You are here
Priorities for Urban Sanitation Capacity Building : Technology for FSSM
Urban Sanitation Capacity Building : Practitioners Meet
https://niua.org/scbp/sites/default/files/Urban%20Sanitation%20Practitioners%20Meet%20Report.pdf
Capacity Building Priorities : Decentralised Sanitation Technology
1) ULB officials are interested in understanding technology options, working models as well as proof for the designs (compliance). As there aren’t enough experiences, models and cases in India, it becomes difficult to convince the ULB officials. There are several challenges of imparting technology training for FSSM. Perhaps one way to go ahead can be to conduct series of sensitisation program on different treatment methodologies, technology options (pick one treatment methodology and provide a beginning to end training) with the clear understanding on applicability, know which model needs to be applied where, the appropriateness of each model, proven case studies, land area requirements, treatment performance, costing related to capital and O&M etc.
2) Understanding of faecal sludge characteristics as well as the design requirements among the engineers and practitioners are very limited. Hence, generic or introduction training's are not sufficient to build the design capacities. It is important to have a high level specific training like a) understanding the quality of faecal sludge in relation to wastewater, b) conceptualization of design (methodology) – based on specific objectives that are confirmed with local stakeholders, c) detailed design trainings on available or practiced treatment modules, its combination, as well as its applications etc, c) different reuse as well as safe disposal practices etc.
3) Detailed sensitization training on a) capital costing as well as O&M requirement of each treatment module (activities, resource required), b) monitoring requirements
4) As one of the main challenge faced by the designers, practitioners as well as ULB officials (to select the treatment option as well as its implementation) is on the non-clarity of compliance requirements. This can be a) different clearances to be obtained from the concerned departments -land, EIA, Consents etc. b) discharge standard requirement for percolate (liquid) treatment as well as solids. If we could develop and conduct sensitisation workshop in consultation with the concerned departments from the local, state or central departments, this will be very useful for faster implementation of FSM/FSTP on ground
5) Potential partners from the private sector need to be identified and ways to handhold them for delivering sanitation services specific to FSM need to be designed so that they can play an active role along with ULBs.
In addition to support the above mentioned capacity building measures:
1) From my observation as well as understanding, the IEC campaigns developed in relation to FSM is not percolating to the final beneficiaries - common public. There is a need to develop effective campaigns talking about a) usage of toilets – what to allow and what not (cleaning agents, trash), use of water, after toilet component, b) the entire management. For eg: Series of small audio/visual clippings played in radio or TV talking about the entire value chain. Also this effort should not be a one-time activity but a repetitive effort
2) There is a need to conduct Training of Trainers (ToT) on different topics of FSM to ensure quality delivery of trainings.
3) There is a need to conduct Training impact assessment to understand its effect as well as need for improvement.
Rajesh Pai
CDD Society