like314 views
This document characterizes different types of sanitation facilities along a spectrum. At one end are private facilities managed by individuals or landlords for exclusive use. Moving along the spectrum are semi-private facilities managed by landlords but shared among tenants, community facilities managed by NGOs, contractors, or governments for use by a neighborhood, and public facilities owned by governments for broader use. Finally, some locations have no facilities and open defecation is common. The document provides examples of different types of sanitation profiles observed across urban areas in India.
03 Sanitation Spectrum
- 1. A sanitation facility can be characterised and defined by its management, method of payment, usage with respect to the Sanitation Spectrum broader community and land ownership. Represented here are different sanitation profiles observed at research locations in urban Indian cities in general. Management Individual Landlord Private Contractor NGO Community Government Commerce Rent Owned Pay per Use Monthly Pass Free Usage ratio 1:1 1:25 1:50 1:Many 1:All Land Ownership Private Government Private Sanitation Situations where sanitation is part of private housing (rented or owned). In cases where multiple tenants/residents are using a common toilet, such as those in rented multi-story housing, the sanitation situation would qualify as a semi-private facility. The dynamics of management and upkeep of the toilets in such a case become interesting - while the landlord is expected to provide for maintenance (since it is part of the rent), due to general apathy on his part residents are forced to make their own provisions. Community Sanitation These facilities cater to a community neighborhood but may also be used by passers-by by virtue of their location. Even though these follow a typical model of a caretaker managing the operations (either as pay per use, pass based or free), the condition of these facilities varies dramatically across locations. Among several potential contributing factors is the management of the facility which may lie with an NGO, a private contractor, a community based organisation or the government itself - each showing varying degrees of efficiency. What is interesting is that in most cases these toilets are built on government owned land and rarely on private land implying subsidies and disincentives for market based efficiencies. No Sanitation This signifies absence of toilet facilities so open defecation is the norm in these locations. The only variable in such cases is the ownership of land which may be with the government or with private entities - impacting user access and attitudes. UX Research on Sanitation in Urban India | Quicksand | August 2010
- 2. Sanitation Spectrum The different kinds of sanitation facilities at each of the selected locations and the different sanitation profiles they fall under Ashwathpura Slum, Bangalore Open defecation Shared Sanitation Mathikere Flyover Slum, Bangalore (semi private, 1:8) Govt. built and run Govt. installed Mandal run/managed GP Block, Pitampura, Delhi community toilet mobile toilet community toilet (pay per use) (free to use) (pay per use) Public toilet Shared Sanitation Zamrudhpur, Delhi (semi private, 1:25) used occassionally (pay per use) Govt. built and run Govt. built toilet NGO run toilet Open Mirzapur, Ahmedabad community toilet (free to use) (pay per use) defecation (pay per use) AMC built NGO run toilet Khodiyar Nagar, Ahmedabad private sanitation Open defecation (pay per use) (under SNP) Govt. built Janta Chowk, Mumbai community toilet (free to use) SPARC toilet Govt. built toilet Sulabh run toilet Gautamnagar, Govandi, Mumbai under construction (free to use) (pay per use) (monthly payment) NGO built Govt. built Happy Colony, Pune community toilet community toilet Open defecation (monthly payment) (free to use) NGO built Ram Tekdi, Hadapsar, Pune community toilet (monthly payment) UX Research on Sanitation in Urban India | Quicksand | August 2010