Chapter 13

314 India Infrastructure Report 2004
! SANITATION AND PANCHAYATS IN

INFRASTRUCTURE
13.1 SANITATION AND WATER SUPPLY: THE FORGOTTEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Dileep Mavalankar and Manjunath Shankar
Images of big dams, bridges, roads, power plants, airports, explore the role of NGOs in promoting water and sanitation,
etc. are evoked by the word ‘infrastructure’. But few think which we illustrate with case studies. Lastly, we provide
of the toilet bowl or the water tap in the house as some suggestions on how the situation can be improved.
infrastructure. But they remain the most commonly needed Although water and sanitation are both important, we have
items of basic infrastructure. Recent studies have shown stressed sanitation since it is even more neglected than
that investing in infrastructure will improve the health of water. Epidemiological evidence suggests that sanitation is
the people, which in turn will increase productivity. For as effective in preventing disease as improved water supply.
instance, regression studies on data from 74 middle income
countries shows that good infrastructure (access to water,
BENEFITS OF SANITATION AND WATER SUPPLY
sanitation, telephones, and roads) is very strongly associated
with low levels of maternal mortality, infant mortality and Access to sanitation and water supply is a fundamental need
under-5 mortality; as well as low levels of poverty and high and a human right. It is vital for the life, health, and dignity
levels of enrolment in primary education (Irigoyen 2003). of the people. According to World Health Organization
The most vital sector of infrastructure for achieving the goal (WHO and UNICEF 2000), the improved water supply
of health is provision of sanitation and drinking water. and adequate sanitation will result in:
Water supply and sanitation, which has the greatest impact
on health, is one of the sectors of infrastructure of our • 25 to 33 per cent reduction in diarrhoeal diseases in
country, which need the most urgent attention. The need the developing world, which accounts for 4 billion cases
is felt more, since investments are not necessarily each year.
appropriable, but the social benefits are stupendously large, • Decreased incidence of intestinal worm infestation
warranting, therefore, state intervention. Studies and research (estimated at 10 per cent of the population in developing
on sanitation and water supply as infrastructure are also countries), which leads to malnutrition, anaemia, and
retarded growth.
limited. For example, the India Infrastructure Reports
• Controlling blindness due to trachoma, and
covered over the last three years, a total of 103 articles, of
schistosomiasis, which are also water related.
which only 7 were on sanitation and 10 on water.
We explore the importance of sanitation and water supply In India poor hygiene and sanitation accounts for 9 per
in terms of health and other benefits. We also bring out the cent of all deaths and an estimated 27,463,000 years of life
woeful status of sanitation and water in India, and the rate lost each year (Murray 1996). This risk factor (arising from
of progress in the sector. Next we analyse the reasons for poor water supply and sanitation) is the second largest
the poor status of sanitation and its slow progress. We also contributor to the burden of disease in India, contributing
Sanitation and Panchayats in Infrastructure 315
Box 13.1.1
Gender and Sanitation
Gender differences play an important role in sanitation. Young girls and boys often do not differ in their personal sanitation habits.
Both may relieve themselves in open spaces as and when required. When they approach puberty, girls often have to meet stricter
cultural requirements than boys: they must
• use only more secluded places, which are often farther from home,
• go only with a group of other girls and only during the twilight hours, or
• defecate only at home and help their mothers to dispose human and solid waste
• stop attending school, etc.
The situation for adolescent girls becomes more complicated when they start having their menstrual periods and need more
privacy and sanitary facilities. A sanitation facility in school and at home may reduce these inequalities. Girls become more equal
because they no longer have to walk far and drop out of school for lack of proper sanitation. The improvement may, however,
also create new gender inequalities. The collection of water for flushing, cleaning, and hand washing, for example, may create more
work for women and girls. Often, such new tasks are not shared between all—men and women, boys and girls—who use latrines
and practice hand washing. Most of the times burden of getting water and keeping the toilets clean falls on girls and women.
Source: Sanitation Connection (2003).
to 9.5 per cent of total Disability Adjusted Life Years reported and estimated for few selected diseases in India,
(DALYs1) lost. (The first is malnutrition, contributing to which are caused due to poor water supply and sanitation.
22.4 per cent of total DALYs lost, and which is indirectly The above reported figures are a gross underestimate
linked with sanitation.) The problem of poor sanitation is since the health management information system or disease
exacerbated in India because of the following factors: i) reporting system is poorly developed in India and, hence,
tropical climate, ii) dense population, iii) low socio-economic there is considerable underreporting of cases of infectious
status of most of the population, and iv) underdevelopment. diseases. Also, not all the diseases caused by poor sanitation
Women and the poor bear a disproportionate burden of are shown in the table. It is estimated that 70 per cent of
the effect of poor sanitation and water supply due to their all diseases are water-borne. The economic burden of ill
socially defined roles. Box 13.1.1 summarizes the relationship health caused by poor sanitation and water supply is also
between women and sanitation. substantial. People spend a lot of money for treatment of
There are many diseases caused by poor water and these highly preventable diseases. Surveys have shown that
sanitation, such as diarrhoea, typhoid, jaundice, intestinal on an average people spend Rs 123–136 per case of gastro-
worms, etc. Table 13.1.1 gives the number of cases and deaths enteric infection (NCAER 1992). The costs of treatment
have gone up substantially since 1992 as medicine costs
Table 13.1.1
especially have gone up. Also, about 73 million workdays
Number of Cases and Deaths Reported and Estimated
Due to Select Diseases Caused by Poor Water are lost each year due to water-borne diseases. Health benefits
Supply and Sanitation (2002) of improved water supply and sanitation, also include an
increased economic well being at the household level, mainly
Reported Estimated through saving large amounts of people’s time and energy.
Disease Cases Deaths Cases Deaths Such saved time and energy can be used in economically
Cholera 3829 6 NA NA productive or educational activities. Table 13.1.2 gives details
Acute 8,215,296 3594 19,29,43,000* 7,11,000* of estimated time saved by improved water supply and
diarrhoeal 9,22,000# sanitation.
disease
Enteric fever 3,79,304 382 3,00,000* NA Key Dependencies
Viral hepatitis 1,31,798 1322 NA 17000#
Irigoyen has reviewed a number of studies worldwide and
Notes: Park (2000); # Murray, Christopher and Alan Lopez (1996);
NA Not available
has listed the following benefits to education and health
Source: GOI (2002). arising from better sanitation and water supply (Irigoyen
2003):
1 DALYs is a measure of disease burden which is devised to
combine mortality and morbidity after adjusting disability. It measures • Water and sanitation affect school attendance and
how many years of healthy life is lost due to mortality and morbidity test scores. The lack of piped water reduces school attendance
caused by a particular disease. by 2–17 per cent in Africa.
Table 13.1.2 significantly better on per capita income! Globally, over 2.4
Time Gains by Improved Access to Water and Sanitation billion people have no access to basic sanitation (WHO–
in Sub-regions: African Region (AFR-D) and Eastern
UNICEF 2000). In India, 83 per cent of households in rural
Mediterranean Region (EMR-D) with High Child
and High Adult Mortality areas have no basic sanitation facility (toilets) while 26 per
cent in urban areas do not have such facility (GOI 1999).
Potential Outcomes achieved by Time gains by sub-regions Compared to other similar developing countries India lags
(hours per year per capita) behind in terms of rural sanitation as shown in Table 13.1.3.
AFR-D EMR-D
Table 13.1.3
Halving the population without 5.9 2.0
Percentage of Population of Select Countries having
access to safe water
Access to Improved Water Supply and Sanitation
Halving the population without access 44.1 19.4
to water and by improving sanitation Country HDI Rank Access to Access to GDP per
Disinfecting at point of use 88.2 38.8 sanitation* water capita
Improving sanitation (low cost) + 88.2 38.8 supply** (PPP US$)
disinfection
Increasing piped water supply and 144.6 96.0 Saudi Arabia 68 100 95 10,815
sewer connections Philippines 70 83 87 3805
Sri Lanka 81 83 83 3279
Source: World Health Organization (2002). China 87 38 75 3617
India 115 31 88 2248
Pakistan 127 61 88 1834
• Doubling the access of rural families to tap and well
Bangladesh 132 53 97 1483
water would increase enrolment by 20 per cent in rural Malawi 151 77 57 586
India.
Notes:
• Adequate water supply and sanitation in schools have
*Access to sanitation is defined as the percentage of the population
increased attendance of girls by 15 per cent in Bangladesh. using adequate sanitation facilities, such as a connection to a sewer
• Better water and sanitation facilities is associated with or septic tank system, a pour-flush latrine, a simple pit latrine, or
reduced absenteeism and improved test scores in Tanzania a ventilated improved latrine. An excreta disposal system is
and Nigeria. considered adequate if it is private or shared (but not public) and
• Access to clean water reduces probability of child if it hygienically separates excreta from human contact.
**Access to water is defined as the percentage of the population
mortality by 55 per cent (42 studies).
with reasonable access to an adequate amount of drinking water
• Presence of sewers in urban Nicaragua reduces the from improved sources. ‘Reasonable’ access is defined as the
probability of child mortality by 55 per cent. availability of at least 20 litres per person per day from a source
• Good water supply and sanitation reduces stunting within 1 km of the user’s dwelling. Improved sources include
and wasting in children (Nigeria, Guatemala, Mozambique). household connections, public standpipes, boreholes with hand-
pumps, protected dug wells, protected springs, and rainwater
There is, therefore, substantial evidence to show that collection (not included are vendor, tanker trucks, and unprotected
adequate water supply and sanitation are important wells and springs).
determinants of health, education, and social well being. It Source: Human Development Report (2001).
is a moot point if any of these vast positive externalities are
at all factored in, in the design of plans and priorities of Poor Water Supply
governments.
The numbers shown in the above table for water are
somewhat misleading as simple access (88 per cent) does not
CURRENT STATUS OF SANITATION AND WATER necessarily translate into good quality potable water supply
SUPPLY IN INDIA for 24 hours across the year. Most water supply is for a few
hours per day. It can even be just for few minutes every 3
It is common experience that in India sanitation in public or 4 days in a week in certain urban areas. In many rural
places is poor and water is unsafe for drinking. International areas some people have to walk long distances to get water.
comparisons show that India is much behind many countries The situation becomes worse in summer and in years of
in sanitation and water supply figures. India was ranked a drought. When there is shortage of water the chances of
lowly 133rd among 180 countries in terms of water water contamination increases manifold. For example,
availability and 120th among 122 in terms of water quality intermittent water supply creates negative pressure in the
as per World Water Development Report, 2003 (Times of pipes when there is no water supply and thus dirty water
India 10 June 2003). We do not have similar figures for is sucked in from sites of leakages in the pipe system. When
sanitation. This is entirely shameful since India’s rank is water supply resumes, this dirty water is supplied first. Even
in well and pond water when the quantity of water is small 1 per cent of rural households and 22.5 per cent of urban
chances of contamination increase substantially. households reported having toilets connected to sewerage
In rural areas water supply through taps is very limited. systems (GOI 1996b). This is a deplorable situation in a
National Sample Survey (NSS) shows only 18.7 per cent country whose 5000-year old Indus Valley civilization was
of households in rural areas have piped water. The known for its urban planning and sewer systems!
improvement between 1988 to 1998 in households with Sanitation facilities in urban areas is better than rural
piped water is less than 3 per cent points. In urban areas areas but is far from ideal. Large populations in urban areas
the coverage of tap water seems to have declined from 72.1 still do not have access to latrines and go for open defecation.
per cent to 70.1 per cent between 1988–98, with increase A survey of 7 major cities in India found that only 2 of them
in use of tube wells and handpumps. This indicates that the had fully covered underground sewerage systems and high
cities are not able to provide tap water to newer settlements. sewage network densities. The other 5 had inadequate
(Table 13.1.4) network coverage. More importantly, of the 7 cities, 3 do
not have any functional sewage treatment plant. The
Table 13.1.4 remaining 4 cities treat only 48–59 per cent of waste water
Percentage Distribution of Households by Principal Source of
generated. The untreated waste water is disposed into tanks/
Drinking Water during 1988, 1993, and 1998 (GOI 1999)
lakes or rivers, thus polluting them and creating severe
Source of drinking water Percentage of household in environmental hazards for the populations downstream
Rural Urban (Table 13.1.6). The government has taken up projects to
1988 1993 1998 1988 1993 1998 clean up only a few major rivers like the Ganga (under
Ganga Action Plan) and the Yamuna and, that too, with
Tap 15.5 18.9 18.7 72.1 70.4 70.1
Tube well, hand pump 39.1 44.5 50.1 17.2 18.5 21.3 little positive impact. Many rivers like the Sabarmati in
Well 39.1 31.7 25.8 9.2 8.6 6.7 Ahmedabad and the Gomti in Lucknow are dumping
Tank, ponds, river canal 6.6 5.0 5.3 1.6 2.4 1.7 grounds for large amounts of untreated sewage even today.
Lake spring and others This is similar to the situation in the Thames river of
Source: NSS Report No. 449. London around the 1850s when major cholera epidemics
had occurred there when the Thames became the dump for
Deplorable Sanitation the city’s sewers.
If the situation of major cities in India is so pitiable
The situation for sanitation facilities is even worse. In rural
regarding the sewerage system, one can well imagine the
areas 82.5 per cent of households and in urban areas 25.5
what it is like in the thousands of medium and small towns
per cent of households do not have a latrine. There is a lot
in the country.
of statewise variation in these numbers (Table 13.1.5). Only
Table 13.1.5 Are There Improvements?

Percentage of Households not having Latrine as per
National Sample Survey of 1998
Improvement in water and sanitation has been slow in the
past. NSS data shows that between 1988–98 the households
States Rural Urban with no latrine declined from 89 to 82.5 per cent in rural
Andhra Pradesh 88.5 30.8 areas and from 31.8 to 25.5 per cent in urban areas, that
Assam 24.7 2.0 is, a mere 6.5 per cent points improvement in rural areas
Bihar 89.4 45.3 and 6.3 per cent points improvement in urban areas in
Gujarat 79.9 21.1
10 years. (Ghosh 2002) The following graphs made by UN
Haryana 84.5 32.9
Karnataka 88.9 30.0 agencies using various data sources show the very slow
Kerala 23.1 5.1 progress of water and sanitation coverage in India.
Madhya Pradesh 94.5 45.2 At the current rate of improvement of sanitation facilities
Maharashtra 85.8 15.8 in rural areas (as shown in the graph) it will take about 75–
Orissa 96.1 35.8
85 years to reach 100 per cent coverage of sanitation in rural
Punjab 67.9 14.8
Rajasthan 87.0 25.5 areas. It is shameful for a country like India to have such
Tamil Nadu 88.5 32.5 a slow progress in sanitation. This slow progress also shows
Uttar Pradesh 90.6 28.2 lack of societal and national commitment to improving
West Bengal 76.1 15.2 sanitation. Sanitation is not seen as a national priority.
India 82.5 25.5 There has to be a paradigm shift if significant change has
Source: Ghosh (2002). to come.
Table 13.1.6
Comparative Data on Sewerage Systems in Major Cities of India (c. 2002)
Unit Bangalore Ahmedabad Surat Lucknow Nagpur Indore Chandigarh

Population of the city lakh 50.0 35.2 24.3 22.1 20.5 16.0 8.1
Total Municipal Budget (Expenditure) Rs cr 665.5 789.3 561.1 137.8 371.8 222.8 135.1
Wastewater Collection (Through sewers) % 60 100 75 46 40 41 100
Wastewater Collection (Through surface drains) % 40 0 25 54 60 59 0
Sewerage Network (Network density) km/sq km * 6.5 3.3 1.5 2.0 4.7 6.9
Sewerage Network (Ratio to road length) – * 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 1.2
Treatment (Operational capacity as proportion % 56 59 81 0 0 0 58
of WW generated)
Treatment (Quantity treated as proportion of % 56 59 48 0 0 0 58
WW generated)
Source: Pangotra (2003).
Budgets for Water Supply and Sanitation also the more recent ones like Rajiv Gandhi National
Historically, water and sanitation have received a very small Drinking Water Mission, and Integrated Rural Water Supply
proportion of the total government budget. Table 13.1.7 and Environmental Sanitation Project. Even with these many
gives the budgetary allocation of the central government for schemes water supply and, more so, sanitation have not seen
water supply and sanitation during the past 15 years. It any significant change. The planned expenditure by the
shows that water and sanitation has been getting only 2 per public sector on water supply and sanitation increased after
cent of allocation of the central government budget. While the Fourth Five-Year Plan from 1.6 per cent of the total
other sectors with little problem of appropriability, like outlay to 2.9 per cent. Since then it has hovered around 3.5
telecommunication services, get 17 per cent. It is not per cent of the total outlay (GOI 1998).
unrealistic or facetious to imagine a future where even the
poor have telephones but no toilets or clean water. THE NEGLECT
The Government of India has initiated many programmes
and projects since independence to bring about universal Although there are many reasons for the failure to achieve
coverage of safe water supply and adequate sanitation. The satisfactory sanitation coverage, it is clear that low social and
Minimum Needs Programme, rural water supply, and political priority combined with poor planning and
sanitation programme have all tried to address this issue as implementation, rather than the lack of knowledge or tools,
30
20 MIC00
IIMC97
% Coverage
JMP96
DHS99
NSS89
CEN91 DHS93
10
NSS96
WHO88
WHO90
WHO80 WHO83
JMP93
0
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
Year
Source: Adapted from WHO/UNICEF 2001.
Fig. 13.1.1 Rate of Improvement of Sanitation in Rural India

Table 13.1.7
Annual Budgetary Allocation of Central Government under Various Heads for Selected Years
(Rs in crore)
Mar-87 Mar-91 Mar-95 Mar-99 Mar-01 Growth Total
(1987–2001) (1987–2001)
percentage
Water supply and sanitation 329.7 470.3 1006.6 1826 2100.8 537.19 5733.4
1.7 1.39 1.6 1.91 2.01
Telecommunication 184.1 328.4 309.6 394.7 518.2 181.48 1735
0.95 0.97 0.49 0.41 0.5
Roads and bridges 300 460 665 2230.8 4827.4 1509.13 8483.2
1.54 1.36 1.06 2.33 4.63
Telecommunication services 827 2875 6751 13,772 18,155 2095.28 42380
4.26 8.49 10.72 14.39 17.4
Medical and public health 200 275 577.6 1194.5 1399 599.50 3646.1
1.03 0.81 0.92 1.25 1.34
Family welfare 530 675 1430 2489.3 3520 564.15 8644.3
2.73 1.99 2.27 2.6 3.37
Total plan outlays 19,422.3 33,856 62,992 95,685.7 1,04,361 437.33 3,16,317.7
100 100 100 100 100
Notes: Figures in lower row show percentage of total allocation.
Source: CMIE, 2003.
lies at the heart of the current slow progress in the sanitation long run the overall development of water resources has low
and water supply sector. WSSC working group on promotion political and administrative priority or visibility. Major
of sanitation has suggested the following list of reasons for irrigation projects are sometimes top political agenda—for
neglect of sanitation (Box 13.1.2). example, the Narmada dam in Gujarat. Irrigation water is
also a reason for conflict between states. But sanitation and
State Failure—the Key: Politically, sanitation and drinking drinking water has never received that level of priority.
water are not a great priority. This may be because people Sanitation is even further neglected by the society, as that
are used to poor sanitation and water supply. Second, the is not a social priority. Open defecation, waste water flowing
benefits of sanitation and water supply are social, shared, on the roads, and garbage being dumped in public places
and preventive in nature, while the costs are private and has become an acceptable social norm even in the most posh
governmental. It is not common to observe ministers areas of major cities in India. Fundamentally, the benefits
inaugurating sanitation and water supply projects. Of course of good water supply and sanitation are not easily politically
in the years of drought and water scarcity, water becomes appropriable, nor privately, but only socially, so given state
a big political and media priority. In such years many short- and institutional failure, there is neglect. Neglect, in turn,
term measures like supply of water by tankers and digging creates mindsets that accept the current situation without
of ponds are taken up to generate employment. But in the protest and as being normal.
Box 13.1.2
Why Isn’t Sanitation Happening?
• Lack of political will

• Low prestige and recognition of the importance of sanitation
• Poor policy framework at all levels
• Poor institutional framework
• Inadequate and poorly used resources
• Inappropriate approaches
• Neglect of consumer preferences and low public awareness
• ‘Women and children last’ is the policy followed in many programmes and plans
• Lack of public health leadership
Source: Kalbermatten, Middleton (1999).
Sidestepping Sanitation: Another important reason is the approach and involving the community, panchayats, local
lack of public health leadership. In western countries hygiene NGOs, funding agencies, and other institutions.
and sanitation were emphasized as preventive measures,
because the public awareness about its impact on health Poor Planning and Design: Investments made in sanitation
came in the 18th and 19th centuries—before the advent of and water do not yield proportionate results because of poor
modern curative medicines such as antibiotics. The European planning and implementation as well as poor repair and
societies of those times had no alternative but to improve maintenance. Economic and financial sustainability of
water supply and sanitation to prevent diseases. But in India environmental sanitation is severely hampered due to lack
the availability of cheap antibiotics coupled with lack of of funds for O&M. Poor planning is reflected in many ways.
vision among the public health and political leadership has Services are not conceived in an integrated way that takes
meant that authorities have become complacent to poor into account all their potential impacts. For example,
sanitation and water supply. Even the people and civil society provision of water supply without planning for the removal
organizations have become insensitive to gross insanitation. of waste water will create pools of stagnant water and
We would call this ‘insanitation-antibiotic syndrome’. mosquito breeding sites, thereby causing health hazards and
Insanitation is tolerated and its effects covered by use of poor living conditions, which could outweigh the positive
cheap antibiotics. But this is a dangerous spiral. Antibiotic benefits of water supply. Many times services do not take
resistance is rapidly developing. into account the needs and preferences of people and, hence,
people do not use them. For example, many toilet
Misplaced Concerns: There are no strong people’s groups construction programmes without demand generation lead
advocating the need for better sanitation and water supply. to non-use of constructed toilets.
In India there are strong environmental groups, which
Misplaced Priorities: Lack of resources is an important
highlight chemical pollution of water, but they have not
constraint on improving water supply and sanitation. But
done much about environmental pollution caused by open
resources depend on priorities. For example, we have seen
defecation, garbage dumping, etc2. Similarly, consumer
many cases where local, state, and national governments
groups have highlighted the problem of hospital waste
have invested public money in far less important activities,
being disposed off in an unsanitary way. Public interest
from the point of view of health of the people. Here are
litigation in this area has lead to strict enforcement of waste
a few examples:
disposal in hospitals. But such legal and environmental
activism is not seen in the area of basic sanitation and water • The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation runs a
which are much larger public health problems causing medical college and hospitals, sports stadiums, etc.—which
much more disease and death. The recent controversy are not among its primary (obligatory) duties. These activities
resulting from the Centre for Science and Environment’s take up a lot of the budget while the municipal corporation
report on high level of pesticides in Coca-Cola and Pepsi is not able to treat all the sewage the city produces and there
is a classical example of such misdirected environmental are not enough toilets for all the people. As a result about
activism. From a public health perspective lack of access 20 per cent of the city’s population is estimated to be
to adequate water, sanitation, and biological contamination defecating on the roads and a substantial portion of untreated
of municipal water supply which millions of people drink sewage is dumped into the river!
daily is a much more important problem than the levels • Latur city (a district HQ in Maharashtra) with a
of pesticides being higher than European standards in cola population of about 80,000 has built flyovers in the city
drinks. to reduce traffic congestion and waiting time at railway
crossings, but the drainage system in the city is still entirely
Cost Recovery: Economic sustainability implies that users open and unhygienic.
pay the full cost of their actions, including environmental • Lucknow is building a huge public garden at the cost
costs, and the full cost of future replacement. Financial of Rs 100 crore in honour of Baba Saheb Ambedkar, but
sustainability requires that systems are able to meet their it still does not have a working sewage treatment plant. All
capital, and operations and maintainance (O&M) costs. the untreated sewage is dumped in the Gomti river.
This has important implications for approaches to cost • After the earthquake in Kutch a luxurious district
recovery, financing mechanisms, and the use of subsidies. hospital worth Rs 100 crore was built in Bhuj with the
As such many recent projects have implemented innovative Prime Minister’s relief fund, while the allocation for sanitation
approaches for cost recovery by following a demand-driven in the whole of Kutch is very small.
• There are never any large and focused allocation on
2 Neither have they been much concerned about effects of the basis similar to that of the Golden Quadrilateral (GQ)
workplace pollution and its hazards. or the APDP. For example in the Eighth Five-Year Plan the
allocation for rural sanitation programmes was only Rs 674 sanitation projects. There have been a few NGOs who have
crore. sanitation and water as their main activity. Here we present
brief case studies of a few such NGOs and some innovations
Sanitation and drinking water are grossly under-funded.
in this sector, which have shown positive results. (Box 13.1.3)
The question is not whether roads are important or not, but
Consumption of sanitation has large additivity benefits.
whether roads, gardens, and hospitals can take precedence
It is of benefit to rich people to pay the poor to access
over water and sanitation for public welfare and public
sanitation or to pay the state to provide universal sanitation.
health.
So large are the additivity benefits arising from lower
A paper published in the journal Yojana indicated that
morbidity. The appropriability is also low especially at low
i) a mid-term appraisal of the Ninth Five-Year Plan showed
levels of income, meaning that the matter cannot be left to
that against the requirement of Rs 1200 crore for rural
the private sector. Therefore, it ought to have the highest
sanitation only Rs 500 crore were allocated, and ii) in 1999–
priority of the state. Unfortunately, state failure in the
2000, under the Centrally Sponsored Rural Sanitation
design, and, more importantly, in the institutional
Programme only 49 per cent of the allocated funds were
mechanisms, coverage, and maintenance of sanitation and
spent (Ghosh 2002).
of public health systems and services, has necessitated fresh
Institutionalization of Neglect: The neglect of sanitation is approaches and innovation. It creates the space for increased
also seen in the condition of toilets in public places like private and NGO participation, through partnerships and
airports, railway stations, bus-stations, gardens, etc. Most of other forms. Since state failure is largest in maintenance and
the times such toilets are dirty, ill-maintained, and without in micro-management, there is much scope to improve
water, soap, or towels. Not only at public places but toilets services when the private sector and NGOs are brought in
in hospitals and health department buildings are also in a the role of the provider, with subsidies and funds from both
very poor condition signifying the total neglect of sanitation users and the state. Innovative forms of PPPs and PFIs in
at such vital health installations. This shows that even doctors sanitation ought to be a top priority.
and health managers are not bothered by dirty toilets. It is
not an uncommon sight to find people relieving themselves CONCLUSIONS
in the open grounds of hospitals. Such is the total neglect
of sanitation in India. Improvements in sanitation and water supply are crucial to
the substantial decrease in disease and deaths. Besides, better
Some Changes? sanitation and water supply has positive synergies in
The funds allocated to water supply and sanitation sectors improving education, decreasing gender disparities, reducing
by the government are slowly increasing over time. The work burden on the families, and providing many other
government has been implementing various programmes social benefits. All these reduce the economic burden of ill
for improving sanitation and water supply. As a result, the health in the family and improve social well-being. Thus,
water supply in the country has improved, even though sanitation and water supply form an important sector in
there are lots of problems of the quality and quantity of infrastructure.
water made available, as well as problems of equity in access India has made reasonable progress in improving access
to water. The progress in sanitation is still abysmal, especially to water but the situation of sanitation is highly unsatisfactory,
in rural areas. especially in rural areas. Some of the key reasons for the slow
progress in water supply and sanitation are:
Role of the NGOs • Very low priority to sanitation and water supply among
Important changes have begun to take place in the sanitation political circles as well as within the society.
and water supply sector over the past few years. These • This results in meagre financial allocations to
increase the role of the private sector, and the importance sanitation and water. Even the allocated amounts are not
of the community and women as stakeholders. More fully spent due to administrative and design weaknesses.
generally, the decentralization process has been furthered. • Weak programme management has also lead to slow
Due to lack of progress of government-run programmes on progress in this sector.
water and sanitation, over the past years, more and more • Lack of pressure from public, judiciary or NGOs to
NGOs and social scientists have been involved in the projects ensure rapid progress in sanitation and water supply.
to generate community participation and demand. NGOs At the current rate of improvement in sanitation it will
are also providing training, planning, information— take about 75 to 85 years to reach 100 per cent coverage
education and communication inputs—to water and in rural areas. Such slow progress should be unacceptable
Box 13.1.3
Innovations in Sanitation
SULABH INTERNATIONAL
Started in 1974, by Bindeshwar Pathak, Sulabh International, a non-governmental organization (NGO) has done pioneering work
in the field of sanitation and has shown that human waste can be disposed of affordably an in a socially acceptable way. Sulabh’s
approach is based on partnerships with local governments, backed by community participation. Its activities have substantially
improved environmental quality in rural and urban slums. Pathak developed the Sulabh Shauchalaya technology, which is appropriate,
socio-culturally acceptable and economically affordable. It is low cost, requires only two litres (instead of usual ten) of water to
flush, and can function even where enough water is not available. It does not require the service of scavengers nor does it pollute
the air. Toilets are easily cleaned and maintained by house-owners themselves. Two (instead of one) pits re use and they work
alternately. It results in manure as a by-product. It also has high potential for upgradation when sewers are in place because it can
easily be connected to a sewer system.
Public ‘Sulabh complexes’ have electricity and 24 hours water supply and soap powder is supplied free to users for washing hands.
The complexes have separate enclosures for men and women. The innovation introduced by Sulabh was that all the public toilets
managed by Sulabh are staffed by an attendant around the clock who supplies soap for washing hands, ensures proper cleaning
and hygiene. The users have to pay a small fee (usually one rupee) in order to use the toilet. Children, the disabled and the poor
can use the toilet for free. Sulabh is operating and maintaining more than 5500 community complexes in 1100 towns in 26 states
and 3 Union Territories As a result of Sulabh’s efforts more than 10 million people have received improved, low-cost sanitation,
and over 50,000 scavengers have been rehabilitated as they now have jobs in these complexes.
The NGO follows a profit-centric model. Most of its public toilets break-even, but those located near highly congested areas
return massive profits, which in turn cross-subsidse some loss-making toilets. The NGO returns constant margins of 15–20 per
cent on an average annual turnover of around Rs 100 crore. It has shown that a mid-sized public toilet breaks even within eight
to nine months of usage.
Sulabh also provides free health education to millions of people through door-to-door campaigns. The organization trains local
people to construct more latrines themselves, and has helped other organizations to set up and maintain user-fee-based community
toilets in slums and other areas. For example National Sanitation Foundation in Gujarat had developed pay and use toilets in many
places in Gujarat. Sulabh with branch officers in many states and union territories has become international now by opening its
complexes in countries such as Bhutan, Nepal and Afghanistan. The key idea that Sulabh demonstrated was the people will pay
to use a clean toilet. It also showed that sanitation makes sound business sense.
Unfortunately Sulabh or its like have not multiplied fast enough to facilitate a more substantive coverage of population.
ENVIRONMENTAL SANITATION INSTITUTE (ESI)

The Environmental Sanitation Institute (ESI), formerly known as Safai Vidyalaya, is one of the few institutes in the country which
has taken up sanitation as its core business. Started by a Gandhian in 1964, its chief aim is capacity building in the field of
sanitation—its name ‘Safai Vidyalaya’ means ‘school for cleaning’. It trains health workers, nurses, anganwadi workers, village head-
men, teachers, engineers, doctors, etc. in the art and science of sanitation—constructing and maintaining toilets. It also acts as
a nodal agency for implementing various sanitation projects of the GOI, the GWSSB, UNICEF, and others agencies. It promotes
low-cost sanitation in Gujarat and the whole country. Due to the sanitation promotion and training work done by ESI for many
years, it is invited as an important member in various policy-making bodies of the government on matters of sanitation. In 1993
it was made a nodal institute for implementing sanitation programme in nagarpalikas and nagar-panchayats. The highlights of its
activities are given in the table below.
Table B13.1.3.1
Key Achievements of Environment Sanitation Institute, Ahmedabad
Key Achievements of ESI Numbers of units

Training Camps organized 2092
Training programmes for engineers in 15 states 102
Bawla type latrines constructed 17,500
Conversion of dry latrines into water seal latrines 1,86,000
Sanitary model ground financed by UNICEF 21
Latrines constructed in 3888 villages through 146 NGOs 1,87,798
Latrines constructed in 55 towns under GWSSB, IDA-1280-IN 29,949
School Sanitation Project 4400
Awards Received: Jamanlal Bajaj Award of Excellence in Local Self-Government, National
Award for Lok Shikshak, Mahatma Gandhi award, etc.
Unfortunately, in spite of such exemplary work done by ESI, it is the only institution of its kind in India which focuses entirely
on sanitation training . The case of ESI shows that with a small number of committed individuals a training institute can catalyse
a much larger impact on rural sanitation.
SWAJAL PROJECT
The Swajal project assisted by the World Bank seeks to improve sanitation and water supply and was conceived in 1994 in Uttar
Pradesh. The project philosophy is sustainability through ‘demand driven partnership’. The project created a new institutional
structure by forging a partnership among three entities—the Project Management Unit (an autonomous government society) of
UP Water Board, NGO support organizations, and village water and sanitation committees (VWSC).
The project was divided into four phases covering 1000 villages. NGOs serve as social intermediaries between the project
management unit and the community. It is called a support organization because the NGOs give ‘single-window assistance’ to a
rural community. To do this, they must have expertise in both ‘software’ and ‘hardware’. The cost of the NGOs’ involvement was
only for 6 per cent of the project budget. The NGOs’ role is disseminating the rules to the villagers, helping the community form
a representative organization (VWSC), and facilitating community decision-making about the choice of water facility design option.
The project, for the first time in India, introduced capital cost recovery and full community responsibility for operation and
maintenance. The main rationale for following a demand responsive approach in the Swajal project is to ensure that investments
are sustainable and the best proxy for demand is willingness to share costs.
The experience with this project showed that people are willing to pay for the services if they have choice in selecting the
technology and if they are properly informed of the choice and their obligations. But this process is slow and needs lot of facilitation.
The key lesson from this project is that with NGO involvement cost recovery is possible (even of the capital costs) and thus
projects can be made more sustainable. If such project can be undertaken with cost recovery in Uttar Pradesh which is an
underdeveloped state, it can certainly be carried out in most other states of India.
MARKETING SANITATION IN RURAL INDIA

In India the Water and Sanitation Programme—South Asia is working towards the adoption of significant institutional and financial
reforms, in order to ensure that the poor are explicitly recognized as valid customers and that they have increased access to self-
sustained water and sanitation systems across the country. Water-Aid India’s rural sanitation programme was making slow progress
in 1995–6 which prompted them to change their strategy from supply orientation to demand creation, social marketing, providing
access to credit, and developing a reliable supply of sanitation goods and services.
Demand creation was accomplished by moving from health education to health promotion. Partner NGOs started a school
hygiene education programme to supplement this, proving that ‘a convinced child is a committed advocate’. All the principles of
marketing like product, price, place, and promotion were adapted to the rural conditions. Promotion stressed the non-health benefits
of a household latrine like privacy, convenience, safety, status/prestige, cost saving, and income generation. Other promotional
activities included putting up billboards, painting promotional messages on the walls of the houses, and the use of sanitation road
shows—health workers touring local villages in a bullock cart delivering hygiene messages and selling sanitary wares.
This was reinforced by providing access to micro credit and establishing sanitary marts. As a result the number of latrines
constructed had risen from just 460 in 1995–6 to 5000 in 1997–8. The key lessons learnt are:
• Reduce and redirect subsidy from construction to hygiene promotion and marketing sanitation;
• Motivate target communities to install latrines by highlighting the non-health benefits of sanitation;
• Provide users with a range of options with low subsidy rather than a single high price model of latrines with high subsidy.
What this project showed was that social marketing approach can help rapid acceptance of the toilets in rural areas in spite
of low subsidy.
SEWA AND FINANCING OF SANITATION

The biggest constraints facing sanitation is lack of funding and poor management of the sanitation systems. Decentralization, which
shifts responsibility of sanitation to Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and local self-governments, might exacerbate this problem
since local bodies are already under severe financial constraints and their management capacities are even poorer than state
governments. This may lead to further neglect of this sector. In such a situation a viable option is to let households invest in the
infrastructure. This can be done through micro finance as demonstrated by the four NGOs in certain urban areas. These NGOs
(Baroda Citizens Council, Mahila Milan, SEWA Bank, Sri Padmavathy Mahila Abyudaya Sangam) have been giving micro credit
to their members under their housing/infrastructure category. An action research carried out by the Water and Sanitation programme
and SEWA (UNDP, SEWA) brought out the following points:
• Micro-finance is an enabling tool for improved water and sanitation services;
• Access to technical advisory support is vital for the success of credit provision for infrastructure;
• Social collateral in place of land tenure or traditional collateral would smoothen the process;
• Community and municipal partnership is the key to sustainability;

• Regular savings and effective field workers are vital for financial sustainability.
The study also found that there was a need for national loan bridge fund or loan guarantee fund, for capacity building of
communities, micro-finance institutions, municipalities, and housing finance institutions. In order to scale up both infrastructure
provision and infrastructure to poor communities, there is a need to understand the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholder,
clarify the different roles required and match appropriate actors with these. It resulted in defining joint guidelines with local
authorities containing a clear and simple set of rules vis à vis access to and level of subsidies and detailing the norms and requirements
for service connections to slum communities. Communities were also to contribute to scaling up of the coverage.
The above 5 small cases show that NGOs can play a vital and catalytic role in sanitation and water development. But their
resources are much smaller than that of the governments. Hence, partnership between the government and the NGOs is needed
on a much larger scale to rapidly scale up sanitation and water supply programmes in rural areas.
Source: UNDP 2003, Business Today 2003
to any civilized society and more so for our own country Panchayats and local governments can develop sustainable
with its ancient cultural heritage, and where rapid progress mechanism of operation, maintenance, and cost recovery of
is on in other sectors. expenditures. The development partners and financial
Over the last several years some NGOs, through some institutes can provide financial support for rapidly scaling
innovative externally-funded projects, have attempted to up effective programmes including micro-finance to the
improve the coverage of sanitation and water supply in rural families.
areas. Some have shown reasonable success in improving Large-scale investments in sanitation and water supply
water and sanitation by generating demand through can have vast multiplier effects on industries like cement,
community participation and improving supply of services hygienic products, soap, and building materials. More
through training, marketing, and micro-finance. Government importantly, given its vast externalities waiting to be realized,
programmes on sanitation and water are largely supply- worthy corporates could also take the lead in improving
oriented and could learn important lessons from the sanitation. Indeed, it would be part of market development
innovative approaches. The government could also usefully to enhance supply and create the demand for sanitary and
partner with private and community organizations. other products, as, with improvements in sanitation, its
There is an urgent need to increase political and social position changes from a ‘make do’ facility to one seen as
priority to sanitation and water supply. This can be achieved necessary to good living.
through sustained research-based advocacy using popular mass Reorienting the priorities of local self-governments
media. NGOs and activists have to take up this challenge. including municipalities and panchayats towards basic
The resource allocation to sanitation and water supply has infrastructure such as sanitation and water supply is crucial.
to go up very substantially given its vital importance to The state governments and funding agencies ought to control
health, social and economic development, and gender equity. non-priority spending of local bodies and help direct the
The pace for improvement of sanitation and water supply available resources to ensuring proper sanitation and adequate
can be increased by involving various stakeholders in the water supply. Activist environmental groups need to focus
process of development of this sector. The stakeholders on pollution and health problems being caused by gross
include NGOs, the community, the private businesses, and neglect of sanitation and drinking water supply. The potential
local self-governments including panchayats, development gains are far in excess of the media-catching activism that
partners, and financial institutions. Each stakeholder’s role we have witnessed thus far for CNG, or against pesticides
has to be well defined and coordinated with other in aerated drinks. Judicial activism and public interest
stakeholders. For example, NGOs can support community litigation could help improve the situation rapidly and make
mobilization and demand generation as well as training. the government agencies accountable.
13.2 TOTAL SANITATION CAMPAIGN: CHANGING THE FACE OF

RURAL BURDWAN
Rajarshi Majumder
Burdwan district of West Bengal is considered to be both samiti, and gram panchayat were fixed. Prizes for the best
the ‘granary’ and the ‘ruhr’ of Bengal. It has 3 distinct performer in every month and year were announced, creating
regions. The eastern and east-central parts are the a sense of competition among the administrators of these
agricultural powerhouses, the west is the mining area of local self-governance bodies. The usually slothful public
Raniganj, and the central region includes the industries officials suddenly became enthusiastic.
and educational and other services. But rural Burdwan like Another fresh element of the programme was the
much of Bengal has been poor, despite the large rise in technology, which allowed users to themselves install the
rural incomes since ‘Operation Barga’ in 1982. Sanitary toilet in their courtyard. Experts from WHO and SIPRD
infrastructure has been underprovided in rural Bengal, and designed a water-washed concrete latrine platform with pan
Burdwan is no exception. Only 27 per cent families had that would not cost more than Rs 350 after allowing normal
access to sanitary latrines in 2001, and open defecation has profit. It was to be set over a soak-pit that would take
been the predominant practice. This has been causing great 10 years for a family of 6 to fill up. Then all that needs to
harm to the rural society. Diarrhoea and other water-borne be done is to cover up the old pit and shift the platform
gastroenteric diseases are frequent leading to substantial to a new pit! NGOs were roped in to produce these latrines
adult deaths, and high infant mortality. Snakebites during and gram panchayats were asked to dig the pit for Rs 50.
the monsoons also claim many lives as people venture out Thus, a family could install a sanitary latrine for Rs 400,
into the fields and ponds for defecation. But suddenly and then fence it with sundry articles like plastic sheets or
things are changing. Thanks to a novel programme by the bamboo thatches. For families below the poverty line the
State Institute of Panchayat and Rural Development state subsidized Rs 150 and asked the family to dig up the
(SIPRD), the construction and usage of toilets has increased pit themselves, reducing the cost to just Rs 200. The gram
rapidly. panchayats conducted frequent meetings in the villages where
the villagers submitted their contribution to the panchayat
officials. Typically, within 7–10 days the latrine platform
THE CAMPAIGN was sent to the home of the beneficiary. The gram panchayat
then arranged for digging the pit in a few days, and
SIPRD was quick to understand that the conventional installation of the latrine. After that the family was asked
sanitation programme in existence since 1994 had been a to suitably surround it with materials according to their
non-starter with only 35 thousand installations in 7 years, choice and affordability.
leaving a gap of 7.5 lakh families in 2001! It was a typical The NGOs as producers and profit earners had an
government programme left to be implemented without interest in more installations and they joined the local
clear cut targets, incentives, and involvement of the people. officials in promoting TSC. This was crucial. The villagers
SIPRD realized the need for a change in design. The Total were advised, persuaded, coaxed, and cajoled. Wall writings,
Sanitation Campaign (TSC) started on 11 June 2001. The folk songs, street drama, puppet shows, etc. were arranged
District Development Authority or the zilla parishad was for awareness build-up. Role models like teachers and
given the task of implementing the TSC through the gram panchayat members were targeted first. Then the
institutions of the 3-tier panchayat system in West Bengal, children and women of the neighbours were persuaded to
with financial and logistical support from central and state create a sense of deprivation among them. The effect of
governments. Specific targets for each block, panchayat demonstration was dramatic on the population. Once a
threshold level of installaton was achieved the programme
gained momentum to create a demand for such toilets.
Acknowledgement is due to my senior colleague Pinaki Chakraborti UNICEF was roped in to provide sanitary latrines in the
and the head of our department, Kausik Gupta, for assisting and schools. This integrated approach broke the deadlock and
encouraging me for this write-up. Uday Sarkar and Ramkrishna
created the necessary ‘big push’. The authorities took a
Bandopadhyay, present and former sabhadhipati of Burdwan ZP
respectively, and Shibashish Banerjee, District Coordinator of TSC, ‘block-by-block’ approach where the district administrations
are the chief architects of the success of TSC as also the mainstay focused on one block at a time and supplemented local
of our survey. I also thank my students who worked hard for the initiative with state support so that the block could reach
field survey. full coverage.
Table 13.2.1
Progress of Total Sanitation Campaign in Burdwan District
Block No. of Households No. of Latrines Latrines Installed No. of Latrines Coverage % of all
in 2001 Census Existing in 2001 during 2001–3 in 2003 Households
All BPL
All BPL All BPL All BPL All BPL 2001 2003 2001 2003
Burdwan-I 38,933 21,178 12,708 2280 6615 5873 19,323 8153 32.6 49.6 10.8 38.5
Burdwan-II 28,855 15,491 10,735 2814 3234 3058 13,969 5872 37.2 48.4 18.2 37.9
Bhatar 53,505 30,910 10,718 1552 12,094 10,926 22,812 12,478 20.0 42.6 5.0 40.4
Ausgram-I 24,164 15,839 3080 308 21,084 14,704 24,164 15,012 12.7 100.0 1.9 94.8
Ausgram-II 30,374 16,521 3845 625 10,595 8846 14,440 9471 12.7 47.5 3.8 57.3
Galsi-II 29,115 19,131 5430 862 3268 3166 8698 4028 18.7 29.9 4.5 21.1
Raina-I 35,169 22,618 9747 2661 24,455 19,124 34,202 21,785 27.7 97.3 11.8 96.3
Raina-II 29,168 13,416 7914 1052 21,254 12,316 29,168 13,368 27.1 100.0 7.8 99.6
Khandaghosh 34,590 19,401 7974 1250 13,725 10,013 21,699 11,263 23.1 62.7 6.4 58.1
Memari-I 42,139 18,920 16,561 3028 8263 6253 24,824 9281 39.3 58.9 16.0 49.1
Memari-II 29,016 15,788 9226 1510 3796 3086 13,022 4596 31.8 44.9 9.6 29.1
Jamalpur 51,610 26,196 15,967 2143 4549 2598 20,516 4741 30.9 39.8 8.2 18.1
Kalna-I 37,731 24,566 14,147 5081 1105 1072 15,252 6153 37.5 40.4 20.7 25.0
Kalna-II 32,534 20,929 11,170 2641 921 863 12,091 3504 34.3 37.2 12.6 16.7
Monteswar 48,803 21,682 13,554 2281 7492 7064 21,046 9345 27.8 43.1 10.5 43.1
Purbasthali-I 40,944 29,063 14,402 5793 12,815 11,040 27,217 16,833 35.2 66.5 19.9 57.9
Purbasthali-II 42,951 25,394 10,897 3034 5493 5418 16,390 8452 25.4 38.2 11.9 33.3
Katwa-I 32,627 16,918 8585 1611 4602 3930 13,187 5541 26.3 40.4 9.5 32.8
Katwa-II 26,942 14,012 7483 1092 3217 2885 10,700 3977 27.8 39.7 7.8 28.4
Mongalkote 50,618 23,621 9037 1136 5184 4025 14,221 5161 17.9 28.1 4.8 21.8
Ketugram-I 30,421 19,383 4597 441 6518 3961 11,115 4402 15.1 36.5 2.3 22.7
Ketugram-II 23,426 15,229 4218 830 2460 2200 6678 3030 18.0 28.5 5.5 19.9
Galsi-I 36,289 18,520 7498 586 2544 2513 10,042 3099 20.7 27.7 3.2 16.7
Faridpur– 22,973 10,839 6347 428 2296 1775 8643 2203 27.6 37.6 3.9 20.3
Durgapur
Andal 35,914 8819 17,126 1450 2672 2533 19,798 3983 47.7 55.1 16.4 45.2
Kanksa 29,954 15,437 8699 1687 4222 3205 12,921 4892 29.0 43.1 10.9 31.7
Pandaveswar 36,077 13,857 13,851 1190 660 650 14,511 1840 38.4 40.2 8.6 13.3
Raniganj 20,527 4213 6727 271 1805 1388 8532 1659 32.8 41.6 6.4 39.4
Jamuria 24,527 9506 5722 485 2289 1017 8011 1502 23.3 32.7 5.1 15.8
Barabani 22,600 7989 3894 229 1194 279 5088 508 17.2 22.5 2.9 6.4
Salanpur 19,406 3423 6721 162 333 172 7054 334 34.6 36.3 4.7 9.8
Burdwan 10,41,902 5,38,809 2,88,580 50,513 2,00,754 1,55,953 4,89,334 2,06,466 27.7 47.0 9.4 38.3
IMPACT OF THE TSC UNICEF provided Rs 1.5 million. Rarely has this kind of
success been achieved in a rural development programme.
The success has been phenomenal. Against a target of 30,000
installations in 2001–2, 34,000 were installed. And in 2002– Table 13.2.2
3 there was a revolution. Over 1.7 lakh latrines were installed Progress of School Sanitation Programme in Burdwan District
which was in excess of the ambitious target of 1.5 lakh. More No. of Schools
than 2 lakh families were covered in 2 years of TSC. As a result,
Blocks Total With Latrine With Drinking Water
47 per cent households in 2003 had access to toilets as against
only 27 per cent in 2001. More outstanding, however, is the 2001 2003 2001 2003
fact that 3 blocks of the district—Raina-I and II and Ausgram- Memari-II 116 28 116 68 116
I—have been able to provide access to sanitary latrines to Raina-II 112 18 112 45 112
Memari-I 110 83 110 93 110
almost all families. These 3 blocks with about 89,000 families
Kanksa 109 13 109 101 109
can thus be declared as ‘totally sanitized blocks’. And all these Raniganj 42 11 42 10 42
have been achieved at an expense of just Rs 150 million. The Monteswar 175 23 175 127 175
beneficiary families have put up Rs 103.5 million, the central Katwa-I 98 14 98 64 98
and state governments together provided Rs 45 million, and Khandaghosh 141 5 141 36 141
The benefits of using toilets are immense.3 The frequency the people. The promotion was also imaginative and
of diseases in the families have reduced substantially and functional. Not having a sanitary latrine was projected as
medical expenses have fallen. This is bound to have a positive something to be ashamed of. The rural society reacted
effect in reducing poverty. Also, the state subsidy for providing strongly and adopted the product.
medicines through Rural Health Centres (RHCs) has come The very success of the programme has revealed certain
down, thereby recovering some of the expenditures on TSC. inadequacies in the situation. As saturation is nearing,
The key to the success of TSC has obviously been the problems crop up. Several families are willing to install
novel design and unconventional implementation methods toilets but do not have a courtyard to place the toilet!. Some
used, along with the mechanism of incentives for the (the very poor) are unwilling to shell out even Rs 200, as
implementing units. The conventional top-down approach the opportunity cost is felt to be too high. Unless endowments
of imposed development was abandoned in favour of improve there would be difficulties in carrying the movement
involvement of NGOs, local bodies and, most importantly, to cover the entire population.
13.3 RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE PANCHAYATS: A REPORT

FROM WEST BENGAL
Dilip Kumar Ghosh
With the passage of the Constitution (73rd Amendment) Act, NADIA DISTRICT
1992, and by insertion of the Article 243G, village panchayats
have formally become institutions of self-government. The Nadia has average ranking among the districts of the state.
Eleventh Schedule contains 29 subjects where inter alia items In this study 3 blocks were chosen—two of them being the
of infrastructure development are also included. The items furthest from the district headquarters. Locations close to
are: (a) minor irrigation, water management, and watershed the headquarters are expected to have better infrastructure,
development; (b) drinking water; (c) roads, culverts, bridges, and one is located very near the district headquarters. From
ferries and other means of communication; (d) rural each block 5 gram panchayats were selected on the basis of
electrification, including distribution of electricity, and (e) their size. Since West Bengal is trying to decentralize the
health and sanitation. The panchayats are mainly entrusted planning process gram sansad (village constituency) and
with the implementation of different centrally-sponsored public gram sabha are given importance by the state government.
works programmes administered by the Ministry of Rural From Karimpur I Block, the gram panchayats selected are:
Development. Their dependence on the government grants Karimpur I, Karimpur II, Jamsherpur, Madhugari, and
is almost total—in fact, they merely act as agencies of the Pipulberia. The 5 gram panchayats of Karimpur II Block
government and implement schemes according to government are Dhoradaha I and II, Murutia, Dighalkandi, and
directives. Thus decentralization of the decision-making process Nandanpur. Karimpur I and Karimpur II blocks are located
(so far as infrastructural development is concerned) means at a distance of approximately 90 km and 75 km, respectively
that panchayats are in better position to identify local from the district headquarters at Krishnagar. Krishnagar I
preferences and priorities for infrastructure services. It has so block is very near the district headquarter and is ‘urban
far not resulted in any substantial mobilization of resources oriented’. The gram panchayats selected from Krishnagar I
locally. Involvement of local people can enhance accountability are Asannagar, Bhanderkhola, Dogachhi, Bhatjangla, and
and quality implementation; but local performance depends Bhaluka4.
on the institutional and political environments in which the
decentralization process works. 4 The main data source is the Statutory Annual Audit Report
We look at Nadia district closely using records at the of the gram panchayats and income–expenditure report of the
village and block levels, covering both expenditures and panchayat samitis. As the data is not maintained adequately and in
the appropriate format, data loss seems to be a serious problem in
physical achievements. In Box 13.3.1, we briefly introduce
local offices. The blocks (where the office of the panchayat samiti
the state of rural infrastructure (village roads, water, and is also located) have computers from the year 1999–2000, but the
sanitation) in West Bengal. gram panchayats have no computers. As these data are unpublished,
in general, access to them is very difficult. The maintenance and
3 As a large and substantial portion of the population is covered updating of data in different registers of the gram panchayats and
there are ‘additivity’ effects that arise, so that the benefits in terms the block offices is irregular. This generates data-gap which in
of both health and well-being would be large. normal course remain unattended.
Box 13.3.1
Village Infrastructure in West Bengal: An Overview
In West Bengal, the road network in the rural areas is developed and maintained by the Public Works Department (PWD) of the
Government of West Bengal, municipalities, zilla parishad (district-tier panchayat), and panchayat samiti (block-tier panchayat).
The PWD usually does not take up the works related with unsurfaced roads. These roads are normally under the jurisdiction of
zilla parishad or panchayat samitis, who also build all-weather and metalled roads. The gram panchayats (village panchayats) do
not take up construction of surfaced roads and mainly take care of village roads, mostly katcha (unsurfaced) in nature.
Roads
At the GP level repairing and maintenance of village roads connecting different clusters of habitations (parah in the local language)
is limited to keeping them walkable. In Table 13.3.1, the share of panchayats in surfaced and unsurfaced roads in districts is given.
From Table 13.3.1 it can be seen that the panchayat bodies have a large chunk of unsurfaced roads which become inaccessible
during the rainy season. There is considerable variation in road density across districts, in part driven by terrain and population
density. Road density is particularly low in northern districts of the state whereas, in the districts near the state capital, Kolkata,
the road density is quite high (Bureau 2001)a
Electricity
Table 13.3.2 shows the progress of rural electrification in the state. It reflects slow progress. Further, in the electricity sector also,
the north districts of West Bengal have very low per capita consumption of electricity as compared to Kolkatab.
Sanitation
The Rural Sanitation Programme in West Bengal is administered by the Department of Panchayats and Rural Development. Truly
speaking, only in this programme is there a blending of work by NGOs and the government. In each block, efforts are being made
to set up a sanitary mart to produce low cost sanitary latrines and accessories on one hand, and to generate awareness among
households regarding the need to have a sanitary latrine on the other. These sanitary marts are visualized as social marketing outlets
where people can request a latrine according to their choice and capacity. Though expanding, they have yet to reach all the blocks.
The year-wise formation of sanitary marts and the coverage of households under this programme are given in Table 13.3.3 for
the period 1993–4 (when all the districts of the state are brought under this programme) to 2000–1. Growth rate in use of toilets
has been stupendous averaging about 7.5 per cent per annum over the decade. But coverage still remains only at a quarter of all
householdsc.
From Table 13.3.3 it can be easily realized that the task is huge because the number of rural households living in West Bengal
is tentatively 1,04,02,647d. As district estimates are not available in the NSSO report, Table 13.3.4 uses the 1991 Census and
the report of the Sanitation Cell of the Department of Panchayats and Rural Development, Government of West Bengal to map
the progress of toilet facilitye.
Water Supply
Panchayat bodies at the block and village level are the key actors in implementing the schemes in this sector. Handpumps are the
principal source of drinking water. They are community-based and installed according to the demands of the inhabitants. A household
has access to safe drinking water when it has access to drinking water supplied through pipes and tap, or a handpump/tube well
situated within the premises or outside the premises. According to District Statistical Handbook (2001) of Bureau, in West Bengal
the coverage of safe drinking water so defined in the rural areas is 77.86 per cent. NFHS 2 Survey points out that taking both
the rural and urban areas, the percentage of households with safe drinking water is 89.3 per cent in West Bengal. The Public Health
Engineering Department of the state government is also working in the rural areas for implementing piped-water supply schemes.
These schemes are identified by the zilla parishad in consultation with the panchayat samitis at block level.
a For example, in 2000–1, it is 375.16 km in Uttar Dinajpur, 508.34 km in Dakshin Dinajpur, 517.28 km in Malda, 376.43 km in Jalpaiguri.
Only in Darjeeling district it is 1113.05 km while it is 1628.72 km in North 24 Parganas (22 km from Kolkata), 1477.01 km in South 24 Parganas,
3064.78 km in Hooghly (45 km from Kolkata), 1849.35 km in Howrah (14 km from Kolkata), and 1699.24 km in Midnapur (130 km from
Kolkata).
b According to District Statistical Handbook, 2001 of Bureau, Govt. of West Bengal, it is 22 kwh in Uttar Dinajpaur, 26.93 kwh in Dakshin
Dinajpur, 58.74 kwh in Malda, 45.25 kwh in Jalpaiguri, and 31.92 kwh in Coochbehar. By comparison, Kolkata has a per capita electricity
consumption of 1127.81 kwh.
c For more detailed coverage of the campaign see Rajarshi Mazumder, ‘Total Sanitation Campaign’, Chapter 13.2, in this report.
d Using an approximate family size of 5.55 and a total population of 5,77,34,690 (2001 Census).
e Figures for 2001 are taken from the intensive survey undertaken under the Total Sanitation Programme (TSP) for ascertaining the coverage of
latrines in rural households. This survey was done under the overall guidance and supervision of zilla parishads. For Purulia, Birbhum, and Darjeeling
districts this survey was not undertaken at this stage. In case of these districts, the coverage is calculated on the basis of sanitary latrines constructed
under Centrally Sponsored Rural Sanitation Programme and with private initiatives. From the survey of TSP it is seen that if one latrine is constructed
under the government-sponsored programme, two additional latrines are constructed by the people themselves on their own initiative.
Box 13.3.2
Programmes in Infrastructure Development
Currently, there are 4 programmes under which the panchayat bodies at the village and block level undertake construction and
maintenance of road network in their respective jurisdiction. The programmes are the JRY, renamed as Jawahar Gram Samriddhi
Yojana (JGSY) since 1 April 2001, the Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS), the Member of Parliament Local Area Development
Scheme (MPLADS), and the Border Area Development Programme (BADP). The gram panchayats get funds for JRY only, while
the panchayat samitis implement all the 4 programmes. A brief introduction about the programmes will help to understand their
basic objectives.
The JRY or JGSY was started in April 1989 with the main objective to generate additional gainful employment for the unemployed
and underemployed persons living below the poverty line in the rural areas. The secondary objective of the Yojana is creation of
durable community and social assets for strengthening rural infrastructure. The EAS was introduced with effect from 2 October
1993 in the rural areas of 1778 blocks of 261 districts where a revamped public distribution system was in operation. It was extended
in a phased manner and by 1997–8, all 5448 rural blocks of the country were brought under the programme. The primary objective
of EAS is to provide gainful employment during lean agricultural season (assurance is to provide 100 days of manual labour in
a year to a maximum of 2 adults per family). The secondary objective is the creation of economic infrastructure and community
assets for sustained employment and development of the area. Both JRY and EAS are centrally-sponsored programmes, where the
centre and the states share costs in a 80:20 ratio.
MPLADS was introduced in December 1993 to enable the Members of Parliament to identify and get implemented small works
of capital nature based on locally felt needs with emphasis on creation of durable assets in their respective constituencies. The scheme
allows each MP an annual appropriation of Rs 2 crore. The Collector is responsible for implementation of the schemes through
government departments, PRIs, or any other reputed and capable NGO. The Border Area Development Programme (BADP) was
started during the Seventh Plan in the western region of the country, and from 1993–4 it was extended to the eastern region states
having an international border with Bangladesh. BADP is being implemented by Karimpur I and Karimpur II panchayat samiti.
The main objective of the programme is to meet the special needs of people living in the remote, inaccessible areas near the border.
According to the guidelines of this programme, schemes which address problems such as inadequacies relating to provision of essential
needs, strengthening of social infrastructure, filling up of critical gaps in the road network, may be taken up under the programme.
But it is also mentioned therein that it must be ensured that no single sector gets a disproportionately large share of the total allocation
in a year. The involvement of local people in the decision-making process is stressed by BADP guidelines (Planning Commission
2001). Both BADP and MPLADS are centrally-funded programmes.
Table 13.3.1
Share of the Panchayats in Surfaced and Unsurfaced Roads in Districts
District 1996–7 1997–8 1998–9 1999–2000 2000–1

S U S U S U S U S U
Burdwan 13.09 71.94 10.00 67.42 12.05 63.88 11.34 69.14 11.86 68.76
Birbhum 41.67 51.29 41.66 51.29 41.81 64.26 41.81 68.12 41.99 69.99
Bankura 21.70 87.11 21.63 87.30 25.35 86.31 25.35 86.31 25.53 86.42
Midnapore 34.80 69.08 33.58 69.16 32.90 69.10 64.80 92.38 60.95 94.83
Howrah 17.87 95.16 29.37 94.99 29.93 90.73 29.93 90.73 29.93 90.73
Hooghly 50.89 82.89 49.78 85.84 50.57 86.30 51.21 86.20 51.10 84.47
24 Parganas North 3.71 10.57 3.89 15.63 3.84 14.47 4.28 13.81 4.93 12.15
24 Parganas South 37.07 88.33 46.08 90.56 45.42 95.05 57.26 96.18 56.20 96.24
Nadia 16.02 73.22 14.65 62.94 14.79 60.73 14.88 61.03 14.00 67.82
Murshidabad 22.90 79.35 22.09 75.85 22.74 73.35 23.82 72.99 22.12 75.27
Uttar Dinajpur 9.53 35.61 10.91 39.67 10.54 39.67 14.60 35.61 14.51 33.18
Dakshin Dinajpur 18.16 52.69 17.69 51.09 18.64 29.23 29.84 29.56 38.76 30.65
Malda 38.00 68.71 39.40 67.10 38.83 53.66 39.54 52.99 39.14 54.55
Jalpaiguri 9.79 80.68 23.68 66.38 24.12 66.04 24.46 70.83 24.90 69.67
Darjeeling 43.00 93.59 43.00 93.59 40.43 86.27 39.87 85.22 39.24 85.13
Coochbehar 7.87 70.82 12.02 69.99 12.66 68.34 12.85 68.46 12.09 71.38
Purulia 36.54 98.31 37.75 38.05 87.91 98.38 42.42 98.44 42.79 98.51
West Bengal 25.39 73.77 27.32 75.56 36.76 78.89 35.16 84.42 34.56 85.41
Note: S——> Surfaced, U——> Unsurfaced. All figures in percentage.
Source: District Statistical Handbooks published by the Bureau of Applied Economics and Statistics, Govt. of West Bengal.
Table 13.3.2 Table 13.3.4

Rural Electrification in West Bengal Rural Households with Latrine Facilities
Year No. of Mouzas electrified Percentage District 1991 2001 Rate of change
1996–97 29271 76.98 Burdwan 15.32 27.65 5.90
1997–98 29321 77.11 Birbhum 6.79 9.64 3.50
1998–99 29402 77.33 Bankura 3.94 12.86 11.83
1999–2000 29537 77.68 Midnapore 4.74 42.60 21.96
2000–1 30025 79.20 Howrah 13.60 47.33 12.47
2001–2 30356 80.07 Hooghly 21.34 13.30 –4.73
24 Parganas North 28.33 40.30 3.52
Note: According to 1991 Census total number of mouzas is 37,910.
24 Parganas South 13.70 26.17 6.47
Source: Economic Review, 2001–2002 of Govt. of West Bengal.
Nadia 22.71 34.78 4.26
Table 13.3.3 Murshidabad 8.36 16.15 6.58
Formation of Sanitary Marts and Household Coverage Uttar Dinajpur 6.15 10.00 4.86
Dakshin Dinajpur 6.15 12.84 7.36
Year No. of Sanitary Additional Percentage Malda 7.84 11.19 3.56
Marts household change over Jalpaiguri 15.43 24.69 4.70
coverage during the previous Darjeeling 27.23 34.43 2.35
the year year Coochbehar 9.69 20.01 7.25
1993–4 86 19,565 – Purulia 3.27 11.14 12.26
1994–5 42 36,940 88.80 West Bengal 12.26 25.97 7.50
1995–6 28 74,761 102.38
Note: Rate of change = [{In(2001/1991)}/10]x100
1996–7 23 1,17,053 56.57
Source: (i) 1991 figures are taken from 1991 Census Report.
1997–8 17 1,47,072 25.64
(ii) 2001 figures are taken from Sanitation Cell, Department of
1998–9 17 1,96,737 33.77
Panchayats & Rural Development, Government of West Bengal.
1999–2000 41 2,31,678 17.76
2000–1 12 2,72,567 17.65
Total 266 10,96,373 administrative expenditure, as the state government bears
Note: 2nd col. of the table denotes year-wise opening of Sanitary
the total burden of the gram panchayats5. Generally, the
Marts. share of administrative expenditure varies in the range of
Source: Annual Administrative Report (2001–2002) of Department 20 to 30 per cent of the total expenditure.
of Panchayats & Rural Development, Government of West Bengal.
Expenditures at Village Level: In Table 13.3.5, the shares
of development expenditure in gram panchayats are shown.
Duties of the Gram Panchayat It is around 65 to 70 per cent and implementation of
schemes under JRY is the major work in gram panchayats.
According to the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 (along
Under this programme, gram panchayats undertake schemes
with its subsequent amendments), the gram panchayats
like construction and renovation of primary schools,
have 3 types of duties. These are (i) obligatory duties
installation and repairing of hand pumps for drinking water,
containing 14 items of activities (Section 19 of WBP Act),
repairing of katcha roads connecting different habitations,
(ii) other duties containing 21 items of works (Section 20),
construction of all-weather roads on a small scale, plantation
and (iii) discretionary duties containing 29 items of works
of trees, etc. Of JRY receipts, around 35–40 per cent goes
(Section 21) where it is mentioned in the Act that the state
for repairing existing village roads (mostly katcha).
government will direct and make provision for undertaking
From Table 13.3.5 it can be seen that the share of
such works. The main activities of gram panchayats as seen
development expenditure in total expenditure was at an all
from the Audit Reports fall under these discretionary duties,
time high in the year 1997–8 in all the blocks under study.
because for each activity the state government provides
One plausible explanation is that 1997–8 is the year prior
funds through zilla parishad/panchayat samiti. Their own
to the 5th Panchayat General Election held on 28 May
resources are very meagre in relation to the expenditure they
1998. For retaining the hold over the panchayats, the state
have to incur. In reality, therefore, the gram panchayat
government channellized more funds to the panchayats.
becomes an extended agency of the block office for
implementing different schemes losing their own characteristic
5 The components of administrative expenditure include salaries
as self-government at local level. The total grant received
and different allowances for employees of the gram panchayats,
by the gram panchayats from the state government varies honorarium for the pradhan and upa-pradhan (chairman and vice-
in the range of Rs 3 lakh to Rs 17 lakh, depending on the chairman of the village panchayat), allowances for the members,
size of the gram panchayats. These grants-in-aid also include expenses for office management, etc.
Table 13.3.5
Shares of Development Expenditure in Total Expenditure of Gram Panchayats
Block 1992–3 1993–4 1994–5 1995–6 1996–7 1997–8 1998–9 1999–2000 2000–1
Karimpur I 65.40 65.72 64.84 66.08 66.64 70.54 68.75 66.60 69.81
Karimpur II 64.97 65.81 65.88 60.17 69.20 77.23 59.76 62.28 65.37
Krishnanagar I 64.89 65.67 69.28 66.44 72.14 78.12 70.22 65.63 69.06
Note: Sample GPs of each block are added together and then shares are calculated.
Source: Audit Reports of Gram Panchayats, collected from BDO.
Items of Work: Normally gram panchayats do not take up sanitation, conservancy and drainage, and the prevention of
works requiring technical expertise as there is no support public nuisances within the area under its jurisdiction, the
personnel for these works. There are only 2 ministerial panchayats, however, do not undertake any work on their
employees in West Bengal for managing the entire affairs own initiative, because they have very little own resource
of gram panchayats. There are no technical persons having base. The share of own revenue as percentage of total
skills equivalent to subordinate engineers at the gram expenditure is calculated for 10 gram panchayats under study
panchayat level. By contrast, at the block panchayat level over a period of 6 years. The result is given in Table 13.3.6.
there are 4 to 5 subordinate engineers, who possess diplomas It can be seen that the own revenue base is comparatively
in engineering. For these reasons, the gram panchayats prefer better in case of Karimpur I and Karimpur II GP of Karimpur
to undertake schemes that are less technical in nature. I Block and Asannagar of Krishnanagar I Block. But usually
However, their role in providing drinking water to the little autonomy exists and everything is directed and funded
villagers is praiseworthy. Around 20 to 25 per cent of the from above. To quote from a report published by the
money received under JRY was spent for it although Government of West Bengal in this regard: ‘... the fact is
everything is provided free of cost. that the panchayats are not at all concerned about acquiring
Even petty repairing of hand pump/tube well is even a modicum of financial self reliance—there is near zero
undertaken by the gram panchayats. In most of the cases self reliance, which means near zero autonomy and
the repairing cost varies between Rs 50 to Rs 150 (repairing correspondingly near zero self-government’. (Mukarji and
involves replacement of check valves, filters, handles, etc.). Bandopadhyay 1993).
Imposing of user charges of only Rs 10 (that is, 35 paise
per day) per family per month can free the panchayats from People’s Participation in Planning
expenditure on such maintenance works on one hand and Attendance at Gram Sansad: According to Section 16A of
can mobilize resources towards their own non-tax revenue the West Bengal Panchayat Act, every gram panchayat shall
on the other. In the sanitation sector the village panchayats hold one annual meeting in the month of May and one half-
practically have no role. yearly meeting in the month of November within the local
Even though under Section 19, sub-section 2 (a), of WBP limit of each village constituency. As per the provisions laid
Act, the duties of a gram panchayat shall be to provide down in the WBP Act, a gram sansad shall guide and advice
Table 13.3.6
Share of Own Revenue as Percentage of Total Expenditure
Name of GP 1995–6 1996–7 1997–8 1998–9 1999–2000 2000–1 Average for the period
Murutia 6.4 8.1 3.9 5.7 4.4 5.2 5.62
Dhoradaha I 7.8 7.0 3.4 9.2 6.2 7.0 6.77
Dhoradaha II 3.2 3.3 1.4 4.2 2.4 2.8 2.88
Nandanpur 10.3 1.6 3.5 7.5 6.8 6.4 6.02
Karimpur I 10.4 9.3 9.2 9.4 9.4 9.6 9.55
Karimpur II 8.9 9.0 6.9 7.5 8.4 8.5 8.20
Jamsherpur 6.2 7.1 7.1 6.9 7.5 7.3 7.02
Madhugari 2.5 2.8 1.9 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.40
Asannagar 10.3 9.6 8.3 9.4 9.4 9.1 9.35
Bhanderkhola 7.2 8.1 7.9 7.8 6.7 7.5 7.53
Note: First four GPs are from Karimpur II Block, next four GPs are from Karimpur I Block, and the last two GPs are from Krishnagar
I Block.
Source: As in Table 13.3.5.
Table 13.3.7
Attendance in Gram Sansad Meetings
Attendance in
Gram Panchayat Total no. of Sansads Total voter Male voter Female voter May 2002 November 2002
Male Female Male Female
Murutia 10 7053 3622 3431 402 78 363 69
Dighalkandi 19 13091 6808 6283 818 206 796 135
Dhordaha I 10 7941 4105 3836 456 120 436 69
Dhordaha II 11 8307 4276 4031 448 52 478 49
Nandanpur 22 15610 8022 7588 636 148 673 123
Karimpur I 16 14223 7256 6967 798 242 874 176
Karimpur II 17 14131 7528 6703 375 102 493 75
Jamsherpur 20 15482 8022 7460 688 143 1317 166
Pipulberia 12 10031 5135 4896 475 121 389 113
Madhugari 5 3013 1595 1418 98 22 118 12
Note: Gram Sansad means village constituency.
Source: Karimpur I and II Block offices.
the gram panchayat in regard to the schemes of economic In fact, there is no ready reply to the query because the
development and social justice undertaken or proposed to panchayats have so far kept them marginalized in the
be undertaken in its area; shall identify or lay down principles decision-making process even after the reservation of at least
for identification of the schemes which are required to be one-third seats for women. Incidentally, the savapati
taken on priority basis for economic development of the (chairpersons of panchayat samiti) in both the Karimpur I
village and identify or lay down principles for identification and Karimpur II blocks are women. Even in site selection
of the beneficiaries for various poverty alleviation and allied for installation of hand pumps, women, who have to carry
programmes. But in reality, these gram sansads are not given the water, are not asked to give their views.
adequate importance by the gram panchayats. Even if they
are convened, the meetings are convened in a very casual The Samiti Level
manner and the local people feel disinterested to attend Standing Committees: The panchayat samitis in West Bengal
those meetings. Table 13.3.7 presents data in respect of the bear the burden of a large chunk of development works. On
sample gram panchayats of Karimpur I and Karimpur II an average in a panchayat samiti, available funds amount
Blocks for the gram sansad meetings during May 2002 and to Rs 80 lakh and above. In this study, the average availability
November 2002. of funds in Karimpur I PS is Rs 116.58 lakh and Karimpur
The poor attendance in the gram sansad meetings is an II it is Rs 135.38 lakh. The programmes executed by the
ample proof of the fact that in the process of decentralizing panchayat samiti having the scope for infrastructure building
the planning exercises, people’s involvement is very rare, and are EAS, BADP, MPLADS, and JRY (Box 13.3.2). The
decisions are mostly taken unilaterally by the panchayats
under the diktat of the political party controlling the Table 13.3.8
Female–Male Ratio (FMR) of Attendance in Gram
panchayats. In the words of World Development Report
Sansad Meetings
1994, ‘without local participation, projects often either
foundered at the implementation stage or were not Gram Panchayat FMR elector FMR FMR
maintained and failed to produce sustained benefits’. May 2002 November 2002
Murutia 0.947 0.194 0.190
Absence of Women in Meetings: Another weak area in the Dighalkandi 0.923 0.252 0.169
gram sansad meetings is the limited presence of women. Dhoradaha I 0.934 0.263 0.158
Calculation of female–male ratio (FMR) depicts this clearly Dhoradaha II 0.943 0.116 0.102
in Table 13.3.8. FMR of electors is also calculated to show Nandanpur 0.946 0.232 0.183
Karimpur I 0.960 0.303 0.201
that though in voting participation of women is quite high, Karimpur II 0.890 0.272 0.152
yet their turnout in gram sansad meetings is quite low. Jamsherpur 0.930 0.208 0.126
During informal discussions in the course of undertaking Pipulberia 0.953 0.254 0.290
field visits to the blocks under study, women categorically Madhugari 0.889 0.224 0.102
told ‘ki habe giye?’ (‘What is the utility in going there?’). Source: As in Table 13.3.8.
Table 13.3.9
Receipt and Expenditure in Different Programmes: Karimpur I PS (figures in Rs lakh)
Year EAS BADP MPLADS JRY

Available fund Expenditure Available fund Expenditure Available fund Expenditure Available fund Expenditure
1996–7 X X X X X X 5.78 3.86
1997–8 25.00 23.14 X X X X 14.28 9.36
1998–9 20.01 1.59 11.25 Nil 10.32 9.30 9.08 7.87
1999–2000 35.81 13.30 38.25 35.25 13.85 6.60 5.91 5.91
2000–1 48.23 26.72 70.50 11.25 16.76 16.76 X X
2001–2 39.46 18.29 107.55 63.21 Nil Nil X X
Source: Karimpur I Panchayat Samiti Office.
panchayat samiti functions through a set of standing For example, of the Rs 38.25 lakh fund received under
committees (in Bengali Sthayee Samitis). At present, BADP in 1999–2000, Rs 16.25 lakh (42.48 per cent) were
according to WBP Act (Section 124) there are 10 standing for road construction. But the records show that no fund
committees. These committees cater to all 29 subjects of the is earmarked for maintenance of road.
Eleventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. Artha, In Karimpur II, 4 out of total 10 gram panchayats share
Sanstha, Unnayan O Parikalpana Sthayee Samiti (Finance, the international border with Bangladesh. Three of them,
Establishment, Development and Planning Standing Murutia, Dighalkandi, and Nandanpur, are included in this
Committee) is mainly responsible for the whole range of study. Like Karimpur I Panchayat Samiti, Karimpur II
activities in a panchayat samiti including plan preparation. Panchayat Samiti also has these four programmes for
Purta Karya O Paribahan Sthayee Samiti (Public Works and infrastructure development. Table 13.3.10 gives the annual
Transport Standing Committee) undertakes construction available fund vis à vis expenditure in these 4 programmes
and maintenance of road network, Janasasthya O Paribesh for the period 1996–7 to 2001–2.
Sthayee Samiti (Public Health and Environment Standing It can be seen that in this block too, BADP is the major
Committee) implements programmes for rural water supply source of fund for development of infrastructure. For
and sanitation, and Khudrashilpa, Bidyut O Achiracharit example, available funds over 1998–9 to 2001–2 in BADP
Sakti Sthayee Samiti (Small Industries, Electricity, and Non- were Rs 214.58 lakh against Rs 131.35 lakh in EAS.
conventional Energy Standing Committee) is to look after
rural electrification programme along with development of Maintenance Expenditures: The scheme register of the block
small and cottage industries and propagation of non- shows that funds allotted for maintenance of the roads that
conventional energies. But in rural electrification, the already exist is very low. According to the guidelines of wage
panchayat samitis under the study have practically no role. employment programmes, it is prescribed that up to 15 per
In local infrastructure development, the major role of the cent of available funds can be spent on maintenance of assets
panchayat samiti lies in the road sector. already in existence. The guidelines place importance on
Data are collected from income–expenditure report of maintenance because inadequate maintenance shortens the
the panchayat samitis. The maintenance of records is better useful life of the assets. Delay in maintainence only increases
at this tier in comparison to the gram panchayat tier. The the expenditures later required to make them service-worthy6.
services of all government employees working in the Block In Table 13.3.9, programme-wise funds spent for
Development Office and its associate offices are placed at maintenance of road and its share in total expenditure are
the disposal of the panchayat samiti. For this reason, funds given.
allotted to the panchayat samiti are mostly meant for From Table 13.3.11 it can be seen that expenditure on
development funds. On tabulating, it has been seen that the maintenance of roads, taking all 4 programmes together
share of road in total expenditure under the programmes varies from minimum of 4.82 per cent in BADP to maximum
EAS, BDAP, MPLADS, and JRY varies in the range of 40
to 45 per cent on an average. The detailed receipt and 6 Block officials of Karimpur I Block mentioned 2 roads where
expenditure under these four programmes during the period for the last 7 years no maintenance work has been taken up and
1996–7 to 2001–2 are given in Table 13.3.9. as a result when it was taken up in the year 1998–9 under BADP,
the scheme cost stood at Rs 4.25 lakh in one case and in another
It can be seen that for infrastructure development, BADP
case under the same programme it stood at Rs 5 lakh in 1999–2000.
is the major source in blocks such as Karimpur I which has According to them if these roads were maintained in time the
international borders where around 40–45 per cent money scheme cost would have been Rs 1.50 lakh for the first and Rs 2
has been spent on development of roads, mostly metalled. lakh for the second case.
Table 13.3.10
Receipt and Expenditure in Different Programmes: Karimpur II PS (figures in Rs lakh)
Year EAS BADP MPLADS JRY

Available fund Expenditure Available fund Expenditure Available fund Expenditure Available fund Expenditure
1996–7 X X X X 6.65 6.60 8.99 6.71
1997–8 25.00 16.55 X X 0.75 0.74 7.87 3.57
1998–9 33.06 12.93 25.87 0.09 2.72 2.68 9.34 6.12
1999–2000 32.30 13.94 54.78 23.84 5.87 5.21 19.21 18.21
2000–1 42.87 27.69 66.16 21.38 5.57 3.78 X X
2001–2 23.12 21.04 67.77 39.14 3.56 3.01 X X
Source: Karimpur II Panchayat Samiti Office.
Table 13.3.11
Expenditure on Maintenance of Roads and its Share in Total Expenditure (figures in Rs lakhs)
Year Karimpur I PS Karimpur II PS

EAS BADP MPLADS JRY EAS BADP MPLADS JRY
1996–7 X X X 0.29 X X X 0.75
(7.51) (11.18)
1997–8 2.26 X X 0.67 1.85 X X 0.40
(9.76) (7.16) (11.18) (11.20)
1998–9 X X X 0.75 1.35 X X 0.55
(9.53) (10.44) (8.98)
1999–2000 0.82 2.72 X 0.49 1.98 1.15 X 1.10
(6.16) (7.71) (8.29) (14.20) (4.82) (6.04)
2000–1 2.76 0.95 X – 1.68 1.22 X –
(10.33) (8.44) (6.07) (5.70)
2001–2 1.92 5.23 X – X 1.55 X –
(10.50) (8.27) (3.96)
Note: (i) Expenditure figures are in Rs lakhs.
(ii) Shares in total expenditure are in percentage and within brackets.
Source: As Table 13.3.9.
14.20 per cent in EAS in Karimpur II Panchayat Samiti. infrastructure development is limited. In rural areas, the
In Karimpur I Panchayat Samiti it varies from minimum panchayat samiti has some role through EAS, JRY, and
6.16 per cent in EAS to maximum 10.50 per cent also in BADP (for the border blocks). However, in rural water
EAS. In the MPLADS programme, maintenance works supply, the panchayats’ role is worth mentioning since
were not normally taken up and the construction of primary they bear complete responsibility for drinking water, and
school buildings was a priority. It was realized during have ensured good coverage. The only weak area is that
discussions with the panchayat officials that they were more in the process of selecting the spots, local women’s choices
interested in new constructions rather than allot fund for are mostly ignored. Unfortunately, despite sincere wishes
maintenance work. This is natural, because new constructions of the state government to involve the people in all stages
would increase the periphery of their popular support— of the functioning of the panchayats, the grass root
benefits to be distributed but not to be supplemented. experiences tell a different storey. The decisions taken by
the panchayats tend to be adhoc as the participation of the
people in the decision-making process is limited and
CONCLUSION infrequent. There may be some exceptions, but they are
From the expenditure data of select villages and blocks in few (like the Nandigram II experience in the total sanitation
Nadia district we infer that the role of the panchayats in campaign).
REFERENCES
Bureau of Applied Economics and Statistics (2001) District Statistical Murray, Christopher J.L. and Alan Lopez (1996) ‘The Global
Handbook Series, 2001, Government of West Bengal. Burden of Disease’, Harvard School of Public Health, USA.
Business India (2003) ‘The Convenient Millionaire’, B.T. Ngor, National Council for Applied Economic Research (1992)
28 September. Household Survey of Medical Care, New Delhi, NCAER.
CMIE (2003) Economic Intelligence Service, Electric Database. Pangotra, Prem (2003) City Monitor 2002, Ahmedabad
GOI (1999) Central Bureau of Health Intelligence (2002), ‘Health Management Association, Ahmedabad.
Information in India 1999’, Ministry of Health and Family Park K. (2000) ‘Park’s Textbook of Preventive and Social Medicine’,
Welfare. Banarsidas Bhanot (16th edition), Jabalpur, India.
GOI (1999) ‘Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene in India’, Planning Commission (2001) Report of the Working Group on
NSS, 54th Round Report, No. 449 (Jan–June) 1998, National Border Area Development Programme for formulation of the
Sample Survey Organization, Dept. of Statistics, New Delhi. Tenth Five Year Plan, Government of India.
Ghosh, D.K. (2002) Sanitation: The Unfinished Agenda, Yojana, RUET, Joel (2003) ‘Water in Urban India: Scenario, the energy
Vol. 46 (10), October. linkage, the limits of the private sector, Draft Paper for India
Government of India (1999) Central Bureau of Health Intelligence. Infrastructure Report 2004.
Government of India (1996) Health Information of India 1996, The Times of India (2003) Water’s Worth (Interview of A.
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, 1996, Vaidyanathan by Parul Chandra), 10 June, Ahmedabad.
pp. 162–96. UNDP (2003) Human Development Report 2003, Chapter 4,
—— (2000) Health Information of India, Ministry of Health and URL: http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/pdf/hdr03_chapter_4. pdf.
Family Welfare, New Delhi. —— (2001) Human Development Report 2001, ‘Making
Government of West Bengal (2002) Annual Administrative Technologies Work for People’, Oxford University Press, New
Report, 2001–2002, Department of Panchayats and Rural Delhi.
Development. UNDP, SEWA (2000) ‘Meeting the Infrastructure needs of the
http://www.sanicon.net/titles/topicintro.php3?topicId=18 (cited 25 informal sector through microfinance in urban India’, Credit
June 2003). Connections Issues Paper.
Irigoyen, Jose Luis (2003) ‘Millennium Development Goals: UNDP (2001) ‘Human Development Report 2001: Making
The Infrastructure Contribution’, Transport Forum URL: Technology Work for People’, Oxford University Press, New
www.worldbank.org/transport/forum2003/presentations/ York.
irigoyen.ppt. World Bank (1994) World Development Report.
Kalbermatten, J.M. and R. Middleton (1999) ‘Household Centred World Health Organization (2002) The World Health Report 2003:
Environmental Sanitation’ (http://www.Sandec.ch/Environmental Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life, WHO, Geneva.
Sanitation/Documents/Paper%20 Description %20HCES%20 World Health Organization and UNICEF (2000) The Global
July 99.pdf) Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment Report 2000,
Mehta, Meera (2003) ‘Meeting the financing challenge for water Chapter 1: Available from URL:http: //www.who.int/docstore/
supply and sanitation—Incentives to promote reforms, water_sanitation_health/Globassessment/Global1.htm#Top.
leverage resources and improve targeting’, World Bank and World Health Organization and UNICEF (2001) Access to
Water and Sanitation Programme, May. Improved Sanitation—India, WHO/UNICEF Joint
Mukarji, N. and D. Bandyopadhyay (1993) New Horizons for West Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation
Bengal’s Panchayats, published by Department of Panchayats, Coverage Estimates 1980–2000, September 2001 (http://
Government of West Bengal. www.childinfo.org/cddb/sani/asia/india-sanitation1.pdf).

Chapter 13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 13

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

314 India Infrastructure Report 2004

! SANITATION AND PANCHAYATS IN

13.1 SANITATION AND WATER SUPPLY: THE FORGOTTEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Dileep Mavalankar and Manjunath Shankar

Table 13.1.5 Are There Improvements?

Unit Bangalore Ahmedabad Surat Lucknow Nagpur Indore Chandigarh

Fig. 13.1.1 Rate of Improvement of Sanitation in Rural India

• Lack of political will

ENVIRONMENTAL SANITATION INSTITUTE (ESI)

Key Achievements of ESI Numbers of units

MARKETING SANITATION IN RURAL INDIA

SEWA AND FINANCING OF SANITATION

• Community and municipal partnership is the key to sustainability;

Source: UNDP 2003, Business Today 2003

13.2 TOTAL SANITATION CAMPAIGN: CHANGING THE FACE OF

13.3 RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE PANCHAYATS: A REPORT

Dilip Kumar Ghosh

District 1996–7 1997–8 1998–9 1999–2000 2000–1

Table 13.3.2 Table 13.3.4

Year EAS BADP MPLADS JRY

Year EAS BADP MPLADS JRY

Year Karimpur I PS Karimpur II PS

You might also like

! SANITATION AND PANCHAYATS IN