Cost effective ways to leave no-one behind in rural water and sanitation – Summary on the RWSN E-discussion

The e-discussion on the topic of “Cost effective ways to leave no-one behind in rural water and sanitation” has come to an end and we are very grateful for the 40+ participants who actively took part. A summary of the e-discussion can be found here. Additionaly, we as moderators want to share our own summary of the discussion in this short blog.

Authors: Julia Boulenouar, Louisa Gosling, Guy Hutton, Sandra Fürst, Meleesa Naughton.

As duty bearers for the realisation of human rights to safe drinking water, States have the responsibility to ensure that no-one is left behind. And the SDG framework clearly sets out the need for all stakeholders to work together on the challenge. This e-discussion was an opportunity for diverse members of the Rural Water Supply Network to share lessons and views on how this can be done.

Reminding ourselves of the challenge at stake: since the SDG WASH targets 6.1 and 6.2 were adopted in 2015, the sector has been thinking hard about how to finance the ambitious goal of providing access to safely managed WASH services for everyone, everywhere and forever. This ambition is even more challenging in rural areas, where coverage levels are lower and the unserved include remote communities which are harder to reach and often poorer.

In order to develop a credible financial strategy to achieve this ambition and leverage resources, governments and sector stakeholders need to determine the real costs involved (not only to provide first time access for a few, but sustainable services for all) and the sources of funding that are available and can be mobilised. It needs credible data on those aspects as well as on the population served and unserved, including the most vulnerable groups.

What we already know about the cost of providing WASH services: the costs of providing services rely on many factors and the WASH Cost initiative led by IRC has helped to identify 6 categories beyond capital expenditure to include among others, operation and maintenance, capital maintenance expenditure and direct support. We know that some of these cost categories are largely unknown and as a result, not planned, not budgeted and not financed. This is the case for capital maintenance expenditure and for direct support costs (generally referring to costs for local government to support service providers).

In terms of actual costs, a World Bank study of 2016 showed that $114 billion per year would be needed globally to cover capital costs and roughly the same for operation and maintenance.

What we know less about is the real cost of providing services to all, especially for those left behind (including those marginalised and those discriminated against) and this is because limited data are available. We also recognise that beyond the 6 generic cost categories, many costs are unknown and neglected and these include:

the non-financial time costs of WASH access,
the cost of taking time to properly understand demand, recognising gender differences and diverse perspectives,
the cost of strengthening skills and stakeholder capacity to fulfil their mandate, particularly service authorities and service providers,
the cost of corruption,
the time and cost of including people with disabilities and others who are socially excluded in services.

These can be seen as cost drivers rather than additional categories, but should be thought through, every time services are planned for.

Who is currently financing this goal and who should do more? Leaving no one behind is the responsibility of national governments. They need to mobilise funding through a combination of sources, including government (taxes), development partners (transfers) and users (tariffs). This is usually known as the “3Ts”. In some contexts, the private sector may have a role to play in investing in water services. However, results from countries that conducted to identify and track WASH financing with the UN-Water tool TrackFin, show that the main contributors for the sector are by far the users who are paying for their own services through capital investment (Self-supply) and through water tariffs (operation and maintenance). In that context, should we consider revising the “3Ts” to “3Ts and S” to acknowledge the importance of Self-supply in the mix of services? And should we also add a 4^th T for time to recognise the extent of unpaid labour, especially that of women, on which rural water supply depends? And should we recognise the time used to travel to a place of open defecation or also the waiting time for shared sanitation?

In any case, given the magnitude of the challenge, governments should mobilise additional funding for the WASH sector and coordinate efforts at all levels to ensure cost-effectiveness and efficiency, particularly in resource-constrained environments. Developing WASH plans at sub-national level could be a good way to strengthening governance and coordination, and maximise cost-effectiveness.

What about serving those that cannot afford to pay? Those currently left behind include communities located in rural and remote areas who are often the poorest and currently rely on Self-supply. For those who cannot afford to pay and to address the issue of leaving no-one behind, various areas can be investigated:

Defining and measuring users’ affordability
Considering low-cost technology options such as Self-supply but only if accompanied by long-term support from local and national government (including through regulation)
Making sure the solutions are acceptable and accessible for all – taking into account gender, disability, and cultural preferences

This e-discussion has been useful at clarifying knowns and unknowns related to costing and financing services. Even though the issue of affordability has been touched on, many questions remain unanswered.

We think this discussion should continue and here are a few questions, which we still have in mind, but you might have many more:

Who are populations left behind in different contexts (including the marginalised and discriminated against) and how can we define and identify them?
What are the ongoing costs of reaching everyone (including the aspects listed above)?
If users are those paying the majority of WASH supply costs, how do we deal with those who cannot afford to pay?
What mechanisms can be introduced to set tariffs appropriately, whilst also covering the costs of long-term service provision?
What are the examples of supported Self-supply that have been successful?
What are the specific roles of local government in ensuring no-one is left behind?

Continue the discussion with us and post your answers below or sent your contribution to the RWSN e-discussion group.

Photo credits (top to bottom): Dominic Chavez/World Bank; Alan Piazza / World Bank; Arne Hoel / World Bank; Gerardo Pesantez / World Bank

Scotland’s place in achieving water for society – including all

This is a guest blog by Ben McIntosh-Michaelis, a RWSN Young Professional who submitted this entry as part of the RWSN@WWW competition. For more information on RWSN’s support to Young Professionals, please see here.

Living in Scotland we often think that everyone here has access to safe water. In reality, this is not quite the case. Despite not being perfect, we are still good at managing our water. Because of this, Scotland is heavily involved in Water, Sanitation And Hygiene (WASH) projects worldwide.

In Scotland’s cities and towns, naturally occurring water sources cannot meet demand. In order to maintain a supply of water for society, which is of sufficient quantity and of good quality, common civil infrastructure is key. By and large, Scotland has a well-developed infrastructure for supplying and removing water. Therefore, water for society is a reality, at least in the urban areas.

Many water supplies in Scotland are managed by a national body, Scottish Water. This goes a long way in ensuring that everyone is included when water is supplied for society. However, rural water supplies in Scotland are not managed by the national body, meaning that ca. 500,000 people on private water supplies (using boreholes or stream water for instance) are not covered by the same infrastructure and quality controls. As the research from the Citizen’s Advice Bureau Scotland suggests, this situation means that safe water for all isn’t a reality even here in Scotland.

Huge variations in geology and landscape in Scotland means that the water quality varies from location to location. The result is that these small and individual sources require a bespoke set of technical steps to clean the water. But as you can appreciate, this is extremely costly and often not a realistic approach.

Development of a standard system which can be used to treat water from sources with significant variations in flowrate requirements and water quality is challenging. Many of the standard, tried and tested technologies used to treat these sources require a lot of electricity, high levels of maintenance, and replacement of parts. This is expensive to manage, and it also places people living in rural areas at risk of being supplied with untreated water if a piece of equipment stops functioning. This section of society may become excluded from the quality water supply for society.

Better mechanisms for implementing new systems and technologies in areas where traditional systems can be unreliable and expensive are needed in Scotland. This is in terms of policies held by those responsible for infrastructure obtainment and providing independent analysis about which products will be suitable. As stated by the Citizen’s Advice Bureau Scotland, “more needs to be done to improve the quality of information available to consumers, and signposting needs to be improved to ensure those that need it can access it.”

From a global perspective, water for society – including all, means that the impacts of climate change and economic practices should be considered when discussing Scotland’s place in society. Steps are being taken by the Scottish Government to include these considerations, many of which relate directly to water (information can be found on the Scottish Government’s website).

As well as Scottish Government involvement, Scottish society engages in international development; from school groups, to charities, universities, student groups and businesses, there are a wide range of projects and affiliations. Many of these projects relate to or involve water. During my own engagement as a student and as a professional engineer working in Southern Africa, I have observed that many of these activities are unregulated and are based on random connections between people in Scotland and around the world. On the one hand, this is great because there are so many ways in which people in Scotland can get involved. On the other hand, many of the projects are untargeted, and do not focus on the needs of the people they are supposed to be helping. The lack of coordination means that there is a lot of replication of projects, sometimes a lack of qualified experts on board, and a lack of a best practice principle.

For Scottish society to engage healthily in international development, including the WASH field, greater coordination and regulation of projects is required. Young people in particular need to be made more aware of the issues surrounding voluntourism in order to curb the harm caused by this practice.

The importance of being properly qualified to do a job must be highlighted, to everyone. My work in the rural water sectors in Scotland and in Southern Africa suggests to me that a cultural shift is required. Just because a water infrastructure project is in a rural area – whether in Scotland or Southern Africa – doesn’t mean it can be hastily implemented or without the necessary technical input. Water for all of society must include those living in even the most remote areas, and the infrastructure, expertise and business models need to be adapted to help meet the needs of these communities to ensure no one is left behind.

More resources

If you are interested in finding out more about rural water supplies in Scotland, and the comparison with other countries (specifically Eastern Europe / Ethiopia), please see this RWSN webinar from 2018, or check out this presentation.

About the author

Ben won the Vision in Business for the Environment of Scotland (VIBES) Hydro Nation Challenge in 2016 for the design of the Afridev Hi-Lift (a handpump retrofit adaptation unit that allows water to be lifted to a head). Later, upon completion of his engineering Masters, he started work for the Climate Justice Fund Water Futures Program (CJF WFP) based at the University of Strathclyde, gaining experience working in Malawi’s Southern region alongside BASEflow, a local Malawian organisation. He currently works for Clean Water Wave, an Edinburgh based Community Interest Company which is developing the low energy, no chemical Clean Aqua For Everyone (CAFE) water treatment system.

World Bank: Understanding the “new rurality” in Latin America and what it means to the water and sanitation sector

by Malva Baskovich and Berenice Flores Arias Uijtewaal, re-blogged from the World Bank

Despite the urbanization trends seen in Latin American and Caribbean (LAC), it seems that the rural population in LAC is decreasing in relative terms. In 2001, official figures indicated that 125 million people in LAC resided in rural areas representing 24% of the total LAC population. In 2013, this value decreased to 21% (130 million out of a total population of 609 million inhabitants), and it is estimated that by 2030, the rural population will decrease to represent 16.5% of the total (CEPAL, 2014).

“There is a ‘new rurality’ in Latin America, and it is critical to be aware of its distinctive features in view of designing and implementing sustainable WSS institutional reforms and investment projects in rural areas.” — this is an important preliminary finding of the World Bank’s Water Global Practice’s Rural Water Security and Sanitation (WSS) Advisory Services and Analytics (RWSS ASA) Program, currently ongoing in the LAC region. The Program aims to contribute towards the design and implementation of rural WSS projects in the region by gathering, systematizing, and disseminating learning on innovations and solutions to RWSS challenges in the region.

The ‘new rurality’ message is that we, development practitioners, may need to revise—or update—our conventional understanding of the rural LAC context. This is particularly true in view of the SDG Agenda, which calls for the design and implementation of sustainable institutional reforms that consider the changes in the social, economic, and political spheres, as well as confronts the threats of climate change. Ultimately, as the report states, ”achieving sustainable outcomes of reform in the WSS sector hinges on a deeper understanding of the total institutional logic of the sector and this includes understanding the societal rules that are defined by the local country context and political economy realities”. And, as we continue to bridge the gap in water, sanitation, and hygiene in LAC, and as we near the deadline for the achievement of SDG6, the focus will indispensably increasingly fall on rural areas. Better understanding the new rurality is also fundamental to ensure adequate funding and resource allocation to rural communities to achieve universal access.

According to JMP (2016), rural LAC has seen large increases in improved drinking water coverage since 1990, driven by an expansion of piped water on premises. While coverage of piped water on premises is high in South America (89%), it is considerably lower in rural Central America and Mexico (27%) and rural Caribbean (38%). Rural improved sanitation coverage in LAC increased from 36% to 64% between 1990 and 2015. Comparatively few households share sanitation facilities in South America but sharing of an improved facility is more widespread in the Caribbean and Central America and Mexico, where it is practiced by at least 10% of the population.

To learn more about the ‘new rurality’, the Program is addressing two important questions: what has not changed in rural LAC’s WSS sector? And, what has changed?

What has not changed in the WSS sector in rural LAC? Unfortunately, a lot. While urban WSS performance rates are on the increase, the same trend is not witnessed outside of the urban circle, and inequalities persist. According to the JMP (2015) 14.1% of the rural LAC population lack access to a basic drinking water service (compared to 1.9% of the urban population) and 8.5 million people relied on surface water for drinking. In the same year, only 68.4% of the rural population used a basic sanitation service (compared to 90% of the urban population) and 18 million people in rural LAC still practiced open defecation.

SIASAR data (July 2019) indicates that of the 10,370 registered water communities in this database, 71% have a water service sustainability index (ISSA) category D, indicating reduced sustainability of water services. Underling factors include the lack of governance, uneven public resources distribution to support WSS community organizations, deterioration of infrastructure, poor water quality, weak community management models, poor operation and maintenance practices, weaknesses of service providers and local governments to afford external support to community organizations, among other governance and political economy challenges.

Rural LAC’s weak sector governance and management leads to persistent ineffective strategies to achieve adoption of hygiene practices and behavioral change, especially in fostering healthy hygiene attitudes and practices such as hand washing with soap and the adequate disposal of excreta, among others. Insistent social conflicts over the ownership and shared use of water, tend to be more acute as there is a growing scarcity in water. The lack of disinfection of drinking water systems also remains a chronic weakness at the regional level; it is estimated that less than 50% of rural LAC communities perform this practice, primarily due to the lack of infrastructure and elements needed for water chlorination. For example, in Colombia, only 12% of the rural population had access to some form of treated water, in Peru less than 1% of rural households access chlorinated water. In short, it is safe to say that universal access to quality and sustainable WSS services remains a challenge in rural areas.

However, there is also a long list of factors that have changed the WSS sector’s rural panorama—among others due to urbanization, increased knowledge on climate change impact, and various social changes—and these must be understood and considered when designing and developing adequate sector reform. Stay tuned for the upcoming blog (part 2) to learn more.

And the winner is…

This year, RWSN is offering the chance for a young professional to attend Stockholm World Water Week.

From 25 June- 9 July 2019, we ran a competition to find a young professional with a knack for communicating complex topics to broad audiences, social media –savviness, and a passion for working on water issues at the local level. Their mission: to attend and disseminate the information relevant to young people to RWSN members via our social media accounts, online communities and blog – but also to share their story or experience in relation to the Theme of World Water Week: Water for Society – Including all.

We received over 20 entries from all over the world, from Cambodia to Peru via South Africa – all of them really inspiring from some amazing young people from around the world.

And the winner is… Mr Benson Kandeh, from Sierra Leone!

The jury thought that Benson demonstrated creativity and commitment through his social media posts highlighting his day-to-day work as a young professional in Sierra Leone, working on self-supply in remote areas to provide water for all. He shared videos and photos of his work, and also wrote a summary story post explaining his views on what ‘Water for Society – including all’ means to him.

Benson’s reaction on winning RWSN’s World Water Week competition:

After reading the email stating the result and me being the winner, I was shocked! It was like a dream! I am very thankful and excited to share my efforts, while learning from other international participants and water professionals. This opportunity will help increase my knowledge of the water sector and apply it in my professional activities in rural water supply in my country, Sierra Leone.

Benson will be reporting from World Water Week and sharing his perspectives with our members through our blog and social media account. He will also share his experience with World Water Week attendees through a talk at the RWSN booth (C10) on “Providing safe water for all in Sierra Leone: experience of a young professional” (day and time tbc). If you are in Stockholm, call by our booth to meet him!

Thank you to all the participants who took the time and effort to enter this competition. There were so many interesting stories, and we will share a few of our top entries here on the RWSN blog in the lead-up to Stockholm World Water Week.

For more information on RWSN’s activities for Young professionals, please see here. We thank the Swiss Development Cooperation for making this support possible.

Introducing our new RWSN member organisation: Red de Jóvenes por el Agua Centroamérica

This is a guest blog by Kenneth Alfaro Alvarado about our new RWSN member organisation R ed de Jóvenes por el Agua Centroamérica (Youth Water Network for Water Central America) and its activities at LatinoSan in April 2019, which were supported by RWSN. For more information on RWSN’s support for Young Water Professionals, please see here.

From April 1-5 2019, the Red de Jóvenes por el Agua Centroamérica (Youth Network for Water in Central America, also known as RJxA CA) held a Water and Sanitation Week in Costa Rica, which included our participation on the 5th Latinosan Conference and our 3rd Regional Meeting.

RJxA CA is a regional platform with representation in Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Panamá, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Belice. Our network promotes the involvement of young people in Integrated Water Resources Management, by strengthening the capacities of young people, political advocacy, environmental education and volunteering. We are also committed to the realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals, especially SDG6. In the network, each country has its own working areas; in Costa Rica, the focus is on Rural Water Supply and Management.

Activities at the 5th LatinoSan conference

During the first day of Latinosan, we had the opportunity to meet and exchange experiences with a group of representatives from the Rural Water Supply and Management sector. We encourage the involvement of young people in the rural water supply and sanitation sector; some of our members are leaders in this sector.

Youth members of the RJxA CA network and Rural Water Supply Managers. Photo credit: Kenneth Alfaro

During the second day , we organised a session dedicated to “Young Professionals of Sanitation” that I had the opportunity to moderate, thanks to the support of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewerage (AyA) and COSUDE. We listened to the experiences of 4 young people from Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras and Perú, all of them working and implementing projects in the rural sanitation sector.

Panelists at the Young Professionals of Sanitation session. Photo credit: Douglas Montano

We also supported the session “Community management of water and sanitation as a model for accelerating the closing of the urban-rural divide” organized by the Avina Foundation and the Latin American Confederation of Community Organizations for Water and Sanitation Services (CLOCSAS) ; we facilitated a workshop using the “World Café” methodology in order to extract ideas from the participants. Some of the main ideas that emerged from the session included the need to improve communications with all institutions, that funds for projects be better administrated, and to take into account spatial aspects in order to better plan for the future use of water.

Discussions during the session “Community management of water and sanitation as a model for accelerating the closing of the urban-rural divide” . Photo credit: Kenneth Alfaro

Activities during the 3rd Regional Meeting and 2nd National Costa Rica Encounter of the Youth Network for Water Central America

The 3^rd Regional Meeting was held at the National University of Costa Rica, located in the province of Heredia, with the participation of more than 130 young people from over Central America and other Latin American countries on April 4th, 2019.

Group photo of the 3^rd Regional Meeting and 2nd National Encounter of Costa Rica of the Youth Network for Water Central America. Photography: Kenneth Alfaro

This event begun with a panel called “Youth and Community Water Management“, moderated by Geisel Sánchez, national coordinator of Costa Rica. The panel included the participation of Karen Guzmán (administrator of the Sierpe Rural Aqueduct in the Osa region, Puntarenas), Ricardo González Chávez (administrator of the Rural Aqueduct of El Mora de Turrialba, Cartago), Gabriel Villalobos and Mónica Romero (members of the Board of Directors of the Milano Rural Aqueduct in Siquirres, Limón), and Dariana Dávila, of Honduras. All are leaders in their communities and with their experiences, they sent a message of motivation to those present, about the need for young people to get involved in community processes and to contribute from their experience, enthusiasm and ideas to the gaps in the management of drinking water in the country and in the Central American region.

Opening panel participants. Photo credit: Douglas Montano

At the end of the day, we read and approved our youth declaration, which was built based on the results of a Virtual Consultation we conducted in march 2019. The Declaration on “Youth Acting for Sanitation to Not Leave Anyone Behind” was adhered to by 190 young people.

We call upon governments to act upon the following three most important requests:

To implement spaces of participation for all civil society sectors, including youth, as actors in decision-making.
To implement accountability mechanisms that must be accessible, inclusive and transparent to allow us to measure the fulfillment of the SDG6. These mechanisms should be consulted and validated to ensure their relevance and efficiency.
To strengthen Community Organisations of water and sanitation services in every country because they play an important role in ensuring drinking water and basic sanitation, especially in rural areas.

Tour to the San José de la Montaña Communal Aqueduct

As part of the 3rd Regional Meeting, we wanted a group of young people to learn about the experience of community water management in Costa Rica, where the Communal Aqueducts supply more than one million people and account for almost 30 % of the administration and management of water supply throughout the country. On April 5th, a visit was organized to the Rural Aqueduct San José de la Montaña, Heredia where young people learned about its operation, water sources and infrastructure, the actions they carry out to protect the water resource and the plans they have for the community with their environmental education programme.

Tour to San José de la Montaña Rural Aqueduct. Photo credit: Jason Salgado.

After this week, our commitment to work and support the empowerment of young people in the rural water sector is even bigger.

About the author

Kenneth Alfaro Alvarado is an Environmental Engineer, and Coordinator of the Youth Network for Water Central America in Costa Rica. The Youth Water Network for Water Central America is a RWSN member organisation. Find out more about the network here.

Contacts:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/KennethAMB
Email: coordinacion.cr[at]rjxaca.org
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jovenesxagua/

Make the last mile the first mile: is business the key to fulfilling human rights?

This guest blog was written by Selma Hilgersom (Simavi). The original blog post is available here and is re-published with permission and thanks from Simavi.

Last week, I attended the AGUASAN workshop. This yearly event is organised by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and joined by a broad variety of WASH practitioners. The key focus of this year’s workshop were ‘service providers that take an inclusive business approach and drive the advancement of the human right to water and sanitation’. Within the conference, six cases of young and inspiring entrepreneurs were put forward during the week and participants teamed up to dive into the business cases and assess the human rights angle of making a business out of WASH.

If anything, the week has given me a serious mind exercise on the role of the private sector in development. I have a background in the field of water technology and supporting the development of innovative business propositions. I do believe that the private sector is key in addressing global challenges. Business comes with internal drivers to guarantee the delivery of products and services that meet the demands of costumers, as entrepreneurs depend on the success of their business to generate an income. This drives efficiency, cost-efficiency and the continuous exploring smarter ways of working.

So, if business has the potential to provide everyone in the world with well-functioning WASH infrastructure, why are we not collectively entrepreneuring into the most rural areas of this world and ensuring that the human right to water and sanitation is fulfilled? And why are NGOs still funded to do a job that business can do while making money out of it?

Let’s first set the perspective straight. I work for an NGO. I am not afraid to re-consider my role in a fast-changing world. I do believe business has an key role to play in accelerating development and strengthening (business) ecosystems in-country. Especially local entrepreneurship and equal North-South partnerships can go a long way in providing people with the basic services that they need. Especially the businesses that pro-actively include women and girls and effectively respond to the needs of all members of a given community, regardless of who they are and their circumstances, seem to have the exact same goal as many NGOs. And stepping away from the ‘beneficiary perspective’ and including people as ‘costumers’ creates a different perspective. Two sidenotes: let’s try to avoid the discussion whether capitalism is the system that ensures everlasting happiness here and at the same time acknowledge that disadvantaged people benefit from a system in which they are participating as more than just ‘costumers’ that are defined by their purchasing power.

The nature of business is to ensure that there is a profit made. And from my experience in start-ups, this is a challenge when starting-up a business. The question that comes to my mind is then how feasible it is to design a self-sustaining business model targeting consumers with the least purchasing power, especially in the beginning. And whether it is possible to focus on the lower-bottom of the pyramid; even if this comes with challenges. A few examples: geography (what if a village is located at a remote mountain), reaching relatively few costumers per community, having to invest a lot in demand-creation before WASH services and products are bought. Are there smart models that make this ‘work’? Or stable financing mechanisms that can blend different revenue streams to cover the high need with the limited profitability? And how do you create a business ecosystem with local entrepreneurs to serve the people who currently lack access to WASH? What is the role and contribution of the government?
There is a broader development perspective to this too. Including ‘impact indicators’ in doing business, which reflect the aim of development work, does require extra efforts that may conflict with business interests. But results in lasting positive change in communities. Think of delivering water in a community where people are at high risk of a specific disease; is this just solved by delivering water? Or does this require the provision of additional health information and working towards improved service delivery? Or in the case that women are not allowed to decide over their own bodies, does the delivery of WASH provide an answer to the broader challenges that exist in the community?

Even if we would imagine an all-inclusive model of the private sector that perfectly responds to the needs of people, there is still one discussion that was put forward more than once during AGUASAN: (government) systems are the enablers of the success and upscaling of any business. The central question is therefore how business models fit in existing local, national and global systems? This links into the very basis of acknowledging that people have rights, and that they should be able to claim them, wherever in the world that may be.
And this is not ‘just a remark’ – it links into the issue of rightly anchoring the responsibility where it belongs: who is (or should) take the responsibility for fulfilling the human right to water and sanitation, and what is the place of the private sector therein? What to do if there is no profitable business case for providing WASH? Maybe the consideration is whether the ideal business model, if it would exist, would silence this discussion: does access to WASH equal that human rights are fulfilled? Even if this is done independently from the government, and in a profitable way? And if so, is it possible (capacity wise) to reach the 2.1 billion people (!) that still do not have safe and sustainable water delivery? Should the private sector be made responsible for fulfilling the human right to water and sanitation, if governments fail to do this?

I am not afraid of profit. I believe that businesses and NGOs both play a vital role in development. I believe in systems that are driven by (young) entrepreneurs and create a broad-range of value to consumers and are self-sustaining. There are many examples in the world where the private sectors makes a huge difference in the lives of disadvantaged people. I refer to the two amazing female entrepreneurs of Pad2Go who want to break the barriers women face in Nepal due to their menstruation (and with whom I had the honour to work with during the week). I am incredibly happy that many entrepreneurs are positive towards cooperation with NGOs. However, I also believe that this comes with a joint dream and a joint responsibility.

Often, the cooperation between NGOs and the private sector is defined by the roles ‘taking care of the business’ and ‘taking care of development’. I advocate for a more integrated business case, where investing in business and investing in development are one and the same thing. Could we agree that the success on the broader impact indicators is equally important as the development of a sustainable business model? And not from a ‘charity perspective’, but from the believe that this will increase the integrated value proposition of businesses. And thereby open up new markets and potential (impact) costumers. And a call to NGOs – can we move beyond the output, outcome and impact indicators, and join hands with those who will remain long after the funding of our NGO programmes has run out? And create built-in incentives to be as successful as we can? And not be guided by pre-set targets?

One of the things that stayed in my mind after AGUASAN is the presentation of human rights superstar Ms. Catarina de Albuquerque, who challenged us to “make the last mile the first mile”. Let’s do that. Together.

Edit from the author: I had some discussions about the extent of ‘pushing (Western) values upon local communities’, and whether businesses or even NGOs should be involved in this at all – or that we should limit ourselves to basic product or service delivery. I can write another blog on my thoughts on this. As this blog has a slightly different focus, I refer to Simavi’s aim to ensure that disadvantaged people in low and middle income countries are enabled to practice healthy behaviour based on their own free and informed decisions and free from coercion and violence. By doing this through supporting civil society to claim its rights with and through local organisations, development is no more than amplifying positive changes that start locally.

About the author

Selma holds a master degree in ‘Human Geography’ and ‘Policy and Organisation’ with a specialisation in transnational advocacy and business and innovation. She has worked in international organisations to promote and support the development of new business models, sustainable innovations and the uptake of new water technologies. Currently, she coordinates programs of Simavi in Tanzania and Nepal that aim to ensure that disadvantaged people, and especially women and girls, can live healthy lives