Nepal WASH Blog Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) & Development in Nepal

December 23, 2010

Link of the week – 23 to 29 December 2010

Filed under: Equity and inclusion,Link of the week,Water — Anita Pradhan @ 6:05 pm

HOW TO: Help Solve the Global Water Crisis with Social Media

Lack of clean water is an issue that’s easy to overlook because we take it as such a given. Thirsty? There’s a bottle. Dirty? There’s a faucet to clean yourself. From the perspective of the industrialized world, it’s hard to wrap your head around how crucial water, particularly clean water, is for our daily lives.

Click here for our link of the week - 23 to 30 December 2010

December 22, 2010

Drinking water forever?

Filed under: Climate change,Ground water,MDG — Tags: , , — Barun Kanta @ 3:15 pm

WaterAid has always been big on sustainability; whether it be promoting affordable technology or up-skilling people for the on-going management of services. We’re an organisation committed to innovation; making sure we’re constantly adapting to meet the needs of the changing times. In the spirit of innovation then, I’d like to put forward some suggestions about how WaterAid and our peer organisations may want to adapt our work in the face of the world’s current emerging global crisis: climate change, particularly in the area of drinking water source sustainability. 

- Environmental awareness components could be incorporated into our Water, Sanitation and Hygiene project plans, for example, components that focus on land use patterns, deforestation, extraction of ground water and overgrazing of pasture land.

- The issues of how infrastructure development, housing, upstream diversion, carbon emissions etc impact on drinking water source sustainability should be added to the agenda for discussion

- Research could be conducted into the annual rainfall versus source yield change patterns within the micro watershed areas (or WaterAid project areas). This would help us to understand any emerging trends during the period of a project, (2-3 years) and to explore adaptation strategies. Learning gained from such research can be applied to the engineering and design of future projects.

- Proven science from forestry and botanical fields can be utilized as potential ways of improving source yields. For example we could explore whether bio-engineering techniques close to the source are effective in terms of improving the water infiltration and holding capacity of sub soil. We could increase awareness about the types of species that consume more underground water and therefore reduce source yields and the types of species that can retain more water in the soil for longer periods, contributing to improved source yields during dry seasons.

- We could pilot alternative techniques of improving ground water recharging in WaterAid supported projects in Nepal, for example by tapping rain water, storm water and waste water

- Local knowledge and appropriate technologies that could potentially improve source yields should also be explored, proven and promoted

These are some ideas of how WaterAid is looking to adapt its working practices in the face of the current changing climate but I would be interested in hearing your thoughts and suggestions. Is this the right approach do you think? Is there anything else we need to consider? Please don’t hesitate to share your views below.

Written by Barun Kanta Adhikari, Planning and Monitoring Manager, WaterAid in Nepal

December 21, 2010

Photo of the week – 21 to 27 December 2010

Filed under: Photo of the week,Urban,Water — Tags: , , , — Anita Pradhan @ 9:29 am

The main water pump in village square: Tigni is a village in the Kathmandu valley – which despite only being 30 minutes from the centre of the city feels very rural as a lot of farming takes place here and selling vegetables is the main source of income. Photo: WaterAid/ Marco Betti

December 20, 2010

No MDGs without toilets

Filed under: Ashu's WASH Mondays,MDG,Sanitation — Tags: , , — Ashutosh Tiwari @ 3:45 pm

Since my previous job was in the private sector, I am often asked about the differences between the private sector and the development sector. In the former, goals are narrower and sharper: meet the quarterly sales targets, beat the competition, show profits for growth, and the like.

For a firm, the metrics and the consequences have to move in the same direction. Else, if you do not sell enough, you will not be able to pay your employees; and, if you cannot pay your employees, your production halts, and that means you cannot make sales, etc.

In the development sector, however, goals are loftier, more vague and sometimes come with an overtone of moral superiority (which is not a bad thing!). The goals are also diffused: reduce poverty, make poor people’s health better, raise employment levels, and so on. In development, the metrics and the consequences can move in opposite directions: for instance, if poverty is not reduced, then, more money is lobbed at the problem.

Indeed, there has been much criticism of the development sector for not having agreed-upon sharper, clearer and measurable goals to reduce poverty, and only throwing money after money at a particular problem.

Happily, much of that vagueness was in the past. Thanks to better monitoring tools and methods, and to donors’ insistence, things are clearer than they used to be, though development debates are still going on as to what to measure and how.

In 2000, after several years of discussions, world leaders adopted what has been called Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). These are “eight time-bound global and local targets on income poverty, hunger, maternal and child mortality, disease, inadequate shelter, gender inequality, and environmental degradation”.

The targets are set to be achieved by developing countries, including Nepal, by 2015. To that end, for the last 10 years, most development institutions in Nepal, including WaterAid, have recast their work as contributions to meeting the national MDGs.

Now that the third leg of the 15-year stretch has started, how close is Nepal to meeting its MDGs?

Happily, it’s on track, according to a recent report published by the Nepal Planning Commission and UNDP. But – and it’s a big but – in three things: in achieving full and productive employment and decent work for all, achieving universal access to reproductive health, and, (goal number 7) in halving proportion of population without access to improved sanitation such as safe water and toilets.

Obviously, we consider the lack of progress on meeting the sanitation goal to be especially important in that it is basic hygiene that serves as visible-to-all indicators for progress.

Now that it’s on record that Nepal’s MDG progress can be slowed down due to its not meeting the sanitation goals, much work remains to be done on sanitation. In my other postings, I will share the data and thoughts with regard to what can be done to do more.

Written by Ashutosh Tiwari, Country Representative, WaterAid in Nepal.

December 17, 2010

Why fuss about sanitation?

Filed under: MDG,Sanitation,Urine — Tags: , , — Kabir Das Rajbhandari @ 5:46 pm

It is not an exaggeration to say that poor sanitation limits economic growth and cripples developing world economies. We know that poor sanitation invariably leads to low productivity. Without good sanitation, workers are less healthy and therefore less productive, live shorter lives, save and invest less and their children are less likely to attend school. On the other hand, with good sanitation, women, for example, are healthier, have more time for childcare and for income generating work. 

It has been estimated that meeting the sanitation Millenium Development Goals’ (MDG) target would yield economic benefits in the region of $63 billion each year (rising to $225 billion if universal access to sanitation were achieved.) Even conservative estimates predict that adequate investments in sanitation could provide the estimated annual 3% economic growth. Put even more simply, for every $1 invested in sanitation, $9 is returned to national economies in increased productivity and a reduced burden of healthcare. 

There are many examples of how improved sanitation can contribute towards economic development. For example, huge quantities of nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium in human excreta, particularly in urine, are wasted in sewerage systems and pit latrines. This represents a financial loss for public and private sewerage treatment services. Both rural and urban agriculture could benefit from nutrients from human urine and faeces to improve people’s livelihoods. 

Also, by preventing human excreta from polluting the human environment, the transmission of pathogens is also reduced. People are able to enjoy better health, allowing them to spend more time and energy on productive activities, mobilizing their assets while the costs of poor health are reduced. 

It is undeniable that improved sanitation is fundamental to improved livelihoods. Who can argue against the importance of safe sanitation and its effects on the livelihood improvements of the poorer sections of society? 

Buddhi and his grand-daughter Gyani Maya Sipai from Thimee, Bhaktapur, Nepal with produce grown using compost from latrines

Written by Kabir Rajbhandari, Programme Manager – Urban, WaterAid in Nepal

December 16, 2010

Link of the week – 16 to 22 December 2010

Filed under: Campaigns,Link of the week,Sanitation — Anita Pradhan @ 4:45 pm

Sanitation is sexy, make it obvious.

Truly creative people see things differently. Instead of seeing problems, they see obvious solutions. Look around you. What everyday objects or services have changed the world and make life better?

Click here for our link of the week  – 16 to 22 December 2010

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

This blog was created by WaterAid under the creative commons licence