The document discusses two community-led sanitation approaches: Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) and the Orangi Pilot Project (OPP) in Pakistan. Both approaches define the sanitation problem as a lack of participation, ownership, and capabilities among the poor. CLTS uses "triggering" to encourage behavior change and focuses on natural local leaders to make entire villages open defecation free, with villagers deciding technologies. OPP uses motivational meetings and lane organizations to develop low-cost lane sewers with septic tanks, providing technical support but no subsidies. The lecture debates the sustainability and broader impacts of these approaches.

1. Community Led Total Sanitation
(CLTS) and Orangi Pilot Project
(OPP)
Empowerment through Participation
DPU Lecture – 27th Nov, 2012
Mansoor Ali
20 December 2012

2. Pre-lecture discussion;
Asking a question vs order an action
Conventional approach
Outcome of conventional approach
Who defines the problem & its
causes

3. Why 2.5 billion people do not have
access to improved sanitation?
Both OPP and CLTS defined the problem in a
certain way; Lack of participation; lack of
ownership; capabilities of the poor;
affordability to pay; ability to operate and
maintain

4. CLTS and OPP Framing of the
problem
 Building on or creating demand
 Expensive conventional technologies
 Support and organisation is important
 Waiting for government and donors
 Do not understand health impact

5. CLTS – Key Features
 Key - triggering through shame – talk shit
 Focus on natural local leaders
 No upfront subsidy for material etc.
 Villagers take the collective responsibility
 Entire village becomes “Open Defecation
Free (ODF)”
 People decide technologies and standards
 Possible reward after ODF declaration
 Village to village replication

7. How CLTS is different from
conventional approaches?
Conventional Approach; CLTS Approach
•Starts with data, planning and •Starts with the addressing the
design change in attitude with triggering
• Technical designs and costing set • Community takes the
the pathway for the action responsibility and design
• Government role and regulation themselves
are important • Community processes are more
• Operation and maintenance is important
planned • Community will do this
• Up-front subsidies are part of themselves
investment • Subsidies are discouraged
• Large investments needed • Small investments needed

8. OPP – Key Features
 Motivational meeting in the community
 Lane organisation and lane manager
 Technical support; plan, designs, cost
estimate, supervision, tools and shuttering
 No subsidy and no reward
 Lane group collect and manage money
 Lobby for government support
 Health, education and loans available
 A demonstration area/ physical model

9. 20 December 2012

10. 20 December 2012

11. Technology Differences
OPP low cost lane sewers with a septic tank
CLTS – mainly on-site with community
deciding the standards

12. People behind CLTS and OPP
Kamal Kar
Robert Chamber
Lyla Mehta
Akhtar Hameed Khan
Arif Hasan
Perveen Rahman

13. Sources of Further Information
IDS, University of Sussex
Orangi Pilot Project
Akhtar Hameed Khan Trust
Water and Sanitation Programme
(WSP
UNICEF
Book; Shit Mattter
Books; Various by Arif Hasan

14. Choose your debate
Debate 1; CLTS allows people to
choose technologies and
standards, although this
empowers them, but end-up with
very poor quality toilets – so no
long term health impact?
Agree, disagree, continue or
change

15. Choose your debate
Debate 2; OPP only transfers
wastewater (the problem)
from lanes to large drains
elsewhere, although this
systems empowers people
but creates problems for
others?
Agree, disagree, continue or
change

16. Political Context or
Structural Causes of
Not Empowering
Citizens to Improve
their Sanitation

17. Habits and taboos
Land and its ownership
Investments
Corruption
Technology divide
Emptying of pits
Treatment plants

18. The Politics of Sewerage and
On-Site Sanitation in Cities
The Politics of Investments
The Nature of Institutions

19. Sustaining Empowerment
without Institutional/ Political
Change
Power and Authority
Reasons for their Formation
Expectations from them
Out-dated Institutional Models

20. Thank you
Mansoor.ali@practicalaction.org.uk
www.practicalaction.org/yourpagehere
NAME | 20 December 2012