indonesia water supply and sanitation magazine percik june 2004. sanitation underestimate

7/31/2019 Indonesia Water Supply and Sanitation Magazine PERCIK June 2004. Sanitation Underestimate

1/48


2/48

Information Media for Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation

Advisor:

Director General for Urban and

Rural Development, Ministry of Settlement

and Regional Infrastructure

Director of Human Settlement and Housing,

National Development Planning Agency

Republic of Indonesia

Director of Water and Sanitation,

Ministry of Health

Director of Urban and Rural Eastern Region,

Ministry of Settlement and Regional

InfrastructureDirector of Natural Resources and Appropriate

Technology, Director General on Village and

Community Empowerment,

Ministry of Home Affairs

Director for Facilitation of Special Planning

Environment Management,

Ministry of Home Affairs

Chief Editor:

Oswar Mungkasa

Board of Editor:

Hartoyo, Johan Susmono,

Indar Parawansa, Poedjastanto

Editor:

Maraita Listyasari, Rewang Budiyana,

Rheidda Pramudhy, Joko Wartono,

Essy Asiah, Mujiyanto

Design:

Rudi Kosasih

Production:

Machrudin

Distribution:

Anggie Rifki

Address:

Jl. Cianjur No. 4, Menteng, Jakarta Pusat

Phone: (021) 31904113

e-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Unsolicited article or opinion items are welcome.

Please send to our address or e-mail.

Don't forget to be brief and accompanied

by identity.

From Editor 1

Your Voice 2

Main Report

Sanitation Underestimated 3

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All

(WASH Campaign) 9

Observing MDGs Sanitation 10

Interview

Ir. Susmono

Sanitation Is More Important Than Electricity 12

ArticleEcological Sanitation 15

Lessons Learned From Sanitation Development 16

Drinking Water Service:

Sustainability and Its Effect Upon Community

Well-Being 18

Community Empowerment and Development System 20

Making Environmental Institutions More

Influential, An Idea 21

Reportage

A piece of story from Ciliwung river bankNever Drink River Water 22

Manner

Phytoremediation An Effort to Process Wastewater

with Plant Media 24

Agus Gunarto Household Wastewater

Treatment System 26

Telescope

Kabupaten Subang: Pioneer in Formulation of

Drinking Water and Environmental Sanitation Policy 27

H.M. Machri S., Chairman of Bappeda, Kabupaten Subang

This is the Communitys Demand 28

Book Info 29

CD Info 30

Website Info 31

Field Visit 32

Waspola 34

AMPL 38

Library 42

Glossary 43

Agenda 44


3/48

Dear readers,

As time flows we were not aware that

this is the moment for us to meet each

other again. In the meantime we have

done our best to make changes in order to

make Percik more enjoyable to read,

attractive and it serves as an accurate re-

ference for one observing, studying, ma-

naging water supply and environmental

sanitation service in Indonesia.

We try our best that each edition con-

tains inter-related topics. In the last edi-

tion, Percik brought you Millennium De-

velopment Goals, in the present it is car-

rying issues related to sanitation. This to-

pic is important because it represents oneof the targets in MDGs that must be

achieved in 2015. Moreover, sanitation is

one of the nagging problems in Indo-

nesia.

In the decade of 1980s there was the

Water and Sanitation Decade. But the

outcome is below expectation. Various

constraints were cropping up. From the

community side, awareness and know-

ledge is wanting. Let alone low income as

another major stumbling block. It is ag-

gravated with the outbreak of economic

crisis of 1997. Based on monitoring, a na-tion with a GNP of less than USD 1.000

must have a poor sanitation condition.

To this community priorities are many

things other than sanitation. From the

government side, central as well as re-

gional, budget allocation for sanitation is

small. Sanitation is no priority. Whereas

to improve awareness level of the com-

munity an integrated movement is need-

ed. This is just about the basic sanitation,

let alone the environmental sanitation

which is way beyond expectation.

Therefore, sanitation is not an indepen-

dent issue and need an involvement of all

the stakeholders.

It is interesting to learn form ecologi-

cal sanitation which has been practised in

East Asia for hundreds of years. Ecologi-

cal sanitation is a cycle, or a close loop

system which processes human waste as a

resource. Human excrement is proces-

sed in situ until it is free from pathogenic

organisms and then recycled into farming

activity. Large scale application of this

technology can free soil, river, lake and

sea from contamination from human

waste.

As an interesting solution to basic

sanitation question, we are offering you

Agus Gunarto's success in developing a

domestic waste processing system. The

system has been internationally acknow-

ledged for its "sophistication" and in

2001 won World Technology Award in

England. Besides, in a larger scale, it isalso advisable to look into waste water

management by phytoremediation me-

thod, using plants as media for neutrali-

zing heavy metal and radioactive contam-

inated water. This technology is also re-

commendable to remedy solid waste dis-

posal site.

Dear Readers,

Compared from the earlier editions

the present Percik is already comple-

mented with an ISSN. Its contents are

more varied. There are new columns:

Teropong (telescope), Info CD, and Light

News. Glossary re-emerges. Wawasan

(insight) brings with it more than 2 arti-

cles. This is intended to present you with

more information. Photographic and car-

toon illustrations are inserted in several

articles. We hope this serves for your sa-

tisfaction. Best regards.

ROM E DITORF

1PercikJune 2004

In the decade of 1980s

there was the Water and

Sanitation Decade.But the outcome is below

expectation. Various con-

straints were cropping up.

From the community side,

awareness and

knowledge is wanting.


4/48

Bravo Percik

Inter-agency integration is a prerequi-

site. This is reflected in Percik. Withoutintegrity it is impossible to have Percikappear before us. Percik which specifical-ly discusses water supply and environ-mental sanitation issues from top to bot-tom has been read by all from the highofficials to the common people.

If I may suggest, aside from thenational policy, it might be plausible ifPercik also publish WSS related commu-nity initiative from various locations thatmight inspire those who work in the samefield.

[email protected] activist

Thank you for your suggestion. As anew media, Percik will always be open toany input and suggestion. Up to this timewe have been trying our best to have theWSS related stories from all over thecountry, the success and the failure. Yetthere is limit to what we get. We will con-tinue to try so that Percik can be betterand satisfy your expectation. (Ed.)

Additional Article

To begin with, I would like to congra-tulate for the issuance of Percik bulletin. Ihave read Percik from 1st through 3rd edi-tions. This bulletin contains a lot of use-ful information for those who work withinthe realm of water supply and environ-mental sanitation. And this can generateinterest from those who are not yet inte-rested to water supply and environmentalsanitation issues.

I would like to suggest the readerswould consider adding into it a more aca-demic treatise as a balance to the issuesrelated to water supply and sanitation. Inaddition, since this bulletin is one of the

activities of the WSS Working Group, itmight be recommendable to also insert itsagenda of activities so that the readerswould be aware of how far the Group hastried to respond to the problems related towater supply and environmental sanita-tion.

Fany WedaA Percik reader

Jakarta

You've made a good suggestion. We

will try it in the forthcoming editions asPercik's distribution coverage becomeslarger. Up to now the coverage area isstill limited so that many of the expertsmay not be aware of Percik's existence.As for the WSS Working Group agendawe have included it in each editionthough not in a complete form. We willtry to present the agenda in a better for-mat in the future. (Ed.)

Lack of Expert's Opinion

Reading Percik, I am interested in

Cermin (mirror) of Edition II/Oct. 2003and Reportase (Edition III/Febr. 2004)columns. The columns illustrate Indone-sian community struggle with the "ro-mantics" of the world of WSS. From CakSolekhan of Kureksari, Sidoarjo who like"an owl dreaming for a moon" is yearningfor a water supply access from the localPDAM network till Ms. Yani of Jakartawho has no objection to pay Rp2.000 each

time she uses a public toilet.

I would suggest to include the expert'sopinion in several relevant subject mat-ters, through an interview, for instance,attached to the respective article. Theauthor's opinion should not be too domi-nant in a reportase writing. And lastly, Iam convinced that all Percik Editorialstaff would be respectful to a presidentand vice president candidate who care forWSS issues in Indonesia. Regards.

RomliA Percik reader

Jakarta

In reportase writing we deliberatelymake it as a light feature story thus inclu-sion of personal opinion is likely to hap-pen. Your suggestion for inserting anexpert's opinion is worth consideration.We all hope that the president and vicepresident candidates care for water sup-ply and environmental sanitation issues.(Ed.)

O U R V O I C EY

2 PercikJune 2004

PHOTOS GALLERY

SOURCE: MUJIYANTO


5/48

The awareness of the importance

of sanitation to the modern soci-

ety began with a sanitation revo-

lution in the 19th century in London, in

1832 to be exact, when Metropolitan

Water Act made it a requirement that

drinking water supply must be provided

through a filtering process. Soon after-

wards, John Snow proved it that after

termination of river Thames pumping atBroad Street the prevalence of cholera

epidemic in London in 1855 was sub-

siding.

The prevalence of cholera epidemic of

Hamburg in 1892 explicitly indicates the

correlation between contaminated water

with disease. While a routine bacterial

examination in water supply service was

introduced in London since 1885, and the

use of chlorine in processing drinking

water was since started, which perhaps

represents the most efficient technology

at that time.It could be summarized that the

awareness of the importance of sanitation

started only in the middle of 19th century.

However, the awareness was not directly

followed with a real action. As an illustra-

tion, even in the United States the federal

government allocated a subsidy budget

for sanitation purposes only as late as

1950s. Sanitation development became a

reality only after the establishment of an

institution called Environmental Protec-

tion Agency (EPA) and the launching of

Water Pollution Act in early 1970s.

At the global level, only in 1980s the

United Nations proclaimed 1981-1990 as

Water Decade which indicates that drink-

ing water and sanitation is acknowledged

as an important matter which concerns

the nations of the whole world. Since

then, drinking water and sanitation is no

more the concern of only a few nations.

A I N RE P O RT

SANITATION

UNDERESTIMATED

M

3PercikJune 2004

Sanitation does not seem an alien word to us. However,there are perhaps only very few of us who realize how

important sanitation is to our life. The importance of

sanitation may be appropriately represented by a state-

ment made by Mahatma Gandhi: "Sanitation is more

important than independence".

SOURCE: OSWAR MUNGKASA


6/48

From the proclamation of the Water

Decade up to now, the time lapsed has

been long enough. But a question re-

mains in our mind why up to now sanita-

tion has not been our interest or priority

in our daily life in Indonesia. Unlike

drinking water which relatively has

gained a measurable attention, sanitation

here in this country, still remains a sub-

ject not worth any consideration.

Although Water Decade has long gone

behind us, yet sanitation has not received

as much attention as drinking has had is

also evidenced from the world level policy

makers. In the MDGs initial targets set-

ting, sanitation was not placed as an expli-

cit target but rather as a corollary conse-quence to the management of slum areas.

Through an intensive campaign by sever-

al water and sanitation activities includ-

ing Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene

(WASH) it was only in the Sustainable

Development Meeting in Johannesburg in

2002 that sanitation became one of the

main targets together with drinking

water.

The Importance of sanitation

The role of sanitation in relation to

community health has been generally

understood. To a greater extent infant

mortality rate is caused by a poor water

and sanitation condition. The same is

said about the prevalence of diarrhoeal

case for a specific location. At a global

level, WHO estimates that 1,8 million

annual death tolls are caused by diarrhea.

While approximately 5.500 children die

daily from contaminated water and food.

The rate of infant mortality in slum areas

reaches 121 for every 1.000 child births in

2001.

It is estimated that the direct and indi-

rect economic cost from poor sanitation

in Indonesia is estimated at 2,4 percent of

Gross Domestic Product in 2001 (approx.Rp65 trillion) or Rp180.000 per capita

per annum. This amount is considered

too high especially when compared with

e.g. educational budget which is only

Rp15,34 trillion per annum.

A study on the impact of sanitation to

the economy in the cities of Yogyakarta

and Medan in 2000 indicates relatively

low figures: Rp100.000 and Rp90.000

per capita per annum in Yogyakarta and

Medan, respectively.

If poor sanitation charges additional

costs to the economy, this of course will

adversely influence economic growth.

This is empirically proven from several

studies which conclude that good sanita-tion condition is one of the prerequisites

for economic growth.

What is less understood is perhaps the

effect of water supply and sanitation to

direct income improvement through less

expenditure for water and sanitation pur-

poses.

An acceptable water and sanitation

condition also decreases expenditure for

health care and treatment of water and

sanitation related diseases.

Besides, productivity increases be-

cause there are less inactive days due to

sickness.

To state it simply, an improved water

supply and sanitation service will reduce

poverty, improve health status, productiv-

ity, competitiveness, and eventually the

economic growth.

A I N RE P O RTM

4 PercikJune 2004

In 1980 the UN declared Interna-

tional Water and Sanitation Decade

for the purpose of improving the

universal access to water and sa-

nitation in the developing nations.

Access is determined by each indi-

vidual nation, but in general it is

agreed that each person needs 20

litres of water every day and is

taken from a source not more than

1,6 km from where he lives

The achievement of Water Decade

is determined by an increase of

service at an average of 10 percentwith the majority takes place in the

rural areas

Water Decade is considered a fai-

lure despite of success in incre-

asing the service but the population

growth is bigger in excess of 20 -

30 percent.

Year 2000: 2,4 billion of world population lack access to improved sanitation, and

81 percent of them are in the rural areas. Besides, 1,1 billion lack access to

drinking water facility, 86 percent of them are rural population

More than 2,2 million people of the developing nations, most of them children,

die every year from the diseases related to lack of water supply, poor sanitation

and poor hygiene condition

Approximately there are 6.000 children die from poor sanitation every day. This

figure is equal to the casualties of 20 Boeing aircraft accidents every day

An acceptable water supply and sanitation service reduces the prevalence of

cholera by 26 percent

Poor sanitation reduces attendance of girl students at schools

National economic condition is aggravated with the need to allocate additional

fund for health care and medication, and the loss of productive hours caused by

poor water supply and sanitation.

FACTS ABOUT WATER AND SANITATION

Water Decade:1981-1990


7/48

Facts and Global Challenge

In September 2000, The UN General

Assembly proclaimed the Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs) which con-

sists of targets set by global communities

to reduce poverty and improve health and

welfare of the whole nation. In Septem-

ber 2002, in the World Summit on Sus-

tainable Development in Johannesburg

the UN reaffirmed the MDGs and put an

additional targets specifically pertainingto hygiene and sanitation. This repre-

sents the global community resoluteness

about the importance of sanitation.

It is estimated that by 2015 the world

population will reach 7 billion and the

majority of the growth takes place in the

developing nations. The growth will

increase the number of population with-

out access to acceptable sanitation to 3,4

billion by that year. To fulfill the MDGs

target WHO estimates that an additional

150 million population have to have

access to sanitation each year. Looking at

our present capacity the MDGs target can

only be reached in 2025. The govern-

ment and donor institutions and coun-

tries must work hard. Why not involve

the community to share this heavy bur-

den?

The inclusion of sanitation in the

MDGs represents a giant step but at the

same time poses a big challenge for the

government and the international institu-

tions to reach the target. It is even under-

stood as the most ambitious of all MDGs

targets. Presently only 16 percent of the

developing nations (cf. 37 percent for

drinking water) are considered capable of

achieving the targets. With the present

level of investment, in Africa the MDGs

targets can only be achieved by 2050,

Asia 2025, and Latin America by 2040.Without a political will and a real com-

mitment, the targets cannot be realized.

Our challenge in Indonesia is how to

replicate the international promotional

successes to Indonesian stakeholders.

Currently 80 percent of world popula-

tion (1,9 billion) are without access to

sanitation and mostly are the rural popu-

lation. It is acknowledged that most of

the population growth takes place espe-

cially in the urban slums, therefore the

attention to urban slums is of the same

rate as that of the villages.

Other matter that must be taken into

consideration is that access to sanitation

is different among different nations as it

is among regions within a nation. This

condition makes it necessary for the plan-ners to make implementation priorities

so that an investment can be made so as

to reach an optimum result.

The sustainability of a sanitation pro-

gram becomes a crucial factor when the

availability of drinking water is a con-

straint. The population growth makes the

requirement for drinking water rises

sharply, and it is estimated that by 2025

35 percent of the world population will

live in the urban areas with drinking

water problem. The present sanitation

system needs 50-100 litres of water toflush 1-1,5 litres of human waste every

day. This system causes a small amount

A I N RE P O RTM

5PercikJune 2004

The provision of an acceptable sanitation facility is necessary to protect thehealth condition of human being and the environment. For this purpose, weagree to reduce by half, in year 2015, the proportion of population who are with-

out access to basic sanitation, that will cover the following activities at all levels

to:

i develop and implement an efficient household sanitation

ii improvement of sanitation in public institution particularly school

iii promote a safe hygienic practice

iv promote education to children as agent of change

v promote an acceptable and affordable technology and practice in con-

formance with the local socio-cultural condition

vi develop a partnership mechanism and innovative payment system

vii integrate sanitation into water resources development strategy

Agreement on Sanitation from

Johannesburg Summit 2002

SOURCE: BAMBANG PURWANTO


8/48

of human waste contaminates a large

amount of water. The need for an alter-

native sanitation which requires less

water becomes the present day challenge.

Finding a sustainable and environmen-

tally friendly method in achieving MDGs

targets is one of the global challenges.

The other challenge is to translate the

term sanitation into a commonly and

widely understood by all. Take as an

example, in Germany there is no such

term comparable to sanitation, so that the

German use abwasser which means waste

water. As a result, there are many who

translate the MDGs basic sanitation tar-

get as waste water treatment. In Asia andAfrica the translation of basic sanitation

has nothing to do with sewerage drain.

Sanitation is like a double edged

sword. It is part of solution but at the

same time also as a part of a problem.

The use of a large amount of water to

flush human excrement contributes to

water scarcity problem, while waste-

water is one of the causes of water con-

tamination.

Developing nations are faced

with several problems in the appli-

cation of flush toilet. Beside water

insufficiency, the availability of

wastewater treatment system is

also problematic. As a conse-

quence, wastewater from a septic

tank is disposed of into an

improper place. If there were

wastewater treatment facility, mo-

re often than not it is not function-

ing properly.

Water scarcity becomes a more

prominent problem of the world.

It cannot be solved only throughconservation but must also be sup-

ported with reduction in water

use. Sanitation is obviously one of

the causes since the present envi-

ronmental sanitation system

needs at least 10 litres of water for one

flushing, while for daily eating and drink-

ing one person needs only 5 litres at the

most. While the more water used for san-

itation the bigger the investment is need-

ed to process the waste water.

The investment requirement cannot

be fulfil led from the local resources,therefore government assistance or sub-

sidy must be provided for. As for the

urban areas, the majority of users are the

rich, thus most of the assistance or sub-

sidy goes to the well-to-do families. The

cost incurred for wastewater treatment is

5-6 times higher than that for drinking

water.

Difficulty in financing threat has been

lingering around sanitation development

in the world. Currently the expenditure

for wastewater treatment amounts to

USD14 million a year while an additional

of USD56 million is awaiting if the MDGs

targets are to be achieved. Quite a signi-

ficant additional investment. The target

investment could actually be reduced if a

less costly appropriate technology be-

comes an alternative. In addition, ano-

ther alternative such as ecological sanita-

tion should also be considered.

Capital intensive sanitation system

such as the ones being developed present-

ly is more appropriate for the developed

world but not for the developing nations.

It has come the time to review the system

so far being developed. The basic ques-

tion is how appropriate is the sanitation

and wastewater treatment system devel-opment so far being implemented?

Whether it is not recommendable to find

a water thrifty alternative and apply the

recycling principle? The alternative

should not be limited for the poor fami-

lies but must also be applicable to the

homes of the well-to-do who in reality are

the major users of the present sanitation

system.

It is recognized that sanitation has not

received the proper attention from the

whole community therefore it needs a

more comprehensive public campaign.

The latest anthropological studies indi-

cate that embarrassment becomes the

most prominent aspect that motivates

behavioural change. Health and hygiene

logic has had less influence in compari-

son to social logic such as reputation or

moral logic such as embarrassment in

attracting the community's attention to

A I N RE P O RTM

6 PercikJune 2004

Improve the local and national ca-

pacity in the management of water

resources development, sanitation

and drinking water supply including

the civil society, private and public

sectors.

Support the community/household

through provision of grant to im-

prove water supply and sanitation -

with specific emphasis on ecologi-

cal sanitation.

Support ecosystem based solution

to human waste treatment in the

framework prevention of diseases

and protection of the environment.

Support and strengthen the partici-

pation of women in sanitation, drin-

king water and water source mana-

gement.

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT

PROGRAM (UNDP) PRIORITY

SOURCE: BAMBANG PURWANTO


9/48

the importance of sanitation. This is

probably the reason why the present

sanitation motto reads sanitation is

dignity. This condition may radically

change the present conventional

campaign format.

Indonesian condition

Up until year 2002 the proportion

of Indonesian population who have

access to an acceptable basic sanita-

tion, consisting of drop pit latrine or

septic tank, was 63,5 percent. In vil-

lages the proportion is relatively

lower, only 52,5 percent, while in the

urban 77,5 percent. Although thetotal number of households with

access is seemingly high, we have to

look more closely into the figure.

There is an indication that the actual

number might be lower. The number

tells us the available facilities without

saying anything about quality. It is

estimated that at this time many of

the basic sanitation facilities should

not be used anymore because they do

not meet hygiene and environmental

requirement. As an illustration, in

rural areas the septic tank is locatedless than 10 m from a water source.

In comparison to other S.E Asian

countries such as Singapore,

Thailand, Philippines the condition in

Indonesia is falling behind. Our sani-

tation condition here equals with that

of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos,

which were just been out from war.

Looking extensively at the condi-

tion in each province, one will find in

many areas a sanitation condition

one will be apprehensive about, such

as a proportion of households with-

out access to sanitation above 50 per-

cent level. The majority of the areas

are in East Indonesia such as NTB,

Gorontalo, Maluku, Papua, C. Su-

lawesi, C. Kalimantan, S. Kalimantan,

W. Kalimantan. Some areas in West

Indonesia, such as West Sumatra and

West Java also have their sanitation

below the national average.

Indonesia is one of S.E Asian

countries with the lowest sewerage

system coverage. The investment le-

vel of investment in sanitation is rel-

atively the lowest in Asia. Only a few

big cities such as Jakarta, Medan,

Solo, Yogyakarta, Cirebon, Banjar-

masin, Balikpapan, Tangerang are

with a centralized sewerage system,

yet with a limited coverage. In total

this covers not more than 2,16 per-

cent of Indonesian population.

The absence of formal network

and infrastructure has made house-

holds and small scale serviceproviders provide the majority of

services, including installation and

draining off services. It is estimated

73 percent of urban households have

on-site sanitation, mostly with

underrated septic tank construction.

While on the other hand, wastewater

disposal system is insufficient

including lack of wastewater treat-

ment installation. This condition re-

presents one of the main causes for

environmental pollution, both gro-

und as well as surface water which isthe primary source for PDAM water.

Sanitation is not a priority for the

central as well regional governments.

Investment for sanitation by central

government either through APBN or

from loan has not made any mean-

ingful improvement. A loan funded

project such as Water Supply and

Sanitation for Low Income

Communities (WSSLIC)-1 and -2,

including a project currently under

preparation Community Water

Supply and Health (CWSH), though

clearly indicates sanitation in the

project title, yet in reality sanitation

is playing a relatively small portion.

Especially after the regional autono-

my, with authority now in the hands

of the regions, sanitation tends to be

underestimated. However, an effort

such as Sanitasi oleh Masyarakat

A I N RE P O RTM

7PercikJune 2004

SANITATION CONDITION OF RURAL IN SOUTH EAST ASIA

Cambodia

LaosVietnam

Indonesia

South East Asia

Myanmar

Philipine

Thailand

Malaysia

Cambodia

LaosIndonesia

South East AsiaVietnam

MyanmarPhilipineThailandMalaysia

Singapore

CambodiaLaosVietnam

IndonesiaAsia

MyanmarMalaysiaPhilipineThailand

Singapore

Rural Urban Total

PROPORTION

SANITATION CONDITION OF URBAN IN SOUTH EAST ASIA

SANITATION CONDITION IN SOUTH EASTASIA

PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLD WITH

IMPROVED SANITATION IN INDONESIA


10/48

(SANIMAS, Sanitation by the

Community) Project as well other com-

munity based sanitation activities, have

at least indicated a promising indication

of government and community attention

to sanitation.

Important Issue and Plan for

the Future

Although at the national level the

access to basic sanitation is relatively

high, there is an indication that the data

do not represent the actual situation. The

coverage data do not mention anything

about the quality of the available basic

sanitation. The high rate of ground water

pollution is hypothetically caused by thelow quality basic sanitation facility. It is

deemed necessary to develop a more

detailed data base to indicate the quality

of the available facility.

Unlike drinking water, sanitation is

not yet an issue. This relates to inequity

in demand for sanitation. The communi-

ty does not consider sanitation as an

important demand. When the communi-

ty does not put sanitation as a demand

then the politicians would just neglect it.

At the most, though they began to realize

it but because of budget limitation theyjust opt in favour of activities that have

been acknowledged as a community

demand.

The important message is, sanitation

must reach the hands of decision makers.

In normative term sanitation is impor-

tant but without any demand pressure

from the community sanitation can never

be a political issue. Sanitation must be

raised to a political issue.

Conducting advocacy in order to

make the community understand the

importance of sanitation can be consid-

ered as the initial step. Advocacy can bemade in many ways. It is needed to

improve the decision making quality and

community participation in its process.

An effective advocacy does not only come

in the form of a promotion on the impor-

tance of drinking water supply and sani-

tation but also include other dimensions

such as policy, civil society, democracy,

and individual interests.

It has been acknowledged that sanita-

tion does not only relate to technological

and environmental aspects but equally

important is its relation to changes in

behaviour and cultural habit of the com-

munity. To change people's behaviour

and cultural habit is done through educa-

tion. Therefore schoolchildren become

the most appropriate medium for intro-

duction of the changes. Sanitation should

be included within educational curricu-

lum.

WASPOLA project has produced aNational Policy for Water Supply and

Environmental Sanitation development,

though it is still necessary to undertake a

more profound study on the sanitation

aspect of policy. Some of the important

issues that we need to develop deeper

include the strategy in linking household,

community, and city wide sanitation sys-

tems; coordination among institutions at

the central, regional and other stakehold-ers; decentralization in sanitation man-

agement; rural vs. urban sanitation.

The investment budget currently

available is considered insufficient to

cover the whole demand. The investment

does not only cover the costs for new con-

struction but also for operation and

maintenance purposes. Besides, addi-

tional fund is also needed for handling

environmental pollution caused by faulty

urban sanitation system. Lack of incen-

tive for the local government is one of the

reasons. There are a number of questions

suggested, among others, (i) how to

mobilize fund for city scale sanitation sys-

tem; (ii) what is the government pre-

paredness for an alternative financing

format; (iii) how could the community

participation for sanitation system provi-

sion be strengthened.

Sanitation has an impact to various

aspects of human life, including poverty,

health, cleanliness, pride, even economic

growth, such as mentioned in many

reports and studies. Unfortunately, sani-

tation has not received a proper attention

it deserves. It seems there is still a lot tobe done before sanitation could win an

attention from the government, the pri-

vate sector and the community. Are we

going to remain an idle spectator and do

nothing? Everything will depend on all of

us. OM

A I N RE P O RTM

8 PercikJune 2004

AN IMPORTANT aspect in an ad-

vocacy is the participation of the commu-

nity and advocacy does not only cover

changes on program and policy (policy

dimension), but also (i) capacity buil-

ding, organizational skill and empower-

ment of civil society and its involvement

in decision making (civil society dimen-

sion), (ii) improve the legitimate civil

society and improve the accountability of

public institutions (democracy dimen-

sion); (iii) improve the poor community's

awareness of its right and obligation

(individual interests dimension).

IN ONE of the reports publishedby United Nations EnvironmentalProgram (UNEP) there is a specific

mention about several importantissues as the main requirements for asuccessful community level waste-water treatment system, namely (i)political commitment and domesticfinancing sources; (ii) water supplyand sanitation development manage-ment is not limited to provision of faci-lity but to also include hygiene beha-viour; (iii) environmental aspect repre-

sents an integral part of urban watersupply and sanitation management;(iv) setting of definite time frame and

clear indicator; (v) appropriate choiceof technology in order to get an effec-tive and efficient water use throughconsidering environmentally friendlytechnology alternative; (vi) applicationof demand responsive approach; (vii)participation of all stakeholders, andapplication of the principle of trans-parency in management and decisionmaking.

Requirement for a successful wastewater treatment


11/48

What is WASH Campaign?

WASH campaign represents an effort

based on the initiative of several organi-

zations and individuals to make drinking

water supply, sanitation, and hygiene as a

part of common awareness. WASH

Campaign was launched at an interna-

tional conference 'Freshwater' in Decem-ber 2001 by Water Supply and Colla-

borative Council (WSSCC). The main

purpose is to improve awareness of the

importance of sanitation, drinking water,

and hygiene, and obtain a political and

social commitment from world leaders.

Why campaign is so important?

There have been a number of mea-

sures taken such as the declaration of

Water Decade but the number of popula-

tion who are without access to drinking

water supply and sanitation remains inthe staggering height. There are current-

ly 1,1 billion people who are without

access to water and 2,4 billion are without

access to improved sanitation. These fig-

ures will keep growing in line with world

population growth.

Many decision makers do not realize

that sanitation is not a dirty job. They do

not realize that provision of access to a

relatively cheap sanitation facility can

reduce half of the number of death tolls

caused by water and sanitation related

diseases. Even that drinking water, sani-

tation and hygiene is an entrance that

leads to poverty reduction measures has

not been a part of knowledge of the deci-

sion makers. One of the reasons is that

those who are in demand are the ones

with the weakest political status so that

the leaders could not gain any incentive

from handling their problem.

This condition makes several interest-

ed parties realize that water supply and

sanitation development is not simply a

physical construction work. A lot of other

activities need be done all of which are

aimed at an effort to improvement of

knowledge and awareness of the impor-

tance of sanitation. One of the activitiesis a structured and sustainable campaign

aimed at all stakeholders both at decision

maker and community levels.

What is the main theme of the

campaign?

There are four main themes to go with

the campaign:

Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hy-

giene can save human life.

Millions of people die each year from

dirty environment, and contaminated

water and food. Improved sanitationand hygiene condition can save many

lives and reduce the prevalence of dis-

eases.

Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygi-

ene for the Community: Priority is gi-

ven to Women and Children.

Women and children are more suscep-

tible to the effect of water scarcity, lack

of sanitation and poor hygiene condi-

tion.

Policy reform is important for the

improvement of water supply and sani-

tation service for the poor community.

The government, private sector and

international institutions must give pri-

ority and their resources for institu-

tional reform in order to make the prin-

ciple of good governance a reality.

Drinking Water Supply, Sanitation and

Hygiene represent the entrance to

poverty reduction.

The main attention in the provision of

basic services must be made as the main

agenda which is known as poverty reduc-

tion and sustainable development pro-

gram.

What can we do?

Some of the steps we could take are:

Establishment of inter-sector and in-

ter-agency partnership

We realize that drinking water supply

and sanitation management must be

undertaken through inter-sector ar-

rangement therefore the involvementof all stakeholders from the govern-

ment, private sector, university, NGO,

and professional association becomes a

prerequisite.

Promotion of institutional reform

In this case reform is understood as a

means to improve public accountabili-

ty, improve regulation, establishment

of effective monitoring effort in order

to arrive at a quality service.

Sharing of information and experience

Establishment of network for sharing

of information and experience amongstakeholders will improve the quality of

water supply and sanitation develop-

ment implementation.

Community mobilization and applica-

tion of community based approach

Using community group network and

direct involvement of the community in

the campaign process will help in

behavioural change process and impro-

vement of the community awareness

Collaboration with mass media

Mass media plays a significant role in in-

fluencing public opinion, and makes a

topic frequently presented to eventually

become a public agenda. Regular connec-

tion with mass media, press conference,

dissemination of information, public serv-

ice advertisement, training for reporters in

water supply and sanitation will become

an effective means.

(Summarized from WASH Campaign)

A I N RE P O RT

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All(WASH Campaign)

M

9PercikJune 2004

When all components within a community are still at a low level ofawareness on matters related to sanitation, it is necessary to

develop a strategic, effective and easily understood enlightenmentmeasure. One of the global campaign format and worth consi-

dering for replication is the WASH Campaign


12/48

M

illennium Development

Goals (MDGs) have been

agreed by world leaders

for the purpose of future

development (for details

please refer to Percik ed. 3). From 8

goals, 18 targets and more than 40 indica-

tors, drinking water and sanitation is

directly related to Goal 7 sustainable

environmental management and Target

10 reduction by half in 2015 the propor-

tion of people without sustainable access

to safe drinking water and basic sanitati-

on service.

Although MDGs represent an agree-

ment approved by 189 countries of theworld, and its approval is indicated by

placement of signatures directly by 147

heads of state/government, but the goal

achieving is not merely the responsibility

of the central government but also to

include local governments, legislative

bodies, civil society, mass media, and all

other stakeholders.

The goals of MDGs are inter-related.

As an illustrat ion, goal 1 eradicate

extreme poverty and hunger is closely

related to improvement in water safe

drinking and basic sanitation . Achieve-

ment of water supply and sanitation tar-

get will greatly influence well-being of the

population.

Sanitation Target Setting

The proclamation of MDGs was made

in 2000, but one should recall that the

calculation to arrive at the target setting

took 1990 as the base year. Besides,

MGDs target for sanitation is stated in

terms of proportion and is not directly

referred to in an absolute number of peo-

ple.

Using the above assumption, the pro-

portion of Indonesian population who

had had access to basic sanitation in 1990was 30 percent. This means that in 1990

70 percent of the population are without

sanitation, therefore we come the figure

35 percents which represents the propor-

tion of population who must have service

by 2015. This further means that in 2015

the proportion of population who would

have improved sanitation service is 65

percent. This target is presented in 'Indo-

nesia Progress Report on the Millennium

Development Goals' which was published

in February 2004 and represents the offi-

cial document from the Indonesian go-

vernment.

In the meantime the National Action

Plan (NAP) on Wastewater Development

published in 2003 by Ministry of Settle-

ment and Regional Infrastructure Deve-

lopment, there are 2 scenarios. Scenario

1 uses the proportion of world population

who are without access to service in year

A I N RE P O RT

Observing MDGs Sanitation

M

10 PercikJune 2004

INDONESIAN TARGET OF SANITATION IN MDGs

year

Indonesian version NAP version MDGs version

SOURCE: AMPL DOCUMENTATION


13/48

2000 as the base for calculation which

arrives at a figure 85,75 percent of popu-

lation to have access by 2015. Scenario 2

uses the proportion of population with

access to service in 2000 and the projec-

tion of Indonesian population in 2015.

This arrives at a figure 70,71 percent of

Indonesians who must have access to the

service in 2015.

The basic difference from the two cal-

culations lies in (i) the difference in base

year, NAP uses 2000 as base, (ii) NAP

bases its calculation on the proportion of

population who must have access using

population projection in 2015.Target setting is crucial for MDGs

achievement. It is up to the stakeholders

to agree on this discrepancy because it

will affect the strategy and MDGs achieve-

ment planning.

If we look back to the 1990s when the

access to basic sanitation was only at 30

percent, and compare it with the condi-

tion in 2000 in which the figure has risen

to 63,5 percent, we could be optimistic

that the MDGs sanitation target can be

reached. However, the target achieve-

ment might be meaningless when we tryto delve deeper into the facts behind the

figures.

As an illustration, one of the result of

survey on shallow wells in Jakarta it was

found out that 84 percent of the water

samples are contaminated with human

waste as indicated from the presence of

faecal coliform bacteria. This fact con-

firms the suspicion the basic sanitation

facilities especially those in the urban do

not function properly. The figure 63,5

percent only indicates the available facili-

ty, but the quality aspect has been over-

looked. As a result, the contamination

aspect is also overlooked. Thus when we

think we have reached the MDGs sanita-

tion target the contamination might likely

be a bigger problem. The contamination

issue must be dealt with properly if the

MDGs sanitation target achievement is to

be meaningful.

Diversity of condition in Indonesia

When setting the MDGs target above,

we were speaking at the national level

which represents the average regional

condition of Indonesia. Each region has

its own specific condition, sometimes wi-

dely different from the others. For exam-ple, NTB reached 41,2 percent when Ja-

karta was at 93,2 percent.

It is interesting to note how we will

reach the national target. Are we going to

focus on the national target without look-

ing into the targets of each of the individ-

ual regions? Or, each region is given

opportunity to set her own target based

on the regional capacity with respect to

the national target. There are other choic-

es to ponder with regard the target

achievement.

In connection to MDGs target, it

should also be borne in mind the Law

22/1999 on Regional Government has

clearly stipulated the relinquishment of

sanitation service management to the

respective regions, therefore the target

achievement will obviously depend on

regional preparedness. Up to this time

the echo on MDGs is still confined within

the realm of the central government. It is

therefore necessary to immediately take

proper action for socialization in the

regions, of course after the central go-

vernment has made itself ready with a

definite socialization strategy.

The role of WSS Working Group

It should be realized that MDGs

Indonesia document which was published

recently must be supplemented with

MDGs special document on drinking

water and sanitation which will serve as a

guideline for the stakeholders in MDGs

drinking water and sanitation target for

Indonesia.

The Water Supply and Sanitation

(WSS) Working Group is expected to play

an active role in facilitating for the publi-cation of such a document, which does

not only contain MDGs target setting, but

also the overall action plan and strategy

for achieving the target including moni-

toring and reporting aspects. A close coo-

peration with MDGs Indonesia Working

Group is unavoidable.

(OM from various sources)

A I N RE P O RTM

11PercikJune 2004

PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLD WITH REASONABLE SANITATION

ACCESS BY PROVINSI (2002)West Nusa Tenggara

Gorontalo

Maluku

W. Sumatera

Papua

C. Sulawesi

Kalimantan

W. Java

W. Kalimantan

S. Kalimantan

Bangka Belitung

S.E. Sulawesi

Jambi

Banten

C. Java

S. Sulawesi

S. Sumatera

Indonesia

Bengkulu

E. Java

East Nusa Tenggara

N. Maluku

N. Sumatera

E. Kalimantan

Bali

N. Sulawesi

RiauLampung

Yogyakarta

Jakarta

Provinsi

PROPORTION


14/48

C ould you highlight the sanita-tion condition in Indonesia?We will look back to the colonial time.

The Dutch government had given atten-

tion to sanitation. Whatever the system

was, centralized or localized. We can see

the inheritance in big towns. We can find

sewerage system in Jakarta, Yogyakarta,Bandung. But this was developed during

the colonial time. Naturally, there was a

discrimination. In the Dutch quarters

this was carefully maintained and pro-

tected while in that of the local communi-

ty this was not so. After independence,

apparently this has missed the attention.

We did more on road building, drinking

water supply, and so on. During the Wa-

ter Decade in 1981-90 we were startled,

awakened, so that within the time lapse

and 5 years after there was a significant

sanitation development in line with the

increase in GNP. When the economic cri-

sis knocked us over we seemingly fell

asleep again and concentrate ourselves

with the economic, political and social

crisis, although some sanitation develop-

ment works were still continuing such as

Denpasar sewerage, Surakarta sewerage.

But this is not a priority. When MDGs

were proclaimed we were shocked again.

But the condition was not as favourable

as it was during the decades 1970 - 80s.

During that time the economy was in an

excellent condition. There was a lot of

money.

Presently we are speaking a lot about

community based sanitation system. And

with this spirit we will re-develop envi-

ronmental sanitation in Indonesia which

has been lagging far behind our neigh-

bouring countries such as Malaysia which

started much later than we, in 1980s.

Environmental issues are becoming more

and more complex which makes it moredifficult to deal with. I think we have to

exert more effort than we did in the

1980s. But the present situation doesn't

warrant for it.

What is the main constraint?

From my own experience and from

observing statistical figures the indicators

for community health include infant mor-

tality rate, life expectancy, water borne

diseases and their prevention are impro-

NTE RVIE W

Ir. Susmono

"Sanitation Is MoreImportant Than Electricity"

I

12 PercikJune 2004

The mesh entangling sanitation development in Indonesia is way from loosening.

Various efforts have been taken by the government to deal with this problem, but the

result has not been what is expected. As time proceeds and population increase new

constraints continue to crop up one after the other. This can only be solved if all the

stakeholders including the community work hand in hand to find the best solution

because sanitation is not an issue that stands by itself. This sector must be regarded

as government priority since the success in handling sanitation can guarantee the

health of the community. Ir. Susmono is one of those who have a keen interest and

care in dealing with this sector. He happens to be an official of the Ministry ofSettlement and Regional Infrastructures and a member of WSS Working Group.

In order to shed a light on the sanitation condition in Indonesia and all its details

Percik interviewed him some time ago. Here are the highlights:

CARICATURE BY RUDI KOSASIH


15/48

ving although we do not handle sanitation

in a proper manner. This means that each

individual is handling these in his own

way. I feel, as once I used to work togeth-

er with the program at village level to edu-

cate women on various aspect of family

welfare (PKK), the role of housewives is

quite significant in improving the figures.

Why? Because, their knowledge is steadi-

ly improving. Many printed materials ca-

me to their hands and they read them. It

is this knowledge that indirectly helps

them to have a toilet built. It is not the

national movement that motivates them.

This means that if it is complemented

with the national movement which we ha-ve started in 1990s, the result probably

will be better. Otherwise it will be de-

creasing or at the most it will remain as it

is today.

To boost the development what

constraint is to be faced?

Improvement of income. It is quite

obvious that people with very low income

they do nt care about sanitation. As their

income improves and they become better

knowledgeable and start thinking, but in

the beginning it is self protection. What isimportant one's own good, home and

immediate surrounding. Outside that it is

none of his business.

While those who live from hand to

mouth, their whole effort is to find food.

For that purpose road and market are pri-

orities. Drinking water to follow next. As

for defecating, it can be done anywhere.

From the data I come up with, a na-

tion with a good sanitation after it reach-

es USD2.000 GNP. Below USD1.000 sa-

nitation is not a subject to be discussed, it

is considered as something not worth

talking about and in the government it is

given a very low budget allocation. So if

you want to deal with sanitation, first do

something about income and education.

In addition we need health service, such

as local government clinic (puskesmas).

In short, speaking of sanitation there are

4 influencing factors to take into consid-

eration: environment, heath infrastruc-

ture, individual genetic characteristic,

and cultural habit.

What steps does Ministry of

Settlement & Regional Infrastruc-

ture take to improve sanitation con-

dition in Indonesia?

We are preparing National ActionPlan, though it has discussed only twice

and this year it is undergoing revision.

However, we have been collecting data or

consolidating during 1990 up to 2000.

The National Action Plan has completed

up to final draft. This year it will be bro-

ught to discussion with colleagues at the

regions, Bappenas, and others in order to

reach an agreement from all by the end of

the year. If we could arrive at an agree-

ment and together with the Law on Water

Resources and Government Regulation

on Drinking Water and Sanitation which

is said are to be combined, all of it will

become a national priority and each

province will prepare its local regulation

based on the central guideline. We are

currently waiting for Government Regu-

lation which is now in process. In the

meantime, we are also conducting social-

ization of National Action Plan on waste-

water management to the provinces

What is the linkage between Na-

tional Action Plan with MDGs?

As benchmark we refer to MDGs. We try

to translate the MDGs target into our goal.

Is MDGs sanitation target realistic?

In the document there is a mention ofadequate sanitation. This term can be bro-

ught up or down. But in Surabaya Mrs. Erna

Witoelar herself said something else. She

changed it into basic sanitation. With basic

sanitation, we think we can do it. But with

adequate sanitation, it will be difficult.

What is the difference?

Basic sanitation intends to protect hu-

man being, while in adequate sanitation

there is additionally environmental factor

to be considered. Speaking of environ-

ment implies a high budget requirement.

The net calculation is the adequate. What

result we get by the end of the year, we

don't know yet. As for basic sanitation we

can go with large scale promotion and we

could expect 80 percent of urban popula-

tion will have access to toilet of some

kind. But don't ask what will happen to

the rivers.

NTE RVIE WI

13PercikJune 2004

SOURCE: MUJIYANTO


16/48

What do you think about NGO

facilitated community based sanita-

tion management?

I have done it 20 years ago during the

Water and Sanitation Decade. But my

target groups then were the "arisan" gro-

up, dasawisma. They were doing quite

well, but later there was a reorganization

and shifting of responsibility, I have no

information what has happened with

them. What is called now NGO is actual-

ly not a new thing to us. What the NGOs

are doing are actually the same old thing.

What I noticed in the field are fresh wrap-

pings of an old thing. It is apparent that

when the community is better enlight-ened they are willing to share and they

care. Once again, the emphasis is on en-

lightenment. Therefore I am quite plea-

sed to see that they clad it in a new wrap-

ping.

What other approaches are the-

re beside community based mana-

gement?

If we are speaking of sanitation, this

can be divided into two categories. One

belongs to community's responsibility

and the other that of the government. Wecannot rely entirely on the community.

That is where the institutionally based

comes in.

Whether both of

them are contained

in the National

Action Plan?

Both of them are.

But what is presently

being handled is the

community based. And

motivating the commu-

nity will need more

than just dissemina-

tion, socialization,

advocacy, and so on,

but also to include leg-

islation. This will be

deduced from law on

natural resources and

environment. As we all know there are

people who are capable, but not willing.

Which one has a higher priority,

the community based or the institu-

tionally based?

Must be developed in a symbiotic

relationship, they are not just moving

side by side. Otherwise, they won't do.

The government cannot walk alone. Both

must be interconnected into one system.

How to sew it, we will see later. In

National Action Plan we haven't come to

such a detail. It is different from solid

wastes where we have completed to the

details. With wastewater we are in shortof data, therefore we have to use assump-

tion and it is time consuming. That is

why we have done only up to the main

points. Hopefully by the end of the year

we can finish with the details.

The management of community

based sanitation development

seems partial. How can we make it

more holistic?

Admittedly not yet. Take for instance,

there is a pilot project in a certain town.

But after the project is over, both thecommunity and the local government

remain silent. This of course needs a

push to make them expand it. If they

don't move, well, perhaps there is a need

for a legislation. It happens quite often.

What is the influencing factor?

Because sanitation is not a priority.

Therefore it has never been considered as

having any significance. If something

new happened such as an outbreak of

muntaber (diarrhoea and vomiting) we

will then remember something. But

afterwards it is forgotten again. It hap-

pens time and again. Perhaps other sec-

tors are more important. For me, sanita-

tion is more important than electricity.

In a town number one is road, number

two water supply, third sanitation, then

come the others, electricity, telephone.On the contrary, now there are those who

have a hand phone but having no toilet.

How can the knowledge of the

community be improved?

We will start with inserting it into

school curriculum, then into the printed

materials for women to read. We do pro-

motion activity, campaigning. But do we

have someone who is capable and willing

to motivate a campaign movement? If

not, it will be difficult because it is from

there that we expect a behavioural changeto take place.

Which target community should

be prioritized, urban or rural?

I think it does not make

any difference. Recorded

access to sanitation in the

towns is approximately 89

percent. But the number of

population who has an accept-

able disposal facility is only

about 70 percent. In the vil-

lages the recorded number of

access is 63 percent. Here the

coverage of disposal facility is

something around 35 percent.

Villagers prefer to defecate in

rivers, gardens or fields be-

cause they have enough space.

For townspeople this is not

possible. (MJ)

NTE RVIE WI

14 PercikJune 2004

SOURCE: OSWAR MUNGKASA


17/48

T

he conventional sanitation tech-

nology is based on the flow from

flush toilet, drainage conveyance,

treatment installation, and disposal. To

some environmentalists this technology

tends to cause environmental pollution.

There is an indication that the available

system (flush toilet and wastewater treat-

ment) is not a solution but rather it is a

part of the environmental problem.

In conventional approach sanitation

means adding nutriments into the envi-

ronment and disrupting the nutriment

cycle. The basic concept which says that

human excrement is a non useful waste is

misleading. Such an approach has causeda new pollution problem. In nature noth-

ing is called waste, each product of life is

used as raw material for the others.

Recycling of human excrement and urine

through sanitation process and return it

to the soil to recover the natural cycle of

materials is disrupted by the existing san-

itation practice.

Starting from this concept, it is

deemed necessary to find an alternative

solution that takes into consideration the

ecological aspect. One of the alternatives

is called ecological sanitation, abbreviat-ed ECOSAN. This terminology means an

economically and ecologically sustainable

sanitation system.

ECOSAN does not refer to any specif-

ic technology but rather it refers to all

technologies and international regula-

tions in dealing with water scarcity and

sanitation issues in a better way. ECO-

SAN includes a closed loop wastewater

treatment system directed towards reuse

of water and nutriment and reduction of

clean water consumption.

The environmental sanitation pre-

sently being practiced is actually based on

the concept of keeping the environment

clean, safe and free from contamination.

This includes wastewater treatment and

prevention of disease. In reality, howev-

er, it turns out to cause environmental

pollution. ECOSAN, on the other hand, is

based on the recycling principle. This

means maintaining the ecological cycle in

a closed sanitation loop. Besides it saves

energy consumption through the applica-

tion of natural processes.Ecological sanitation is a cycle, or a

closed loop system that processes human

excrement as a resource. In this system

human excrement is processed in situ

until it is free from pathogenic organisms.

Then the sanitized waste is recycled by

applying for agricultural purposes. The

main features of ecological sanitation are

(i) prevention and pollution and preva-

lence of diseases caused by contamina-

tion from human waste; (ii) processing of

human waste as a resource rather than as

useless waste; (iii) recovery and recyclingof nutriments.

ECOSAN is based on traditional sci-

ence in the form recycling and compost-

ing of waste materials, but it is combined

with modern science and the use of flush

toilet.

The principle of ECOSAN is not new,

it has been practiced in East Asia for hun-

dreds of years even in China it has been

practiced since thousands of years ago. It

is important to note that this system is

not meant as a simple alternative just for

the sake of the poor. ECOSAN principle

is applicable in a wide variety of social

economic conditions and in every nation.

In many countries the application of

farm manure from human excrement is a

rare practice. The more human excre-

ment disposed of into rivers the more is

the degree of environmental pollution. It

is therefore recommendable to using the

closed loop system in order to prevent

bacterial or virus contamination and pro-

duction of farm manure.

If ECOSAN could be adopted in a largescale, soil water, rivers, lakes, and seas are

protected from human waste contamina-

tion. Less water is used. The farmers use

less inorganic fertilizers. Prolonged use of

inorganic fertilizers has been the contributor

of environmental degradation.

ECOSAN concept is supporting the

MDGs target achievement. The applica-

tion of ECOSAN can significantly reduce

water consumption so that more could

have access to water. However, we must

realize that many challenges are awaiting

before ECOSAN could be brought into themainstream of sanitation management,

among others (i) rejection to new idea

because one is used to an old practice; (ii)

ECOSAN is a decentralized system so that

the cost is borne by the user; as an exam-

ple, the user must set aside some time to

handle his own waste; (iii) financially the

application of ECOSAN is a burden espe-

cially in locations where a conventional

system has been used because one has to

consider the amount investment that has

been put into the existing system.

The application of ecological sanitation

concept in Indonesia is not impossible.

But, of course, we need a thorough study

before we could determine the advantages

derived from its application. This is a mat-

ter of choice. Whether this system could

become one of the choices in our communi-

ty? This is indeed a tickling question.

(OM from various sources)

RTICLE

Ecological Sanitation

A

15PercikJune 2004

THE DISADVANTAGES OF THE CONVENTIONAL SANITATION SYSTEMUncontrolled disposal of more than 90 percent of world wastewater

A large amount of clean water is needed to flush off the wasteNeeds a large amount of investment, O&M costs, and energy

THE ADVANTAGES OF ECOLOGICAL SANITATIONQuality improvement of community health through minimizing the mixing ofhuman excrement with waterNatural resources conservation through less water consumption, minimizingwater pollutionMaintain soil fertility and increase agricultural productivityWastewater is not disposed of but rather it is reused


18/48

Unlike in Indonesia, where sanita-

tion development is not properly

documented, in other countries

the document pertaining to sanitation is

well kept so that we could pick some les-

sons out of it.

Lessons from foreign countries can,

for example be obtained from various so-

urces among others Learning What

Works for Sanitation. Revisiting Sanita-

tion Successes in Cambodia, WSP-EAP,

2002; Sanitation and Hygiene Promotionin Lao PDR, WSP-EAP, 2000. However,

documents about experience in Indonesia

can also be found in Myth vs. Reality in

Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion, WSP-

EAP, 2000 and Achieving Sustained

Sanitation for the Poor, WSP-EAP, 2001.

The following are several facts and

lessons learned from Indonesia as well

Cambodia and Laos as summarized from

the above documents:

Stimulating Factors

From the experience in Cambodia,Vietnam and Indonesia, there are several

factors known as stimulating the demand

for toilet, namely (i) an experience in see-

ing and using a toilet in some other place,

such as in town or at a neighbour's; (ii)

availability of and ease in obtaining con-

struction materials, availability of experi-

enced construction workers; (iii) decreas-

ing of woodlands, gardens, rice fields

areas as a traditional place for defecating;

(iv) a better knowledge in hygienic life;

(v) social status; (vi) improvement in wel-

fare.

Any of the above factors is not work-

ing alone but they tend to work together

in stimulating the demand for a toilet.

Identifying all the factors is one of the

keys to motivating the community in

using toilet.

Unlike stimulating factor, the inhibi-

ting factors of Cambodia, Vietnam and

Indonesia indicate a national variation.

In the three nations the dominant inhibit-

ing factor is low financial capacity of the

community. The poor tend to choose to

pay in kind (labour or material). Other

inhibiting factors are, (i) lack of, even it

tends to be predetermined, informed

choice. The facilities offered to the com-

munity are produced in far away places

using a material that is difficult to find at

the locality. In Indonesia and in Vietnam

the design and technology that are con-

trary to the local practice add to the

inhibiting list. The community uses

human waste to feed animal and fish-

pond, thus a design which makes extrac-

tion of excrement difficult will certainly

be rejected; (ii) lack of communication

with the community about the advan-tages and disadvantages of having a toi-

let; (iii) water scarcity or water source is

too far away from the toilet; (iv) previous

negative experience in relation to a toilet.

As an example, dirty water flaring out

from a toilet. Lack of technical assistance

being one of the reasons;

Change in behaviour

From a population survey in Cam-

bodia, it was revealed that although most

of the people own a toilet but this does

not necessarily change their behaviour.This is indicated from the fact that the

community is still defecating anywhere

RTICLEA

16 PercikJune 2004

A SURVEY to households in the vil-

lages of the Philippines reveals the

main reasons why a toilet is neces-

sary. In order of importance they are

as the following: (i) reducing the

swarming of flies; (ii) cleaner envi-

ronment; (iii) privacy; (iv) prevent

embarrassment when there is a

guest; (v) reducing prevalence of di-

sease. The list indicates that

hygiene reasons are less important

than considerations for pride, com-

fort, and social status. (WHO)

Why does the communityneed a toilet?

Lessons Learned FromSanitation Development

Construction of a toilet

does not necessarily

change hygiene behaviour.

Some practical

considerations are still

shedding a dominant hue

into the daily habit.

Though toilet is

already there.

STIMULATING FACTORS CAMBODIA VIETNAM INDONESIA

Increased awareness

Availability of material & skilled worker

Social status

Lessening in open space areas

Welfare status

Government promotion

Availability of land space

Availability of technology choices

Availability of micro credit


19/48

they feel comfortable. When in the rice

field they defecate among the paddy, in

spite of each of them has built a toilet at

home. When comes the season when wa-

ter is difficult to get they go to defecate

near the water source. Practicality is mo-

re dominant than community health rela-

ted consideration.

Acceleration in behavioural change

depends on (i) availability in choice of de-

sign and the appropriate cost in accordan-

ce with life style, capacity of the commu-

nity, and availability of water; (ii) avail-

ability of materials and skilled workers.

AdvantagesFrom the result of surveys it was con-

cluded that the communities in the three

countries gain advantages from the avail-

ability of toilet in several different ways.

The most important being cleanliness

around their homes and freedom from

stench odours. Then follows comfort,

such as saving time, easy access. Next co-

me safety, prevention of disease and

hygiene behaviour, privacy and pride,

economic gain (compost, cost saving) and

others.

Lessons learned

Based on the above facts some impli-

cations can be suggested as the following:

Demand will increase if the communi-

ty has for itself seen and experienced the

advantages. A negative experience will

grossly reduce the demand. Provision of a

suitable information and intensive sociali-zation will stimulate the growth of interest

in the community. Direct personal ap-

proach can be very effective, so that em-

ployment of local native as motivator or

facilitator should be recommended.

The construction of a toilet does not

necessarily change hygiene behaviour.

Practicality is more dominant in influen-

cing their daily habit. In spite a toilet is

ready for use at home they still go any-

where they feel comfortable to defecate

(such as in the rice field when they hap-

pen to be there).

The communities consider that the

advantages gained from having a toilet is

more from the aspects of environmental

cleanliness, safety and comfort. The as-

pects of prevention of disease, reducing

flies and hygiene are less important. A

sanitation promotion strategy must be

based on introducing the community withthe advantages gained from having a toi-

let. It is recommendable to avoid using

tailor made promotion format, but rather

make adjustments in accordance with the

local condition.

The community should be offered with

as many choices as possible, design, cost

and payment system. This will help to

generate more interests especially from

the poor class. A specific strategy must be

applied to attract the poor such as

through a non costly design, payment in

installments over an extended period,

common use of a toilet, or a micro credit

scheme for toilet construction.

The demand for a toilet is highly influ-

enced by the community habit. Changing

habit takes a long period of time. Sani-

tation program implementation should be

set for a longer period of time than that

for other programs. (OM)

RTICLEA

17PercikJune 2004

SANITATION PRACTICEIN AFRICA

Toilet is built outside the house, so at

night one would defecate in a barrel to

be emptied the next morning

Another way is by "flying toilet". The

faeces is put into a plastic bag and then

dump it somewhere (garbage bin, river,

garden).

A Environmental cleanlinessB ComfortC Prevention of diseaseD Economic Gain

E SafetyF PrivacyG Others

THE ADVANTAGES OF HAVING A TOILETBASED

ON THE PERCEPTION OF THE COMMUNITIES OF CAMBODIA,

VIETNAM AND INDONESIA

INHIBITING FACTORS CAMBODIA VIETNAM INDONESIA

Capacity of the community

Choice of design and technology

Negative experience

Scarcity of water

Lack of socialization

Lack of land space


20/48

It is noticeable that sustainability

and effective use of a water supply

facility has won a major attention

from the promoting institutions for the

water supply development for the poor,

especially those in the villages. In several

activities, WSP-EAP (an institution under

the World Bank which handles water and

sanitation) frequently emphasizes the

importance of sustainability and effective

use of a water supply system.A conceptual scheme on sustainable

water supply was later becoming very po-

pular and frequently brought forward to a

training and a workshop. The scheme is

visualized as a water supply sustainability

pentagon. There are five variables, each

one of them is systemically inter-related

with the others; those are institutional,

financial, environmental, technological

and socio-cultural aspects.

Even with a simple general reasoning

the sustainability conceptual scheme with

its five variables is easily understood andaccepted. However, will the conceptual

scheme be applicable to the actual condi-

tion of community in which the water

supply service is to be developed? In

other words, whether the five variables do

indeed determine the sustainability of a

water supply service facility universally,

regardless of time and place, or will it be

applicable only at a certain condition? Is

there any study to test the sophistication

of this model?

Sustainability Variables of Water

Supply Facility

There is a considerable number of

studies have been done on water supply.

One of them is Flores Revisited: Assess-

ment of Selected Site in Flores, on the ini-

tiative of WASPOLA and conducted by

the Pradipta Paramitha Foundation. The

main information produced consists of

sustainable water supply service, positive

and negative aspects influencing water

supply service, effective use of water sup-

ply service, community participation

level, policy support, technology appro-

priateness, and others.

Regarding sustainability of waterservice, the determining variables, accor-

ding to the findings of this study, are in

general institutional and financial. All

water supply services which are function-

ing well are located in a community who

cares to maintain the facility through

establishment of a management team

responsible for managing the operation

and maintenance of the facility, including

collection of monthly contribution. In

terms of statistical measurement, the

strength of relation between institutional

activity and willingness to contribute re-gularly with sustainability-measured with

spearman rho correlation-are 0,752 and

0,514 respectively. There is also a strong

tie between management institution with

monthly contribution. The spearman rho

correlation coefficient between both vari-

ables is 0.63.

Fund availability is prerequisite for

sustainability of the facility, especially for

the procurement of supplies for mainte-

nance and repairs, and for system expan-

sion including home connection. In Flo-

res Timur, the capacity of users for

monthly contribution is quite limited. In

Rawabeling village, for instance, they can

only pay Rp200 per capita per month.

This means a family of seven will only pay

Rp1.400 per month. Because of such a

small contribution, there is only very li-

mited capacity for expansion and impro-

ving level of service. They will not be

able, even for a small repair they do not

have enough fund.

In a study conducted in 50 villages, it

was also revealed that sustainability is

correlated with socio-cultural variable,

but this is only true as it relates to the

poor class of the community. As the stu-

dy finds out, for the poor the higher the

level of water sufficiency the higher is the

sustainability of the service. This indica-

tes that the poor play a significant role inthe maintenance of the facility. This is

quite logic, because it is the poor who will

suffer most when there is a water short-

age, they won't be able to individually ful-

fill their own need.

Effect upon community well-being

In general, the villages with a facility

used to be a place where water is always

in short quantity, and water taking for

daily consumption is a laborious job

which consumes a lot of time and ener-

gy.From this study in Flores it was

revealed that 202 user groups from 52

sample communities feel strongly the

benefit of a water supply facility. Of all

the benefits the most frequently men-

tioned is "nearer to take water from."

Since the distance is shorter, there is

consequently a change in their water

related daily habit and a development of

derivative benefits, directly as well as

indirectly, which was unimaginable

before.

The benefits may be felt both by the

rich as well as the poor, men or women.

Consistently women-rich and poor-feel a

more benefit than do their men (rich and

poor). This is probably because women

have more direct concern in the fulfill-

ment of the need of their families for

water. For a clearer picture please see the

following table:

RTICLE

Drinking Water Service:

Sustainability and Its Effect

Upon Community Well-Being

A

18 PercikJune 2004

ByAlma Arief1)

and Hery Widjanarko 2)


21/48

The above table indicates only the

benefit of water supply, felt by all commu-

nity groups in study sites. The casuistic

field findings are not included here, such

as for instance a certain location the bene-

fit includes drinking water for cattle, mop-

ping tile floor, brick baking, cement mi-

xing for concrete house, watering veg-

etable gard

indonesia water supply and sanitation magazine percik june 2004. sanitation underestimate

Documents