SuSanA - Forum Kunena Site Syndication Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:31:49 +0000 Kunena 1.6 SuSanA - Forum en-gb Re: 3rd International Conference on Faecal Sludge Management - Vietnam 19-21 January 2015 - now with feedback - by: tmsinnovation
The presentations that we received for FSM3 are now available here:

We are going to try and still get a copy of the handful of presentations that are missing.
The videos of the presentations are still being edited by the event organiser web agency and will still take some time. As soon as they are available, I will let you all know via a forum post.

Look forward to reading further feedback and impressions from the FSM3.

Kind regards
Conferences, seminars and workshops Fri, 30 Jan 2015 20:17:00 +0000
Jan 30, 2015 - WASHplus Weekly: Focus on Fecal Sludge Management - by: campbelldb ]link.

This issue highlights the recent conference on fecal sludge management in Vietnam; many of the abstracts from the conference are now available. Also included are new reports and articles from IRC; Water For People; the International Institute for Environment and Development; and country reports from Senegal, Vietnam, and Zambia. Also included are links to FSM tools and innovative organizations working on FSM issues.]]>
Faecal sludge management Fri, 30 Jan 2015 17:15:31 +0000
Re: Where is the local government involvement in faecal sludge management and sanitation for the urban poor? - by: christoph I agree with you that the involvement of the local utility is most crucial for roll out.
local government has taken this task on

That is what we worked on in Peru with GIZ. We proved that the service is possible to an affordable price (see here ) in the video in 15:13 the model is explained and 15:40 shows the calculated numbers. The mentioned 8 soles /month and family are 2,7 U$/month,family as a recollection fee - far cheaper than the regular wastewater fee. The utility (was/is) going to implement, we have to see how are things changed after election now in December - that is always a problem especially as the project ended. Beforehand we proved with examples all over the country that in general it is an applicable model of sanitation.
I do not agree with your view
this includes sewer systems that are usually cross-financed via water supply sales
That is not my experience. My experience is, that sewers are financed in developing countries or by the state or by donors - never with tariffs and even less cross financing to water tariff. Often, at least in Peru, the wastewater tariff is used to cross finance water expenditures.

My logic would be - use the same amount you would use for sewer and WWTP implementation to finance the infrastructure at the users home - but I know that is a severe problem for public money.

Best regards

Upscaling, sanitation governance, institutional aspects, sanitation policies Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:09:28 +0000
Where is the local government involvement in faecal sludge management and sanitation for the urban poor? - by: muench FSM3 conference and indeed from the whole discourse on faecal sludge management.

And that's the local government involvement, particularly when it comes to the people living in informal settlements. OK, one could argue this doesn't just apply to sanitation but is a wider problem regarding insecure tenure issues, corruption, neglect, violence etc. Are we therefore putting the cart before the horse if we are trying to sort out sanitation before sorting out local government issues? Should we work much more closely with organisations working on improving governance, decentralisation etc.?

I had a little twitter conversation with Sasha from SOIL Haiti on this which I found interesting, see below. The screenshot doesn't come out so clearly but this is what Sasha wrote:

SOIL ‏@SOILHaiti 22. Jan.
" @SOILHaiti and @Sanergy both work closely with local governments, though they aren't yet financially or operationally involved."

Elisabeth von Muench ‏@EvMuench 22. Jan.
"I didn't really get this from the presentations. Perhaps LG accept what you do, but that is not active involvement?"

"what sort of involvement would you envision?"

Elisabeth von Muench ‏@EvMuench 22. Jan.
"They should gear up to provide the sanitation service themselves, isn't it their job & responsibility? "

Elisabeth von Muench ‏@EvMuench 22. Jan.
"Or they should at least consider a subsidy scheme for sanitation in low-income urban areas..."

SOIL ‏@SOILHaiti 22. Jan.
"in a perfect world yrs, but unreliable tax base and political instability = sustainability risk."

I do agree with organisations like SOIL and Sanergy (the hyperlinks take you to existing threads about their work on the forum) that we cannot wait for local government to provide sanitation solutions and leave the people languish in their own waste.

However, what I am wondering: now that SOIL and Sanergy have proven that it is possible to provide sustainable sanitation to these people at low cost (with a small subsidy), would now be a good time to try and convince local government to step in? Not necessarily to provide the service themselves (this would probably not work very well) but to regulate it in some form and to provide a subsidy for it? I think it will be next to impossible to provide sanitation to anyone without a subsidy (this includes sewer systems that are usually cross-financed via water supply sales), therefore why would anyone expect that sanitation for low-income informal settlements should be an exception from this rule? It is an investment into a public good, public health.

Does anyone have any examples where local government has taken this task on, perhaps after NGOs have proven it to be possible?

Upscaling, sanitation governance, institutional aspects, sanitation policies Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:28:16 +0000
Re: 3rd International Conference on Faecal Sludge Management - Vietnam 19-21 January 2015 - now with feedback - by: wasifbashir15 Hope you will be fine and doing all well.
It was really very nice to meet you at Hanoi during 3rd FSM conference.
Nice to hear about your feedback and will soon i will also share my output as well.
Stay Blessed
Muhammad Wasif Bashir Babar-Pakistan
Speaker at 3rd FSM Conference Hanoi]]>
Conferences, seminars and workshops Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:13:22 +0000
Re: 3rd International Conference on Faecal Sludge Management - Vietnam 19-21 January 2015 - by: muench flying there.

So let me start, hoping that others will follow suit. I actually plan to put some of the things that I learnt into the respective topic threads, as it could be an overload if it was all in this post.

The good news is, as mentioned before, that the presentations were filmed and will be made available on the SuSanA Youtube channel or the FSM3 website or both. Trevor also got hold of the majority of the presentations which he is busy uploading to the SuSanA website as we speak (a mammoth task!). Hopefully those presentations that he didn't obtain yet can still be provided by the respective presenters (whom I have also encouraged to post their presentations in the topic areas where it fits on the forum).

For me this conference was good, I enjoyed meeting many people whom I only knew via the forum or by e-mail before.
A lot of conversations started with "Hello, I know you from the SuSanA Forum!". Having had those previous conversation on the forum meant that we could dive into our conversation much faster and more effectively. E.g. I met for the first time Giacomo from IRC, Aasim from CEPT India, Dave Robbins now with Oxfam USA, Marcos and Chuck from the Earth-Auger toilet, Sudhir from WRC, Sharada from Uni Berkeley and of course Sasha from SOIL, and many more! (Please also give us your feedback on the forum about this conference.)

You can find quite a bit of feedback about the conference on Twitter, just look for the hashtag #fsm3.

Other thoughts in no particular order:
  1. Having a SuSanA booth was great, but in general I felt that the visibility of SuSanA could have been a bit higher - somehow. Perhaps we were lacking some more high profile people who mention SuSanA in sessions - then again, the topic of capacity building, sharing, dissemination of results did not come up often. Although this perception could be wrong, as one participant pointed out to me that SuSanA is now mainstream at a conference like this and does not “need” to have its own side events.
  2. The conference attracted quite a high number of people (750), which was also aided by the activities from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation who added some grantees' meetings to the back of the conference thus increasing the reasons for going to this conference. ADB (Asian Development Bank) also sent many people.
  3. Personally, I still think that the title "faecal sludge management" is not perfect for this type of conference. Isn't it more "On-site sanitation" or "Sanitation without sewers"? I just don’t like this focus on “sludge” which makes me think of septic tanks and pour flush latrines mainly (dry toilets were accepted in the program but this is not reflected in the title of FSM).
  4. It seemed to me that there very few real entrepreneurs (I can mainly only remember one who presented about vermi-composting in New Zealand in the resources recovery workshop). Everyone else is still more or less grant-funded, like NGOs (like SOIL or Water for People and Oxfam).
  5. I was also missing more participation from local government, the only local government that stood out once again was eThekwini municipality from Durban in South Africa (I really admire what they do!), connected to the Uni Kwa Zulu Natal and some South African consulting firms. They were telling us about a new program that they are rolling out which involves emptying of UDDTs every two years and planned treatment with black soldier fly (I hope Nick will open a new thread on this topic soon so that we can discuss it in more depth).
  6. I also heard about scheduled septic tank emptying in a few presentations, which I found interesting. It is more cost-effective to empty all the septic tanks of a street in one go whether they need it or not. I will also start a separate thread on this.
  7. I heard a bit about resource recovery at this conference but not so much, apart from the workshop that I attended on the last day of the conference which had resource recovery as a topic. Only one of the four presenters of the morning session was able to present a case where a profit was able to be generated (vermi-composting in New Zealand). The others were not (yet?) producing a profit. The others were: SOIL Haiti, ACF in Mongolia (their project is now coming to an end) and Sanergy in Kenya. I hope the presenters will make their presentations available here on the forum as they were very interesting.
  8. The presentations that I heard that talked about faecal sludge treatment, usually only spoke about thickening and drying but most of them said nothing about pathogen kill. The reuse as fertiliser was often mentioned but rarely rigorously assessed (an exception being the work by SOIL and the work by IWMI see also here).
  9. More and more I get the feeling that we are applying double standards: when it comes to treatment of faecal sludge, nobody bothers much about destroying helminth eggs but still advocates use of the wet or dried faecal sludge as a fertiliser. But when it comes to UDDTs, we expect them to destroy helminths eggs with a success rate of 100%....
  10. In general the conference was quite focussed on technology and science, which is alright, but could have perhaps been balance with a bit more on policy, governance, capacity development, marketing, behaviour change and health aspects. E.g. the issue of solid waste being dumped in pit latrines often came up but noboday really knew anything about how to avoid it with proper solid waste management practices and so forth.

OK, that's it from me.
I really do invite you to check out the tweets from the conference, by looking in Twitter for #fsm3. You will find many "musings" and conversations on take home messages there, too.

What did others think about this conference?

Conferences, seminars and workshops Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:03:43 +0000
Re: new MSc in “Engineering for International Development" - by: sahidul93 Masters, diploma and PhD programmes (and scholarships) Fri, 30 Jan 2015 04:13:26 +0000 Re: Template of a Faecal Sludge Management Policy - by: MichaelCarr
The book is available FREE OF CHARGE as a PDF DOWNLOAD on the Sandec/Eawag and UNESCO-IHE websites:

hope this helps]]>
Faecal sludge management Fri, 30 Jan 2015 01:28:31 +0000
January 2015 posts to the WASHplus WASH Nutrition Library - by: campbelldb WASH Nutrition Library


- The Other Asian Enigma: Explaining the Rapid Reduction of Undernutrition in Bangladesh
- SPRING – Essential Nutrition Actions and Essential Hygiene Actions: A Training Guide for Peace Corps Health Volunteers and Peace Corps Staff
- World Bank – Promoting Handwashing and Sanitation Evidence from a Large-Scale Randomized Trial in Rural Tanzania
- Child malnutrition and the Millennium Development Goals: much haste but less speed?
- Pediatric small intestine bacterial overgrowth in low-income countries
- ACF – Greater investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is key to the fight against undernutrition]]>
WG 12 (WASH & Nutrition) Thu, 29 Jan 2015 20:01:06 +0000
Re: Air travel to conferences, site visits, etc. - by: joeturner
I was just showing that a single return flight has quite a lot of emissions relative to something else (in my case, annual car emissions). I wasn't trying to justify my car emissions.]]>
Miscellaneous - any other topic Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:25:41 +0000
Re: Partners wanted for Ghana - by: solidrock4
1. We are currently using biodigesters and hope to maintain

also remember that the cost includes workmanship]]>
Persons or companies offering their skills or products (and introductions) Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:47:47 +0000
Re: Partners wanted for Ghana - by: denniskl
And it works out to a little over 1,000 sterling each toilet correct?]]>
Persons or companies offering their skills or products (and introductions) Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:30:37 +0000
Re: Partners wanted for Ghana - by: solidrock4 We are targeting at lest 450 people using the facility every day meaning that at least 22 people would use one toilet seat.

revenues from the daily usage would amount to
daily 20GP *450 --------90GHC
Weekly 90 * 7 days -------630GHC
Monthly 630* 4 weeks ------- 2520 GHC
yearly 2520 *12 Months-------30240 GHC

30240 GHC -------- 6066.7 Pound sterling

25000 pounds goes into building the toilet facility with 20 seats
15000 goes into community sanitation education activities for one year
10000 goes into developing organisational capacity.]]>
Persons or companies offering their skills or products (and introductions) Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:07:56 +0000
Re: Air travel to conferences, site visits, etc. - by: nbfaso
As someone who spends most of their time living in-country for my projects I tend to be flying mainly for visiting family at home (unfortunately not very often!), though occasionally I will fly between countries. Recently I had to weigh up getting from Malawi to Rwanda/Uganda and I considered the overland possibility for keeping costs down - even speaking to people who had just done the road trip - to come to a decision to take the flight instead of several days' worth of buses and uncertainty across Western Tanzania.

Having also travelled between countries in West Africa on 24 hour bus journeys I also know the toll it took on me and my ability to work effectively once I arrived at destination. I guess some people are able to travel with little impact on their health and level of fatigue and I would consider them very lucky. In hindsight I don't doubt that some of these trips may have been more effective had I taken a flight. Of course, I have not considered the ecological impact with respect to the work I am doing, but merely from a personal standpoint, and the domain is really field work rather than conferences.

That said I have sometimes been amazed at just how many flights some colleagues with various project partners can take in one year (2-3 visits from Europe to multiple Southern destinations) not just in terms of CO2 but also in terms of project budgets - especially so when their organisations are working on CO2 projects!

I do believe, however, that they are very conscious of the issue and do consider it very seriously. I think many such organisations will, or should be taking steps to reduce such travel. Any credible organisation working in sustainability must really consider this seriously.

One could argue that long-term reliance on travel by Northern experts for an organisation is a key sign of unsustainability, but is there a way of bridging the capacity building gap in the short-term wherein shuttling people around the world can be avoided/reduced?

The emissions from Elisabeth's flights (in tourist class) is only a bit more than the emissions driving my car for a whole year.

I agree that it is up to people to be the change they want to see, within reason. What would the impact be if everyone were to stop driving, or businesses stop shipping giant tankers from port to port to deliver those cars and our smartphones? If taking one flight is deemed unacceptable because it produces CO2 equivalent to a year's car use, why is it any more acceptable to use a car for one year or heat your house using dirty technology?

I know that this sounds like a rationalisation to avoid changing ones life style (and it might in fact be subconsciously to some extend ), but what most people fail to see is that climate change can not be seen seperatly from the overall issues in our society which caused it.
And as I don't see anything changing in that regard (at least not before things get much worse), we should rather brace for an hard impact and try to adapt and prepare as well as possible for what will come.

There are people working on reducing transport emissions as there are people working on improving sustainable sanitation and energy generation, and there are some people consciously attempting to reduce their own CO2 impacts, so the overall trend should really be positive - by trying to rationalise it this way and even including the current majority not making any personal changes, I don't feel quite so pessimistic.

It would be good if the long term benefits of these flights outweighed their short term impact, but is there a way to quantify it and know if a good job is being done? I imagine hundreds of projects could be qualified as failures if only we knew the total negative externalities produced directly or indirectly by project implementation only!]]>
Miscellaneous - any other topic Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:51:00 +0000
Consumer Insights on Sanitation – Upping the Usage of Fresh Life Toilets (update by Sanergy) - by: Sanergy Consumer Insights on Sanitation ​– Upping the Usage of Fresh Life Toilets

Hi everyone!

We wanted to share our insights on what we are keen to try out in 2015 to influence the uptake of hygienic sanitation in the communities that we work in.

At Sanergy, we provide hygienic, accessible and affordable sanitation in the informal settlements of Nairobi, Kenya. Currently, our network of 620 toilets branded as Fresh Life, are generating over 26,000 uses every single day. We are the largest provider of hygienic sanitation in the areas that we serve.

We always want to raise the bar and serve more community members at each of our toilet locations. Designing and delivering improved sanitation is key, but not enough. We want to take a step further and ensure we provide effective interventions that change human behavior. How do we drastically reduce the number of individuals using unsanitary facilities or practicing open defecation?

In the last six months of 2014, we worked closely with Populist and GRID Impact, research and design firms, to help us understand behaviour change and a deeper grasp of our target audience. The team undertook extensive human-centered design research and identified several key consumer insights that we are keen to explore in our operations.

Fresh Life usage is a very addictive behaviour; once someone has a positive first experience, they will almost definitely become consistent customers. The challenge, then, is inspiring that first usage. We need to explicitly connect the brand to specific, tangible benefits that distinguish it from other options – especially at the moment of choice when someone needs to use the toilet – and motivate people to break their current habits in order to try Fresh Life.

click here

Another insight: the toilet does not speak for itself. That is to say, even though there is widespread brand recognition, non-users have their own perceptions of what it’s like inside or who the target customer is. For example, some think children are our main target because we have a growing presence in schools. While many can recall seeing the blue toilet or ‘Fresh Life’ logo, there is not an easily recalled understanding of what happens inside. Potential users are not armed with a concrete expected experience, and are therefore less likely to find Fresh Life a resonant choice. So how do we change preconceived notions among our potential customers to generate more demand?

A final insight: finally, we need to work with our FLOs to show them that actively recruiting new customers is just as critical as providing high quality service to their existing customers, and that shifting their focus just a bit will help their business grow. We need to come up with better, easier ways for our FLOs to feel comfortable as they promote their services.

We are excited to incorporate some of these insights in our work with the community in 2015. Watch this space for regular updates as we seek to provide hygienic, affordable and accessible sanitation for everyone forever. We would love to hear from you. Let us know what you think!]]>
Public toilets, community toilets, toilets at festivals and events Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:17:22 +0000