The Swachh Bharat Mission is a popular tagline since October 2, 2014, appearing almost everywhere across the nation with each of the initiative of the Government of India.
The new currency introduced after demonetisation even carry the logo of ‘Swachh Bharat Mission’ (SBM). The intention behind is to make ‘sanitation’ a popular word among the millions of Indians.
No doubt, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) directly affects human health and have far-reaching consequences when ignored. India continues to lag behind on WASH indicators despite being one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
Thus, the effort on sanitation is not a new one. The incentive tag to sanitation drive is not a new one as well. The difference between previous interventions and the current one under the banner of SBM is increased political will and ensuring that all excluded and marginalised segments get incentive to ensure sanitation facilities at their reach.
‘Person with disability’ (PwD) is one of such segment, those are eligible to get incentive for individual household toilet under the Gramin segment of SBM i.e. SBM (G). The logic behind providing incentive to PwD for toilet was that neither they are able to access sanitation facilities away from home nor they can access any toilet, which will not be accessible to them, even at their own house. Thus, through the incentive, they can build a toilet, which really can carter their need and can be accessible to them considering their physical deformity. Hence, the prime motive behind toilets for PwDs was to design and build a toilet considering the specific need.
If we take Odisha as a case point, as per the State Annual Implementation Plan (AIP), there was a target of 33,540 toilets to be constructed during 2016-17 for PwDs under SBM (G). Against the target, from April 2016 to March 2017, only 2,432 toilets could be constructed in the name of PwDs. Again, as per AIP, for the year 2017-18, total 46,198 toilets are being targeted for PwDs against which, within seven months i.e. until end of October 2017, total 378 toilets could be constructed in the name of PwDs.
looking at the achievement against target, 2016-17 marked mere 7.25 per cent and 2017-18 (within seven months) it is 0.8 per cent only.
This is not only the case of Odisha. The total achievement across country during 2016-17 is 46,256 and during 2017-18 (within seven months) is mere 19,395. While construction of toilet under remaining incentive eligible category (where general toilet deign is fit for all) is quite encouraging creating villages after villages, Gram Panchayats after Gram Panchayats, Blocks after Blocks and even districts after districts open defecation free (ODF), achievement in case of toilet for PwDs is quite discouraging. Critical mass even put question on real accessibility of the toilets so far constructed for PwDs under the SBM.
Coming to public toilets, community toilets and toilets in various institutions, including schools, most of those are not accessible for PwDs or child with special need (CwSN). There are rare instances of inclusive toilets in institutions. It is difficult to find any community toilet being accessible for PwDs. Most of those toilets are general in design and can only be accessible to normal people having no disability.
In the hurry of achieving number and chasing the herculean target, somehow we are less concerned about a segment of people in our society i.e. PwDs, who need real attention and in case of sanitation, they face most difficulties. While policy prescription says of ensuring facilities/ toilets for PwDs, we are somehow closing our eyes while running for chasing the number.
There are primarily two reasons behind not being much active in case of provisioning of toilets for PwDs. First is having limited knowledge on what accessible/ inclusive toilet is. If we are making a toilet inclusive, both PwDs as well as normal members of the household can access that. In fact, such toilets are quite essential for elderly people as well pregnant women in the household. Simple thing is to make the people associated with service delivery understand the importance of inclusiveness of the toilet as well as orient them on the design aspect – what kind of modification required for such toilets.
Second reason is those who know little on accessible/ inclusive toilet, think that this is a costly affair. Considering the incentive amount marked under SBM (G) for individual household toilets, they think that, accessible toilets for PwDs cannot be constructed. But, in reality, such structures require hardly 10-15 per cent extra finance, which can very well be mobilised from the household. Even if any household is not able to meet the additional cost burden, this can also be mobilised from Gram Panchayat considering the increased financial allocation/ grant to Gram Panchayats in current scenario.
There are even many local materials available, which can be used in the toilet to make those accessible by PwDs. There are examples — only need to be explored. In this case, the people associated with service delivery need to understand the real cost implication as well as design aspect — what are the local materials available for modification of toilets to make accessible by PwDs.
Interestingly, most of the people and authorities, excluding those working with PwDs, even do not know what inclusive and accessible services are – forget about acting on the same. The knowledge and understanding about accessible toilet even among PwDs is also not up to the mark. The approach of ‘one-size-fit-for-all’ has made general twin-leach pit toilet equally popular like the SBM among all segments of people and accessible/ inclusive toilet is lying in the policy documents only.
Definitely, the approach is changing at the top level in decision-making body at both the State and Central level. However, making entire service delivery chain from top to bottom level accountable for creating accessible toilets is the need of the time.
Besides, due orientation and provisioning of reference materials can further smoothen the process. Awareness among the PwDs has also to be raised regarding accessible toilet and provisioning under the SBM, so that they can demand the design fit for them while the construction takes place. Otherwise, despite having a good intention, the SBM will end up leaving the PwDs behind and a section of the community will remain as they are until date – deprived of basic services.
(The writer works with WaterAid India, Bhubaneswar. The views expressed are personal)