Welcome to the second of the two modules on Citywide Sanitation Services and Introduction to Diagnostic Tools and Frameworks. This module will continue the introduction to some systematic ways to understand and analyze the complex urban environments we face when planning improvements in sanitation services. In this module, we'll look at how tools such as the Fecal Waste Flow Diagram and the City Service Delivery Assessment can help us to analyze and understand technical and non-technical challenges related to sanitation service delivery, and we will look at urban sanitation as a service and the roles of government and the private sector in delivering it. When looking at the sanitation challenges of a specific city, the Fecal Waste Flow Diagram or "SFD" as it is commonly referred to, is an effective way to illustrate the fecal flows in the city and to highlight areas of the sanitation service chain which need attention. You will be learning more about the development and use of SFDs in later modules. Here is the SFD for a typical low-income city in Africa and it highlights the need to improve the operational effectiveness of the sewerage system, to improve the fecal sludge management services, and provide household sanitation options for rental housing and marginal challenging environments. To achieve the SDGs, sanitation services need to include everyone. Data disaggregated by wealth quintiles shows that it's the poorest households which have the worst access to sanitation services. Global analysis has identified four key aspects of sanitation services which need much more attention if sanitation services are to reach everyone. One, making better use of existing and future investments in sewerage. This includes ensuring connections to existing sewers, making sewerage accessible in difficult to reach and poor communities, and having approaches for facilitating the connection of poor customers to sewers. Two, fecal sludge management to make on-site sanitation hygienic and viable. Three, services for rental housing and informal settlements, including the use of shared toilets and the challenges of limited space of multi-story residences and of illegal or informal settlements and the implications of situations where households don't have tenure on where they rent. And four, marginal areas and challenging environments. Sanitation is further complicated where communities are located in difficult terrain such as where there are swamps, high groundwater, housing over water bodies such as rivers, lakes, or the sea, rocky terrain, steep hillsides, cold climates, etc. New tools are available which enable a systematic assessment of the non-technical aspects required in an urban sanitation service chain. The city service delivery assessment allows the visual presentation to decision makers of a scorecard that encapsulates the underlying policy, planning, and budget context, how expenditure, equity, and outputs are monitored, and the quality of operation and maintenance, etc. This analysis enables decision makers to prioritize which institutional and service delivery issues need immediate attention. The prognosis for change tool enables a more detailed analysis of incentives and influences and enables decision makers to seek win-win outcomes on specific issues. The tool seeks to assess three things: How key formal and informal institutions function, what incentives those institutions provide to stakeholders, and the formal or informal power those stakeholders have to exert influence. It also considers the implications of the findings for effective engagement with the problem by those wanting to improve the situation and aims to make interventions more likely to succeed by ensuring they are taking the underlying political economy of the city into account. Here we list some examples of the type of non-technical issues that typically need to be tackled in developing an effective inclusive sanitation program at scale in a city. Different services need to be provided along the sanitation chain and these vary in nature and in scale, from material supply to small-scale construction and operating public toilets at the household end of the spectrum through desludging, fecal waste transportation and sewage and sludge treatment and disposal to maintenance and management of drainage and solid waste services at the other end of the spectrum. These services can be grouped as customer services, directly interfacing with households or customers, public services, and infrastructure development which is a necessary, but not a sufficient enabling input for the service providers who operate and maintain the infrastructure. And these services can be broadly seen as being private goods benefitting individual households or groups of households, although they mostly also have a public benefit, and public goods which do not benefit only a single household or individual, but rather benefit the public or the city at large. These distinctions have important implications for how financing, subsidies, and regulation are organized and practiced. Users have traditionally been left to pay for private goods themselves, but because of their public good element it may be appropriate to provide partial or in specific circumstances even total public funding for these services where users are unable to pay the full cost. Similarly, public goods may be provided by the private sector if costs can be recovered, for example, from land developers or from the sale of treated wastes or under an agreement with a public sector institution. But in all cases, the full sanitation services chain needs to be regulated by the public sector so as to safeguard standards. We will now consider the roles for the public and private sector. As we saw in the last slide, there are three main categories of goods and services: Customer services, public services, and infrastructure developments. Customer services are often best provided by the private sector as this usually creates stronger accountability but may also be provided by the public sector. At the other end of the spectrum, finance for major public sanitation infrastructure will usually be cheaper from public sector sources, but the involvement of private sector partners is gaining popularity as it may accelerate improvements and promote cost effectiveness. In between these extremes, the provision of public services offers wide scope for public-private partnerships of various types. For these services to provide sustainable sanitation for everyone, local government typically plays a key role in providing planning and coordination, local regulation and bylaws, appropriate tariff structures, local standards, enforcement of land use, support to get the local service providers up and running which may not otherwise happen by itself, housing, tenure, and land use policy, and the promotion of services, behavior change programs, and monitoring. The role of national government is to provide a conducive and supportive environment which includes appropriate policy frameworks with laws, national standards and regulation to support them, planning structures and monitoring systems, finance windows and mechanisms for infrastructure developments, and national capacity building initiatives. To summarize, in this module we have seen that tools such as the Fecal Waste Flow Diagram and the City Service Delivery Assessment can help us analyze the multiple complex technical and non-technical factors involved in urban sanitation and how to prioritize them, and urban sanitation is about services which are developed and implemented by both public and private sector entities. Later in the course we will return to look again at aspects of the urban sanitation service chain from both the municipal and the national perspective.
