Sustainability Planning and Monitoring

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DO PROJECT RULES PROMOTE SUSTAINABILITY AND EQUITY?Three major weaknesses1. In almost all cases with accessbelow 100 percent, wealthierhouseholds had greater accessthan poor ones.2. Sanitation access was low exceptin Java and Southwest Sulawesi,and highly inequitableeverywhere. Improvementsfollow water, but outside supportcan give sanitation a boost.The study checked access only in the parts of thevillage covered by the project. In less than half ofthe 40 villages did the project cover all the dusuns(sub-village habitations). Only in Central Java didall five VIP communities achieve 100 percentaccess, though three of six WSLIC communities inCentral Java also had reached 100 percent. Therewas no baseline against which to measure thechange in equity of access, so it is not known towhat extent the project approaches contributed tothese results.In 15 communities fewer than 10 percent of thehouseholds used a toilet. Even where there wasaccess, access for poor households laggeddramatically. Convenient water access is almost aprerequisite for a latrine, and wealthierhouseholds still got water (or more convenientwater) first. The multi-sectoral projects did not evenoffer household latrines as a choice. WSLIC andRWSS did, but only to a very limited extent. Mosttoilets apparently came from homeowners’ ownefforts, at their own cost, and the wealthierFigure 14 Who has access to improved sanitation?100%80%Percentage of households60%40%20%0%Central JavaVIPNTBOECFSouth Sumatra Jambi Central Java SoutheastSulawesiRWSSWSLIC 1East JavaKDPWest SumatraUpper Class Middle Class Lower Class100
DO PROJECT RULES PROMOTE SUSTAINABILITY AND EQUITY?households got adequate sanitation first, or werethe only ones to have it (Figure 14).Rural Indonesians prefer household pour-flushlatrines and use water for cleansing. Of the 12communities that had sanitation access over 60percent, the average water access was 84 percent,and seven of the twelve had achieved 100 percentwater access. The assessment teams reported thatsanitation “took off” in a number of communitiesafter house connections came. They also foundthat Ministry of Health (MOH) programs led tovigorous sanitation programs in several villages.In one, people were trained and groups were setup with revolving funds to build latrines. Inanother, sanitation received special attention whenthe village was selected as a MOH model watersupply and sanitation community.Five lessons about theprojects for the future1. Project inputs follow projectobjectives.Only WSLIC had a clear sustainability objective.Achieving sustainability in rural water supply andsanitation requires attention to five aspects:technical, environmental, financial, institutional(managerial), and social. Community-managedsystems need a management organization toensure longer-term sustainability, particularly onein which all categories of users, both women andmen, have a voice. Yet, only WSLIC and, to alesser extent, the RWSS project sought to establishwater management organizations and build theircapacity to sustain their water systems.3. Women and poor householdshad little voice and choice indecisions and service control.None of the projects had sufficiently effectivemechanisms to reach out to women and poorhouseholds. Getting information is an essentialfirst step if people are to make informed choicesand decisions, but none of the projects didvery well in spreading information beyond thevillage elite. VIP’s information disseminationefforts worked best, followed by WSLIC’s inSouth Sulawesi. These two groups ofcommunities, not surprisingly, also reported agreater equity in control over decisions abouttheir water systems. As with informationprovision, however, none of the villagesreported that ordinary people were involved indecision making to any extent (Figure 13).None of the projects had an equity objective.Few project inputs - mainly in WSLIC and KDP -were directed towards actions to increase thechance that women, poor households, groupsin the project villages, and other marginalizedgroups would have a voice and choice in theirservices.WSLIC was the only project to involve womenmeaningfully in any project-supported activity.It set out to include women in the WMOs itestablished and in the training it offered.Women and some poor people were broughtinto management organizations and have stayedinvolved over the years. Women were trainedand continue to use the skills they gained, andboth poor people and women have benefitedfrom the paid and unpaid jobs created in WSLICcommunity-managed systems on Java.101
Page 1 and 2:
SustainabilityPlanning andMonitorin
Page 3:
SustainabilityPlanning andMonitorin
Page 6 and 7:
PrefaceThe mission of the Water and
Page 8 and 9:
AcknowledgementsThe Participatory L
Page 10 and 11:
viii
Page 12 and 13:
4.9 Visualization and self-scoring
Page 14 and 15:
Figure 18 KDP 2 activity cycle with
Page 17 and 18:
THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINED WATER SU
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
A NEW TOOL FOR PLANNERS AND MANAGER
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
THE MPA FRAMEWORK AND PROCESSkey va
Page 37 and 38:
THE MPA FRAMEWORK AND PROCESSsevera
Page 39 and 40:
THE MPA FRAMEWORK AND PROCESS●●
Page 41 and 42:
THE MPA FRAMEWORK AND PROCESSThe MP
Page 43 and 44:
THE MPA FRAMEWORK AND PROCESSsegreg
Page 45 and 46:
THE MPA IN ACTIONaction points in i
Page 47 and 48:
THE MPA IN ACTION●●●●●●
Page 49 and 50:
THE MPA IN ACTIONBox 15 Key element
Page 51 and 52:
THE MPA IN ACTIONsuccessful or unsu
Page 53 and 54:
THE MPA IN ACTIONexternal facilitat
Page 55 and 56:
THE MPA IN ACTIONBox 17 Indicative
Page 57 and 58:
THE MPA IN ACTIONvisits and conduct
Page 59 and 60:
THE MPA IN ACTIONScoring principles
Page 61 and 62:
THE MPA IN ACTION4.10 Quality contr
Page 63 and 64:
THE MPA IN ACTIONExperiences with t
Page 65 and 66: THE MPA IN ACTION5Organizing and In
Page 67 and 68: Box 22 Gender and poverty analysis
Page 69 and 70: ORGANIZING AND INTERPRETING THE DAT
Page 79 and 80: PARTICIPATORY TOOLS USED IN THE MPA
Page 109 and 110: Section 2MPAApplication Case Studie
Page 111 and 112: DO PROJECT RULES PROMOTE SUSTAINABI
Page 115: DO PROJECT RULES PROMOTE SUSTAINABI
Page 121 and 122: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICEDANIDA began
Page 123 and 124: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE2. Key findi
Page 125 and 126: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICEReality of e
Page 127 and 128: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICEAdding Accou
Page 129 and 130: ADDING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR GENDER EQ
Page 137 and 138: Table 2WSLIC 2: ADDING POVERTY ACCO
Page 141 and 142: Table 3 (continued) ADDING PERFORMA
Page 145 and 146: LOOKING BACK TO SEE FORWARDMembers
Page 147 and 148: LOOKING BACK TO SEE FORWARDFigure 2
Page 149 and 150: LOOKING BACK TO SEE FORWARDFigure 2
Page 151 and 152: LOOKING BACK TO SEE FORWARD●●
Page 153 and 154: LOOKING BACK TO SEE FORWARDMPA core
Page 155 and 156: EFFECT OF THE MPA ON GENDER RELATIO
Page 157 and 158: EFFECT OF THE MPA ON GENDER RELATIO
Page 159 and 160: ACHIEVING SUSTAINED SANITATION FOR
Page 161 and 162: HOW WELL DID THOSE DEVELOPMENT PROJ
Page 163 and 164: HOW WELL DID THOSE DEVELOPMENT PROJ
Page 165 and 166: Appendix AInstitutions that current
Page 167 and 168:
Appendix BProcess designed forPLA P
Page 169 and 170:
StepNo.7.ProcessAsk “Were users e
Page 171 and 172:
ReferencesBernard, Russel H. (1995)
Page 173:
Wijk, Christine van. (1998). ‘Gen
Page 176:
Water and Sanitation ProgramWater S
show all

Sustainability Planning and Monitoring

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?