indonesia water supply and sanitation magazine. 'percik' first edition august 2003

From the Editors

Main Feature:WASPOLA: Giving Birth to National Policy forDevelopment of Community-Based WaterSupply and Environmental Sanitation

Interview:"We Need a National Policy"

Opinion:Field Trial of the National Policy forCommunity Based Water Supply andEnvironmental Sanitation

Miscellaneous:National Policy for Development of Community BasedWater Supply and Environmental Sanitation

Field Visit

Book Info

Website Info

Mirror:Having a toilet, it is hard in the beginning butin the end we are proud of having one

Tableof

Contents1

2

6

8

10

11

12

13

14

Information Media for Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation

Advisor:Director General for Urban and

Rural Development, Ministry of Settlementand Regional Infrastructure

Director of Human Settlement and Housing,National Development Planning Agency

Republic of IndonesiaDirector of Water and Sanitation,

Ministry of HealthDirector of Urban and Rural Eastern Region,

Ministry of Settlement and RegionalInfrastructure

Director of Natural Resources and AppropriateTechnology, Director General on Village and

Community Empowerment,Ministry of Home Affairs

Director for Facilitation of Special PlanningEnvironment Management,

Ministry of Home Affairs

Chief Editor:Oswar Mungkasa

Board of Editor:Hartoyo, Johan Susmono, Budi Susilo,

Poedjastanto

Editor:Maraita Listyasari, Rewang Budiyana, Rheidda

Pramudhy, Joko Wartono, Essy Asiah, Mujiyanto

Design:Rudi Kosasih

Production:Machrudin

Distribution:Anggie Rifki

Address:Jl. Cianjur No. 4, Menteng, Jakarta Pusat

Phone: 62-21-31904113e-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

Unsolicited article or opinion items are welcome.Please send to our address or e-mail.

Don't forget to be brief and accompaniedby identity.

R O M T H E E D I T O RF

1 PercikAugust 2003

P h o t o s G a l l e r y

The development of facilitiesfor water supply and environ-mental sanitation has been

implemented for a considerablelength of time. A considerable resulthas been achieved but at the samethere also shortcomings and con-strains that make the developmentresult less than the expected. Apartfrom all these, it is noted that duringthe last few years the attention givento this sector indicates an increasingtendency.

A number of cases mark the mile-stones of these changes. One, inSeptember 2000 in a UN-sponsoredMillennium Meeting the world lead-ers agreed to a set of measurablegoals and targets in fighting poverty,diseases, illiteracy, environmentaldegradation and gender inequity.This document is later known asMillennium Development Goals(MDGs). With regard to water supplyand environmental sanitation it isagreed halve by 2015 the proportionof people without sustainable accessto safe drinking water. Two, inJohannesburg Summit 2002, thewater supply target was furthersharpened while in sanitation by2015 half of the population that arecurrently without it must be ableaccess its service. Three, safe and

hygienic drinking water is the rightfor everyone. All the above comprisethe statement concluded by the UNCommittee on Economic, Social andCultural Affairs.

As an awareness of the impor-tance of water supply and environ-mental sanitation is increasing, oneof the striking issues that needs to bedealt with is the indifference and lackof interest from among the commu-nity and the stakeholders. Examiningfurther into the barrier, it is deemednecessary to build and improve theparticipation of the stakeholders inWSES development. Their participa-tion greatly helps speeding up theachievement of the target and objec-tive of the WSES development pro-gram.

One of the most important strate-gies is through a public campaign.Such a campaign will enable to createa condition in which water supplyand environmental sanitation deve-lopment is placed in priority scale ofthe government and the communityalike. One means of campaign isthrough an information media. Thisinformation media will become themeans for interaction of at least thegovernment agencies, universities,private sector, donor agencies/coun-tries, and the community. It is hoped

this media will be instrumental in theestablishment of a WSES networkamong stakeholders.

What's in a name, so saysShakespeare. But what would it belike if an information media is with-out a name, it is like a head without aface. The process of selecting a nameis not as easy as it seems. There weremany prospects coming into mindthat made it difficult to choose. PER-CIK becomes the final choice. Onemight question the meaning behindthe name. Percik literally meanswater splash. A splashed water thattouches the surrounding indicates itsexistence. We, from this viewpoint,try to signify water splash as a meta-morphosis of public campaign. Atask this media will undertake.

As it is with a new informationmedia, there is a lot of improvementto be made before PERCIK can reachan acceptable standard. Toward thisend, we would appreciate any com-ment and suggestion from the read-ers.

As the wise man says, a big leap ispreceded with an initial step. An ini-tial step has been taken, we hope thiswill become the beginning of a jour-ney toward the fulfillment of ourcommon obsession.

Source: Ministry of Health

Aprolonged dry season has causedsevere drought in many areas ofJava and Madura. The people

have difficulties to get water they need.The dry season which is estimated to lasttill October 2003 will aggravate theavailability of water for consumption andsanitation needs. If the problem waterscarcity is not solved in time the inci-dence of diarrhea, skin infection and di-seases of the respiratory tract will cer-tainly widespread.

The government agencies involvedare currently busy finding ways to over-come the scarcity of water for drinkingand sanitation needs. This is indeedonly an incidental case caused by naturaldisturbance. However, this is also anindication that the environmental qualityis so poor that makes the availability ofwater for consumption so scarce.

It is ironical, though, similar caseskeeps on coming back from time to time,and it is always the poor who suffers. Inother words, in terms of quantity, thecoverage of WSES development is still ina very limited scale. A level of coveragethat is not enough to cope with theincreasing demand as a consequence ofpopulation growth.

Up to this time it is estimated that100 million of Indonesian population donot have access to water supply andsanitation service. Most of them are thepoor and those living in the rural areas.The number indicates a growing tenden-cy every year.

Experience from the past indicatesthat water supply and sanitation sys-tems/facilities constructed are not func-tioning properly. The reason for thisfailure is, that community was notinvolved in planning, construction, andoperation and maintenance activity.Limited technology option also makes itdifficult for the community to choosewhich of the facility complies with thedemand, culture and capacity for mana-gement and the local condition. Lack ofcommunity involvement has led to facili-

ty service not sustainable. The facility isnot used effectively because it was builtfor them based on supply drivenapproach. Many of the investment is notused by the community because theydon't need it, but on the other handthere are many who need one but theyaren't given any services.

From the implementation of a numberof donor and central government fundedWSES related programs one could summa-rize that effective use and sustainability ofservice is better if the community isinvolved during the development phases.User management involving all compo-nents in the community and decision ma-king by the local institution, will result in agreater community participation during thepost construction O&M.

A balanced involvement of women,under-privileged group (poor, disabled,etc.) in decision making process and inO&M, will improve effective use and sus-tainability of service. Effective use andsustainability of service will be achievedbecause the choice of technology and itsfunding consequences are determineddirectly at household level in the com-munity. Community contribution in

development is determined based ontechnology choice and a managementunit elected in democratic manner.

Eventually user community willdevelop a capacity to pay for any serviceas long as the service satisfies theirdemand. User really care about the qua-lity and wiling to pay as long as the ser-vice meets their demand.

A study by World Bank on 121 WSESfacilities around the world which wasconducted by various institutions andorganizations indicates that an activecommunity participation in decisionmaking and in development processeshas resulted in effectively used and sus-tainable WSES service.

The analysis on the result of study on121 water supply facilities indicates that20 of the facilities are highly effective.Two of the 20 highly effective servicesare in Indonesia. The two systems whichthe World Bank indicates as highly effec-tive are the ones handled by an NGOwho involved the community participa-tion throughout their development pha-ses.

The development strategy consists ofestablishment of an institution involving

WASPOLA: Giving Birth to National Policyfor Development of Community-Based

Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation

A I N F E A T U R EM

2 PercikAugust 2003

all components of the community; appli-cation of participatory approaches inproblem solving; provision of training inmanagement, design, construction, O&Mand hygiene behavioral aspects. Theindicator of success for the two systemsincludes:

Applied technology design which isacceptable to all components of thecommunity including women, a sim-ple but quite reliable system.The project is acceptable to the com-munity and it's able to motivate themto actively participate, including infinancial aspect.The community is motivated and iscapable of running O&M activity.The community pays for water sup-ply service based on an agreed upontariff.Women are involved in each phase ofproject development, though stilllimited in decision making process.Time saving for women so that theycan do other things.Women are active members of waterusers' group.The community build toilet fromone's own sources, high rate of toiletuse. Women become active members ofhealth related groups.WSES development is basically for

the community, without an effort to havetheir significant involvement the accept-ability and sustainability of the develop-ment is difficult to achieve. This indi-cates that the current approach appliedby the government in WSES develop-ment needs be revised thoroughly.

Learning from the experiences of thepast "both from domestic and abroad" aprogram called Water Supply andSanitation Policy Formulation andAction Planning (WASPOLA) wasdesigned and implemented. The five-year program consists of 3 main compo-nents: learning process, policy formula-tion and implementation activity. Theprogram is focused to water supply andsanitation facility managed by user com-munity. In the policy formulationWASPOLA operates under the leader-ship of the Government of Indonesiawith financial support from theAustralian Government (AusAID) andthe World Bank, through Water andSanitation Program for East Asia and thePacific (WSP-EAP).

At central government level the mana-gement is handled by Central Project Com-mittee consisting of cross-sectoral govern-ment agencies, National DevelopmentPlanning Agency (Bappenas), Ministry ofHome Affairs, Ministry of Health, Ministryof Finance and Ministry of Settlement

and Regional Infrastructures. The dailyactivities are handled by a Working Grouprepresented by members from the sameagencies. Both institutions are coordinatedby Bappenas. The principle of partnershipapproach is not practiced among the centrallevel agencies only, but also extends to thelocal governments, multi-lateral and bila-teral donor agencies, local NGOs, and thecommunity in general.

The implementation of the five-yearprogram has come to an end in July2003. A document called National Policyfor Development of Community-BasedWater Supply and EnvironmentalSanitation has been produced. This poli-cy has become a new paradigm. Thedonor countries even have adopted it.Now, a number of new challenges areawaiting. When the policy has gainedformal legal recognition, there will be along list of works to be done in order toput the policy into the real nationwideimplementation. Whether the nationalpolicy will be able to respond to the chal-lenges in the Millennium DevelopmentGoals? How about the UN challengewhich states that drinking water is theright for everyone? It seems that the jobof the Working Group has not quite fi-nished yet. Their opinion and hard workis still needed.

A I N F E A T U R E

Water in indispensable tohuman life. We are quiteaware that water constitutes

the origin of life. The manifestationregarding role of water to humanlife, unfortunately, gives rise to thenotion that water is solely a publicgood: it can be obtained at no cost.

As a consequence, the communi-ty does not regard water as a scarceresource which has economic value.They exploit water freely and exces-sively. The community also tends todisregard environmental and waterresources, both quality or quantity.Other consequence is a stagnation indeveloping knowledge and technolo-gy for reuse and recycle of water.

The viewpoint may be right for aslong as there is enough water avail-able. But in fact the availability of

water can never fulfill the need ofeveryone. For a community who isnow being under prolonged dry sea-son, for instance, water is no more apublic good. A big sacrifice must begiven in exchange to water. Theyhave to deepen their wells, fall inline and wait for hours until waterlevel to increase for the pail to befilled, or even they have spendmoney for water.

A public campaign needs to beorganized to introduce a change inthe community viewpoint. All com-ponents of the community must beeducated that water is a scarceresource with economic value andneed sacrifice -money or time- inorder to get water. A new communi-ty awareness in relation to theadherence of economic value in

water is expected to enable to changecommunity habit in water use:exploit water resource more wisely,use water more efficiently, willing tosacrifice to obtain water. Water is obviously valuable, andeveryone must sacrifice something inorder to obtain water. The more sobecause water supply and environ-mental sanitation system needsoperation and management cost forits sustainability. Sustainable ser-vice can materialize only if there isequity in the amount to be paid,value of water in the eyes of the user,and the amount of cost of service. Inaccordance with its nature as an eco-nomic good, the main principle inWSES service is "user must pay forthe service".

Water As Economic Goods

M

3 PercikAugust 2003


4 PercikAugust 2003

R esponsive Approach places the demand of thecommunity as a determinant factor in decision

making including financial aspect. This makes thecommunity participation in the whole process begin-ning from planning, funding, construction and mana-gement of the system in accordance with demand andfunding capacity of the community. This approachcalls for a substantial reform in the ways of projecthandling by stakeholders, whether community, NGO,private sector and government.

The main features of the approach comprise:The community decides on the choice about:

Whether or not to participate in the activity?Technology choice and system coverage based on willingness to payHow and what format of systemHow fund is to be managed and accountedHow O&M will be managed

The government functions as facilitator by making available a national policy and strategy, enhances consultative atmosphere among stakeholders and facilitates human resources development and learning process.Creating a conducive atmosphere for participation of various stakeholders in any initiative emerging within the community. Provision of sufficient information to the community and standard pro-cedure to help the decision making process jointly made within the community.

T he working group was formed on the ground thatWSES development is not the responsibility of one

particular sector but rather it must be a combination ofvarious aspects, technical, institutional, financial, socialand environmental. Based on this consideration thatWSES Working Group was formed consisting of therelated government departments, Home Affairs, Health,Finance, Settlement and Regional Infrastructures, andcoordinated by Bappenas.

Beside its relation with WSES related projects(WASPOLA, WSLIC-2, Pro-Air, CWSH, SANIMAS) theWorking Group is also involved in formulation ofNational Policy for WSES Development Policy. Up tothis time only the National Policy for Development ofCommunity-Based Water Supply and EnvironmentalSanitation is completed, whereas the InstitutionallyBased National Policy on Water Supply andEnvironmental Sanitation is in preparation, at the sametime also the field test for the application of the policy inthe regions and public campaign on the subject of watersupply and environmental sanitation, through the publi-cation of journal on WSES, posters, and animation.

It is hoped that more members would join theWorking Group so that more activities related to increa-sing access to drinking water and sanitation servicescould be done. In addition, it is hoped that this collabo-rative pattern could be duplicated by the regions (provin-cial and kabupaten/kota) to enhance drinking water andsanitation development to enhance the fulfillment ofdemand of the community.

DemandResponsiveApproach

A Glimpse OfWATER SUPPLY AND

ENVIRONMENTALSANITATION WORKING

GROUP


5 PercikAugust 2003

ParticipatoryApproach

Constructing is easier than main-taining. The proof to this state-ment could easily be found in

many physical development projects bythe government. WSES developmentprojects are no exceptions, many of themmet with apprehensive failure. They arenot effectively used and their sustainabi-lity was cut off because the communitycannot operate and maintain them pro-perly.

It is the Methodology for ParticipatoryAssessments (MPA) that can guaranteethe effectiveness and sustainability of thefacility. MPA represents a tool developedto enable the policy makers, programmanagers, and local community assessand monitor the sustainability of the faci-lity and decide on a corrective action asnecessary.

This methodology proposes the wayshow women and poor families may parti-cipate and benefit from a facility togetherwith men and wealthy families of thecommunity. It also indicates the keystoward a successful community managedWSES project. At the same time it alsoenables us to make a quantitative aggre-gation of community level monitoringdata so that it can be applicable at theprogram and policy maker levels.

MPA make use Participatory RuralAppraisal (PRA) and Self Esteem, Asso-ciate Strength, Resourcefulness, ActionPlanning, Responsibility (SARAR) whichare known effective in stimulating com-munity participation. But MPA addition-ally include the following characteristics:

MPA is targeted to the implemen-ting agency and the community as well inthe light of a sustainable and effectivelycommunity managed facility. MPA isdesigned to involve all the main stake-holders and conducting analysis of therole of 4 important components of thecommunity: poor women, rich women,poor men, and rich men. Therefore MPAputs the gender and poverty analysisframework into operation for the purpose

of estimating the sustainability of a WSESfacility.

MPA utilize a set of public specificindicators to measure sustainability,demand, gender, and poverty sensitive-ness. Each is measured in accordancewith the participatory tool for the com-munity, the implementing agency and thepolicy maker. The result of communitylevel assessment is brought up by the rep-resentatives of user community and theimplementing agency to the stakeholdermeeting for the purpose of evaluating theinstitutional factors that are responsiblefor project impact and sustainability atthe field level. The result of the institu-tional assessment is used for reviewingnational as well as program level policies.

MPA produce an aggregate of vil-lage level qualitative data, some of themare quantified into ordinal system by thecommunity members themselves. Thenthe quantitative data can be statisticallyanalyzed.

In this way we can conduct an inter-community, inter-project and time seriesanalysis and at the program level.Therefore, MPA can produce a manage-ment information for large scale projectand suitable data for program analysis.

Who can benefit from MPA?MPA is open for a variety of uses. The

qualitative information obtained fromvisual observation can easily be convertedinto numerical process or graphical pre-sentation. The resulting community levelgraphs can be obtained immediately afterthe application of participatory tools tothe community groups, men, women,rich, poor, and then present them beforeand be verified by the community.Similar data from different times or fromother communities, after consolidationcan be used to help manager or projectpersonnel see the tendency and analyzeits causes. Assessment results from anumber of projects after being consolida-ted at program or national level can beused for policy analysis.

What are the requirements for usingMPA?

MPA is open for a variety of uses.The qualitative information obtainedfrom visual observation can easily beconverted into numerical process orgraphical presentation. The resultingcommunity level graphs can be obtainedimmediately after the application of par-ticipatory tools to the community groups,men, women, rich, poor, and then pre-sent them before and be verified by thecommunity. Similar data from differenttimes or from other communities, afterconsolidation can be used to help mana-ger or project personnel see the tendencyand analyze its causes. Assessmentresults from a number of projects afterbeing consolidated at program or natio-nal level can be used for policy analysis.

What are the requirements for usingMPA?

MPA is designed as an integral partof a project, not as an accessory or assomething independent. That is whyMPA need a funding agency who feelsobliged to design a new or an on-goingproject applying the participatory assess-ments.

Although in many countries there aremany experienced facilitators in theapplication of participatory methodolo-gies, they still need a specific training inusing MPA. First, MPA add an analyticalframework that enhances sustainabilityand provide possibility for the conver-sion of participatory data into quantita-tive codes for use in sustainability analy-sis. Second, since the whole characteris-tics are participatory MPA enhance thelearning process of the participants. Askilled and gender- and poverty-sensitivefacilitator is the key to enhancing thecycle of learning process and actions atall levels.

Source: National Policy for Develop-ment of Community-Based Water Supplyand Environmental Sanitation Document

What is behind the birthof WASPOLA program?

Actually, up to the present time wedo not have a national policy forwater supply and environmentalsanitation. That is why we are fre-quently wielded over by the donoragencies. Thus, we need such apolicy, which we could use as gui-dance in dealing with the donoragencies. Thank God if we couldfund it on our own, but at themoment it seems unlikely since weare still in shortage. At that timewe could say this is our nationalpolicy. If you could accept it wecould sit together and negotiate,but if not we have to say we aresorry, and thank you for your kindattention and help. In that way wecould be more focused.

As an example, in bilateral relation-ships, the donor countries have a prefe-rence to specific location. Australia, forinstance. They prefer Indonesia Timur.Why? Why don't they like IndonesiaBarat, anyway there a great variety ofproblems in Indonesia. Germany, isanother example. For TransmigrationArea Development (TAD) they preferKalimantan Timur. Why not SE. Malukuor SE. Sulawesi? Similar situation isencountered with the World Bank andother donors.

I believe that if they have the samevision with us in solving WSES develop-ment problems, they should not havepreference to any specific location. Whynot we deal it as equals?

Seeing it as something new, howwas the program in the beginning?

When we started with the design, wewere somewhat at a loss because watersupply and environmental sanitationbasically encompass a very wide horizon.Whether it would be based on rural andurban, or what? If it is based on areas,rural and urban, it is but logical thaturban areas are growing rapidly so that

the problems of the rural are left behind.Is it that we want? Finally we look at itin terms of function, some facilities aremanaged by an institution while othersby the community. It so happens thatthis almost coincides with urban-ruralphenomenon. Generally in urban themanagement is done by an institutionwhile in rural areas by the community.We do not start from urban and rural,because we want to avoid discriminationissue. Such as town population get thisamount and villagers get that amount.Who decides those numbers? In the pastthe town people got 100 liters per se-cond, the villagers got 60 liters per se-cond. Who justifies those? Why this dis-crimination in level of service? That iswhy we do not want to start from there.We want to start from the managementinstitution. By an institution and by thecommunity. If possible both are dealtwith simultaneously.

How far is WASPOLA's achieve-ment?

Up to this time what has been com-pleted is the national policy for the com-munity based. We are now movingtoward the institutionally based.

Why should it be that way?We have three patterns, each with

different level of complexity. We startedfrom the easiest, i.e. the communitybased. This has been started since PelitaI and II. Under the umbrella of InpresSarana Kesehatan. It was supply driven,though. What do the villagers need, wemade the logical allocation. There wasthen an empowerment componentembedded within the project, though inminor format. The current becomesstronger after the reform that makes it arequirement that community empower-ment must be strengthened. Yet at thattime there was no tools for that purpose.Then we looked for the most suitabletools. It turned out that supply driven isnot suitable for this purpose. Thisapproach leads to low sense of belong-ingness within the community. Now wechange into demand driven approach,depending on the real demand of thecommunity. Even then it is still notenough because this does not guaranteethe growth of sense of belongingness.Therefore there must be community con-tribution. This is one way in developingthe sense of belongingness. This is whatwe compile into policy and strategy for-mula. We tried to accommodate theinterest of all the stakeholders whetherthey are from inside or outside the localgovernments and the community. Whatwe did was providing facilitation until wecame to the present formulation. Interms wording it seems that the formuladoes not mean anything to the bureau-cracy but from the view of the communi-ty it proves excellent. The nuance is nomore instructive, rather it opens newperspective.

How about the institutionallybased?

This is more complicated because insti-tutional is often linked to the corporate cul-ture of each sector especially one that isalready managed by a public company,such as local government owned company.

N T E R V I E W

Ir. Basah Hernowo, MA :Director of Human Settlement and Housing, Bappenas

'We Need a National Policy"

I

6 PercikAugust 2003

It turns out that the amount ofNPL (non performing loan) is sobig that it is not possible to solve itwith only one policy. Theapproach must be multi-sectoralincluding legislative, Ministry ofFinance, and local governments.Need a common effort in findingsolution. Therefore we have toapproach it in phases leading to anational policy for institutionallybased. We have to work harderbecause there are too many inte-rests and stakeholders involved.

What is the future outlookonce the national policy iscompleted?

We would expect that we wouldnot be wielded by the donor agen-cies any more. We could becomeself reliant. It could be better if wecould fund through central govern-ment budget, without loan. But itseems unlikely. Currently thebudget for human settlement sec-tor is Rp. 1,35 trillion per annum.That's not enough to meet thedemand. Up to 2009, we need 50trillion Rupiahs for filling up thegap of WSES provision in

Indonesia. It means that we shouldprovide 10 trillion rupiahs perannum. That's a problem….Therefore, we have to conductsome sort of "marketing" and atthe same time also we are requiredto explain to the local governmentabout something like better refrainfrom buying service vehicles andinstead put the money for WSESdevelopment. And increase in lo-cal government budget from e.g.3% to 8%. And if we find someregions with a strong willingnessbut they do not have enough mo-ney we are ready to share the costs.

The program approach callsfor a change in paradigm.What barriers are expected?

Many. One and foremost isresistance to change, especially fromthe bureaucrat. Secondly, sectoralegoism. Everyone wants to be leaderin his sector. The third relates toinstitutional structure. Needs areform in the manner such as a go-vernment sincerely plays a true facili-tator role, not just a lip service. Thisneeds a cultural reform and a seriouscommon effort.

N T E R V I E WI

7 PercikAugust 2003

Richard Hopkins,Team Leader

WASPOLA Project

"There are stillmany things to do"

In the beginning WASPOLA was faced with manybarriers because this program applies a different

approach, i.e. the focus is placed on the processand formal as well as informal inter-agency coordi-nation/collaboration as the basic foundation forthe policy formulation. In the early stages,WASPOLA moved very slowly, and it was causedby the common understanding in implementingthe program has not taken its shape, especially po-licy development through a process approachAnother matter that happened during the earlystages was frequent changes in members of theworking group, so that it needed a relatively extraeffort in order to maintain consistency andprogress of the overall WASPOLA activities. Itturned out that the approach was successful inbuilding sense of belongingness and commitmentof the government, and this is showed from thehectic schedule of WASPOLA activities during thelast two years, especially those related to institu-tionally based policy formulation, coordinationwith local governments, and lessons learned fromeach districts. By the end of the second year theactivity found its acceleration, at the time when aworking group from related departments began toshow interest in WASPOLA activities. This wasenhanced by the fact that pursuant to regionalautonomy the responsibility for WSES sectordevelopment is relinquished to local government.In the third through the concluding (2003) yearswas noted with an increasingly more productiveactivities by the Working Group. Not only in poli-cy discussion but also in field activities that sup-port policy reform. This indicates a markedimprovement in sense of belongingness of the go-vernment. In the end, all those involved, especial-ly the inter-sectoral working group came to realizethat policy formulation through participatorymethodology, though in the beginning was seem-ingly dull and loathsome, but in the end producessomething very useful. At the most importantthing that the policy is acceptable to the stakehol-ders, because all of them participated during thedevelopment process. Although many things havebeen achieved yet still many more are awaiting tobe done.

We would expect that we would not bewielded by the donor agencies any more.We could become self reliant. It could be

better if we could fund through APBN,without loan. But it seems unlikely.

BackgroundStarting from the fact that the

responsibility for WSES sector develop-ment is now relinquished to district go-vernment, WASPOLA Working Grouptried to introduce a new breakthrough inpolicy formulation, especially for WSESdevelopment. Through an involvementof a wide variety of stakeholders, espe-cially at district level, its hoped that thedistrict aspiration, could be accommo-date and finally the policy could beimplemented in the districts.

After the basic idea accepted at theNational Working Group forum, severalbasic questions emerge, what is theamount of resources for providing facili-tation to the regions all over the country,who will do it, in what mechanism, howlong is the time it will take, and so on.

It is indeed not easy to facilitateabout 400 districts within a relativelyshort time, while the National Policy forDevelopment of Community-Based Wa-ter Supply and Environmental Sanitationdocument must be finalized by the mid-dle of 2003. Under the consideration oflimited resources it was concluded that inthe initial stage only several regions wereto participate, later in the future thismight be done in a larger scale combinedwith the necessary improvement to thepolicy, taking lessons learned from thisinitial stage.

It was not even easy todecide on the number of districtsto participate, since there was anapprehension, whether the par-ticipation was based solely onthe obedience to the central go-vernment, rather than awarenessof the importance of WSESdevelopment. On the otherhand, WASPOLA being the partypromoting the demand respon-sive approach also tried to avoidunilateral appointment patternwhich dismiss the opportunity

for the regions to voice out willingness orreluctance in the program offered.Therefore each of the districts selectedmust be able to provide their best contri-bution in policy development process,and it was also expected that the policywould be directly adopted to the formula-tion of WSES development policy andplanning of their respective districts.

Selection of DistrictsFrom a series of discussions within

the national working group it was agreedto invite several potential districts toenrich the policy which was being formu-lated. The selection was based on theexistence of similar activities within thescope of policy implementation, such as aproject which applies the principles con-tained in the policy, for instance WSLIC-2, UNICEF sanitation project, KfW/GTZwater supply project. Specific attentionwas also paid that the regions selectedsufficiently represent the geographicaldistribution.

There was uncertainty in the begin-ning of whether the regions would parti-

cipate in the policy formulation that cer-tainly has nothing to do with physicaldevelopment project. In general, theregions would only be interested in phy-sical development or something thatwould be followed with physical develop-ment. On the contrary, WASPOLA doesnot bring physical project at all. It wouldcontain policy dialogues, and it could beproduce boredom.

But the presumption was entirelymistaken, because all 10 kabupatensinvited to a seminar in Yogyakarta 9-12October 2002 were present andexpressed willingness to participate.

The success in convincing the dis-tricts that WSES development need aspecial attention was born from an openand participatory effort. In this opportu-nity an introduction was given about theobjectives of the field trial, and what kindof activities were involved in the exercise.Besides, the districts also discuss amongthemselves how this policy could beapplied in their respective areas.Including the site selection criteria forthe localities to participate in the fieldtrial, if such a selection is required.

Out of 10 interested districts only 4kabupatens were selected. This isbecause the limited resources availablewith the WASPOLA Working Group. Thefour kabupatens are Sumba Timur,Subang, Musi Banyuasin, and Solok.

Field Trial ProcessIn broad line the field trial

process consists of three phases,preliminary understanding,advancement, and independentpractice. Facilitation support thatprovided by the WASPOLASecretariat/Working Group up tothe second phase, while in thethird the district has had sufficientcapacity to work independently indeveloping their district policy andits implementation.

P I N I O N

Field Trial for the Implementation of NationalPolicy for Development of Community-BasedWater Supply and Environmental Sanitation

A new approach in policy development

O

8 PercikAugust 2003

By: Sofyan IskandarWASPOLA Project Coordinator

1. Obtaining inputs from the districts for policy improvement

2. Adoption of the basic policies contained in the national policy into the development of districts policy

3. Obtaining inputs for marketing the policy to other districts in Indonesia

In broad line, the objectives of the Field Trial forthe Implementation National Policy for

Development of Community-Based Water Supplyand Environmental Sanitation in the districts are:

The preliminary understanding phaseconsists of introduction of the impor-tance of WSES sector to key stakeholdersin the district, conducted through formaland informal visit, discussions, meetings,and concluded with a seminar. The main

activities undertaken in all the participa-ting districts consisted of a review of theperformance of WSES service in the past,at present, and its outlook in the future.In this way the regional stakeholders willidentify the issues, the challenges and theopportunity for WSES sector develop-ment in their respective districts.Further the stakeholders may start withdrawing a rough planning for WSESdevelopment of their districts.

In the advancement phase which rep-resents the continuation of the previousactivities the stakeholders are invited tostudy the substantive matters of thenational policy. The process containsparticipatory discussions about the policyguidelines in the district context. Tobroaden the perspective, a review is alsomade to a successful project and one thatmet with a failure. Through a field visitand an interview with the user, thefindings are brought up to a kabupatenlevel discussion.

Field Trial ResultThe regional stakeholders have

come to understand that 5 factors, name-ly social, institutional, financial, technicaland environmental influence the sustain-

ability of a WSES facility. All the regionsunderstand that all components areinterrelated but each region sees thatthere is a specific factor fulfilled if thesocial barrier, i.e. the social structure of agiven community, could be exploitedoptimally. In Kab. Subang, however, thetechnical factor is considered more influ-ential, since geologically the region canbe divided into 3 categories, mountain-ous, moderately flat and coastal plains.The selection of an appropriate approachand suitable technology option becomethe focus of interest in Subang. In Solok,the role of institutional factor is moredominant, when the nagari holds astrategic position in the sustainability ofWSES service provision. As it is inSubang, Musi Banyuasin also sees thattechnology option is the most dominant,this relates to tidal swamps and riverbanks which make up a substantial por-tion of the district area.

There is a common recognitionthat in the general the basic policies canbe understood, and can be used as refe-rence in WSES sector development bythe region. In Kab. Subang the districtworking group were able to formulate thevision and mission of WSES program ofthe district, entitled Subang Sehat 2008.The Musi Banyuasin Working Group taketime to review the Muba Sehat 2005.Solok Working Group formulated SolokSehat 2010. Sumba Timur WorkingGroup enriched the understanding aboutvision and mission of the kabupatenespecially in WSES sector.

Though it was understood, yet thepresent document still needs someimprovement, especially in the use ofspecific terms with ambiguous meaning.

There is an increasing communica-tion intensity among stakeholders in thedistrict, therefore the efficiency WSESsector development will be increase.

The introduction of participatorymethodology in policy development atdistrict level contains an attraction forthe districts, because it is a substantiveimprovement, and can also be applied fordevelopment planning in general. Thismethodology is considered very effectivefor collecting information and ideas froma wide range of sources within a relative-ly short time.

It can be assumed that while theformal version is not yet available, thedistrict might be able to start adoptingthe main policy guidelines for their ownpurposes because substantively theguidelines are acceptable and well under-stood. This of course does not deny theimportance of the legal format.

Concluding remarkOnce the National Policy for Develop-

ment of Community-Based Water Sup-ply and Environmental Sanitation docu-ment is finalized and legally acknow-ledged the next step will be its imple-mentation at a national scale. What isleft for the National Working Group todo is to decide how this can be effectivelyundertaken. Whether it will be preciselylike the field trial in 4 locations, with animplication that a big amount ofresources would be needed, especiallyfunding and availability of qualified faci-litators. It is deemed necessary to findnew ways to endorse the implementationof this policy so that it is not only formal-ly accepted, but it is also put into the realpractice. Besides, it is no less importantis the flexibility in the part of theNational Working Group in accommo-dating additional inputs from the regionswhich may be too valuable to miss for thefuture improvement of the policy.

P I N I O NO

9 PercikAugust 2003

1. Sumba Timur, East Nusa Tenggara2. Sumba Barat, East Nusa Tenggara3. Timor Tengah Selatan,

East Nusa Tenggara4. Wonosobo, C. Java5. Garut, W. Java6. Subang, W. Java7. Musi Banyuasin, S. Sumatra8. Sawahlunto Sijunjung,

W. Sumatra9. Solok, W. Sumatra

10. Pasaman, W. Sumatra

Kabupatens invited toseminar of national WSES

policy formulation:

Availability district administra-tion support, as indicated with aformal letter from the head ofthe districtCommitment to participate inthe activities, as indicated in thewillingness to form and func-tionalize districts technical teamCondition of the area in relationto complexity of issues and geo-graphical distribution

1.

2.

3.

The criteria for site selectionaccording to the participants

of the seminar:

I S C E L L A N E O U S

National Policy for Development ofCommunity-Based WSES

PURPOSE1. General

Improvement of people welfarethrough sustainable management ofwater supply and environmental sanita-tion.

2. Specifica. To improve development, provi-

sion and maintenance of WSES infra-structures and services.

b. To improve manageability and sus-tainability of WSES infrastructures andservices.

POLICY GUIDELINESWater as an Economic Good andSocial Good

Until today, some communities per-ceive water as an social/public good withno economic value, obtained and usedat no cost to the user. This belief has ledto the lack of community's motivation toconserve environment and other relatedwater resources (both quantitatively andqualitatively), excessive exploitation andunchecked use of water coupled withslow progress in the development of skilland technology for water reuse and recy-cle have persisted.

In order to drive reform in suchexisting public perceptions and to con-firm that water in an rare commodityrequiring a degree of sacrifice, eitherwith money or time to obtain and use,public campaign effort targeting all le-vels of the community should be imple-mented. The underlying principle ofWSES as an economic good is that theuser pays for service.

Informed Choice as a Basis forDemand Responsive Approach

To improve effectiveness of the appro-ach the government which plays as facilita-tor is required to offer the community withinformed choices covering every aspect ofWSES system development, including tech-nological, financial, environmental, socio-cultural and management institution.

Environmentally-Based DevelopmentDevelopment of water supply infra-

structure, starting from raw water source

intake, through distribution and treatmentsystems, and the ultimately to the finalhousehold distribution network should fol-low the rules and regulations pertaining toenvironmental conservation. Likewise, thedevelopment of environmental sanitationinfrastructures, especially those built tomanage waste should abide by environmen-tal rules and regulations.

Hygiene EducationSustained WSES management requires

WSES development to be comprehensiveand capable of stimulating change for bettercommunity hygiene behavior to improvequality of life. Initiative to change behaviorshould emphasize comprehensive properhygiene and healthy living education as acompulsory and principal component offuture WSES development, developmentplanning and implementation should notfocus strictly on the physical construction ofinfrastructures.

Poverty FocusIn principle, every individuals in

Indonesia has the right to receive adequateand sustained WSES services. Therefore,the limited capacity of the government,WSES development must focuses on thepoor and other disadvantaged member ofthe community and that requires them tobe active participants and decision-makers.So that their demands could be fulfilledfairly and properly.

Active Role of Women in DecisionMaking

Women play a prominent role in thedaily activities to meet the demand forhousehold WSES, therefore it is naturalthat woman actively participate in WSESdevelopment. According to UNICEF andWorld Bank studies of WSES project inIndonesia, women's involvement in thedevelopment process of WSES systems,from planning, through implementationand to management, evidently increase thesustainability of the system.

Accountability in the DevelopmentProcess

The era of decentralization and trans-parency no longer positions communities as

objects, but rather as subjects in the WSESdevelopment process. This policy aims toenhance community ownership of infra-structures and community awareness ofsound management principles early in theprocess. Therefore, WSES developmentshould foster transparency and openness,providing the opportunity for all stakehol-ders to contribute according to their capaci-ties during the process beginning fromplanning, implementation, operation andmaintenance, to service improvement.

Government as FacilitatorFacilitation should not be translated as

provision of physical infrastructure or directsubsidy, but rather the role of governmentin providing continuously technical and nontechnical assistance to enhance communityempowerment in order to enable them toplan, construct and manage their ownWSES system and other support activities.

Community ParticipationAll members of the community must be

actively involved in each phase of the deve-lopment. However, considering the limita-tion of time and space the involvement isimplemented through a democratic repre-sentation mechanism and reflects the accom-modation of the demands of the majority.

Optimum Service and Right TargetOptimum means a service that satisfies

the demand, equitable and ease of access.Right target means as a coverage complieswith the scope of issues within the communi-ty.

Application of Cost Recovery PrincipleThe financial capacity of the govern-

ments (central as well as regional) is insuffi-cient to continuously develop and buildWSES systems for all communities. In sup-port a sustainable service development it isnecessary that the construction and manage-ment of WSES system be based on the prin-ciple of cost recovery.

In this connection, informationregarding the cost recovery obligationmust be made available and open to allstakeholders, especially the user commu-nity, so that they are aware of the size oftheir investment.

M

10 PercikAugust 2003

Representatives from 33 dis-tricts and 7 provinces gatheredtogether for annual DCT(District Coordination Team)

and PCT (Provincial CoordinationTeam) coordination meeting at HotelHilton, Surabaya, 20-22 August 2003.The purpose was to improve coordina-tion among DCTs and PCTs in the imple-mentation of WSLIC-2 (Water and sani-tation for Low Income CommunitiesPhase 2) project, evaluation of imple-mentation activities, and planning forthe future. For comparative study the

participants were brought to severalproject sites in Kab. Malang.

The opening was made by SuyonoDikun Ph.D, IPM, Deputy forInfrastructure, Bappenas, who delivereda keynote speech. In his speech DrDikun stresses the importance of regio-nal diversity and specific demand betaken into consideration. This meansthat regional development must begeared to the aspiration of the communi-ty and regionally based. The central gov-ernment will only provide direction andrelinquish all power to the regions to

develop themselves. " Based on thisresponsibility the government exercise astrong commitment to help in strength-ening the regional capacity."

In connection with WSLIC-2 projectit is recommended that the regions allo-cate sufficient counterpart funds for thelocal goverment budget for cross-sectoralactivities since the national budget is inshortage.

After the in-house meeting the par-ticipants are brought to visit WSLIC-2projects in Malang.

I E L D V I S I T

Annual Coordination Meeting ofDCT and PCT WSLIC-2 Project

F


In first week of August 2003 WSESWorking Group visited PagelaranVillage, Kec. Ciomas, Bogor. This vil-

lage is a field laboratory for trial theimplementation of National Policy forDevelopment of Community-Based Wa-ter Supply and Environmental Sanitation.

The village has its uniqueness. In themiddle of the village lies the Ciburialwater spring, as raw water source forPDAM Kab. Bogor, but its population isin constant water shortage especially du-ring dry season. The most difficult situa-tion is experienced by those who live inRW 8 to the south of the spring and it'slocated at a higher elevation.

The chief of village, H. Achmad Tohirsaid that in May 2000 the communitywas hit by a serious diarrhea. This wascaused by insufficiency of water supplysystem and unfavorable environmentalcondition. "It was in the news every-where," he added.

Because of that disaster the villagewas then given a compensation of 20 mil-

lion from the local government of Kab.Bogor. Then the community startedmoving to look for their own watersource. A water spring was located on290 m2 land area at Desa Pasir Erih,Kec. Tamansari. The discharge is about10,6 litre per second and located 13 mhigher than Desa Pagelaran. In early2003 water was beginning to flowthrough a very simple piping system."The community began practicing somechanges. From a habit of bathing in theriver, they now do it in a bathroom", thevillage chief said.

In an MPA discussion facilitated bySuprapto from the WSES Working Groupit was revealed that the management isstill in poor condition. Only one man isdoing that. "Sometimes water flows nice-ly, another time it is choked," A Suhardja,one of RT chairmen said. This happensbecause water is not evenly distributed.

Even then, many of the communitymembers feel satisfied. This wasexpressed Endih, another RT chairman.

The reason being, his RT is located

in the highest location of the village. But

he also found out there is a lot of water

uselessly wasted because there is no on-

off mechanism in the homes.

From the community responses,

Suprapto, with his specific style, summa-

rized several technical shortages such as

the need to enlarge the water intake,

firmer construction, improvement to

management system.

When asked about contribution they

stated their willingness to contribute Rp

5000 per month. The government will

contribute pipes and cement.

As a beginning the community are

requested to prepare a social map and

piping network. It is hoped that all the

RW 8 population could enjoy the service.

The community is enthusiastic. In the

near future the Group will return to the

village and see what the villagers are

doing.

A bit of hope in Pagelaran

Up until recently the practice ofWSES system development isbased on supply driven

approach that ends up in inefficiency.Many of the constructed systems are leftunattended because they are not in con-formance with the demand of the com-munity. By the year 2000's togetherwith the acceptance of National Policyfor Development of Community-BasedWater Supply and EnvironmentalSanitation the system development isbeginning to put forward the applicationof demand responsive approaches.

In the above context, this book(though has been in circulation for sometime) is still very relevant as guidelinesfor WSES system development by thestakeholders.

It is generally understood that thebenefit of community participation in

decision making process could enhancethe success of a development project.However, since the empirical data sup-porting this conclusion are qualitativemany development practitioners reservesome doubt. This report tries to explainthis conclusion through three importantquestions. First, how big does communi-ty participation contribute to projecteffectiveness? Second, what kind ofcommunity and government characteris-tics can speed up the process? Third,how can community participation beenhanced through community managedwater supply development policy andtechnical design in 49 developingnations? The result indicates that com-munity participation indeed providescontribution to project effectiveness.

It is generally acknowledged thatinfrastructure is key to economicdevelopment. Since 1950 through

1990 most of the developing nationsdepend on the government investmentfor infrastructure development especiallyenergy, telecommunication, transporta-tion and water supply. But we are alsoaware that the speed is decreasing. It isestimated that 1 billion people do nothave access to water supply, and 1,2 bil-lion are without basic sanitation facility.In addition to that rate of inefficiency ishigh.

The above constraints together withgovernment lack of fund way out must be

found through private sector participa-tion. This condition made an increasingof private sector participation since1980's. It this context this reportbecomes very useful in explaining objec-tively based on trend analysis the privateparticipation phenomenon in infrastruc-ture development especially energy,telecommunication, transportation anddrinking water in developing nationsduring 1990-2001. There were at least2.500 private infrastructure projectsdeveloped in 132 developing nations withtotal investment of USD754 billion onwhich this report is based.

O O K I N F O

The Contribution of People'sParticipation Evidence

from 121 Rural Water Supply Project

B


Title:The

Contribution of People’s

Participation Evidence From

121 RuralWater Supply

Project

Author:Deepa Narayan

Publisher:Environmentally Sustainable

Development Occasional Paper Series No.1 The World

Bank Washington DC,July 1995

viii + 108 pages

Title:Private

Participation in Infrastructure;

Trend in Developing Countries in 1999-2001

Energy, Telecommunication,Transportation, Water

Author:Ada Karina Izaguire etc.

Publisher:The World

Bank and Public Private InfrastuctureAdvisory Facility (PPIAF), 2003

xiii + 160 pages

Private Participation in Infrastructure ;Trend in Developing Countries in 1999-2001

Energy, Telecommunication,Transportation, Water

Information in this website represents

a part of UNESCO (United Nations

Educational Scientific and Cultural

Organization) website. During the last

30 years there are several important

events and milestones that are related

to Water Supply and Environmental

Sanitation:

E B S I T E I N F O

Conclusions and Important ConferencesDuring the Last 30 Years

http://www.unesco.org/water/wwap/milestone/

W


1980-1990 International Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation Decade

1992 International Conference on Water and Environment in DublinThis conference produces a statement known as Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development that places attention to economic valueof water, involvement of women, and poverty.

UNCED Earth Summit in Rio de JaneiroThis conference produces Rio Declaration on Environment and Development that highlights issues on collaboration, community participation,water supply and sanitation, human settlement, sustainable development. Agenda 21 was formulated.

1997 First World Water Forum in MarrakechThis forum produces Marrakech Declaration that highlights water supply sanitation, integrated water management, ecosystem conservation,gender quality, and efficient use of water.

2000 Second World Water ForumIn this forum it was agreed World Water Vision, Marketing Water Everybody's Business that states that water has various uses and importance fordomestic, food and irrigation.

In this it was also declared UN Millennium Declaration which contains Millennium Development Goals (MDG's), one of which being reducing by half the number of population without access to drinking water and sanitation in year 2015.

2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in JohannesburgIn this meeting the world leaders emphasize their commitment to MDG's

2003 Third World Water Forum in JapanThis forum is commemorated with the publication of First Edition of the World Development Report.

"Why should we have to have atoilet?" That is used to be saidby population in village Ental

Sewu when we asked them about construc-ting a toilet. The same statement we gotfrom the neighboring village. What theyhad in mind was that building toilet cost alot of money because a toilet is identical to abig septic tank. That's why they preferredto defecate in river or drainage canal.Whereas their village is located just in a cor-ner of a big town of Sidoarjo.

This condition made Sutrisno Hadi(56 years), a retired government employeeand motivator of Sehat Foundation inEntal Sewu promise himself to change thelocal community.

Based on a survey conducted in year2001 by the Foundation in Mlaten hamletof Sidokepung there are only 7 householdswith a toilet out of 90, while in village EntalSewu there are only 340 toilets in a total of700 households. The Foundation considersthis situation must change otherwise it willproduce an adverse effect to health condi-tion of the whole community in the future.However, it was understood that to break ahard habit is not an easy thing.

Sutrisno had an idea that awarenessmust be built starting from family level andmoving gradually to a common awarenessin the whole community, from domestic(household to household) approach gradu-ally into a systematic process. The aware-ness building was conducted through theJamban Keluarga (family latrine) andPembuangan Limbah Keluarga (family se-werage) Programs. With patience he talkedto convince the community the importanceof having a toilet, through door to door visit,speaking in RT meeting, and in any gathe-ring. With a joke but deeply convincing hetalked to families with a adolescent girl buthave no toilet he would say: "if some daysomeone came to you proposing youryoung lady and it happens that he needs to

go to a toilet, where would you take him?To the river?" Beside the above methodmessage after message was delivered inwriting reminding the community "not todefecate in the open". The various methodsproved effective in building the awareness.

In Sutrisno's mind, if not now when willhygiene behavior be promoted? Should wewait for government subsidy? Isn't it thecommunity really capable? An indeed, thecommunity is capable of buying moreexpensive belongings. Isn't it by having atoilet also a way to build one's honor? Theproblem lies in awareness. And thereforethe awareness is to be grown and nurtured.

All this time, according to Sutrisno,there's a lot of government effort made tointroduce household toilet program butsince the introduction was made throughproject without initiative from the commu-

nity, many of the constructed facilities areleft unattended and never been functioning.In other words, in terms of toilet and envi-ronmental sanitation, community motiva-tion for building awareness and empower-ment must be considered as equally impor-tant as the physical construction itself.Focus on physical construction and you aresure to come to problems.

And the idea is right. Toilet construc-tion is not necessarily expensive and thecommunity, indeed, can afford it. To fur-ther convince them, Sutrisno asked thecommunity to make calculation, how manyfamilies to use one toilet, plan to be emp-tied once in how many years, what kind ofconstruction materials to be used. With asimple calculation it was septic tank that isbest and most economical. To again con-vince them, observation was made to find

I R R O R

Having a toilet, it is hard inthe beginning but at the end

we are proud of itAn experience of SEHAT Indonesia Foundation, Sidoarjo, E. Java

M


out which of the materials were alreadyavailable and what the remaining still needto be bought.

Loan from SEHAT IndonesiaFoundation

As it was stated above, the communi-ty is actually has the resources theyneeded, but for a toilet they feel sothrifty and reluctant to spend anythingexcept if there was a loan which they willpay back in installments. From an initialcapital of Rp3.250.000, derived fromcontribution of the foundation officers inSeptember, the fund was revolving andin July 2003 has grown to Rp8.530.000and has served more than 80 householdsincluding loans for repair of sewerage.Average loan is Rp300.000 to 600.000and repayment period of 4 to 8 months.

In its implementation theFoundation and the borrowers agree to aloan agreement. Each borrower ischarged with an added value of 1,5% permonth in order to guarantee that the lat-ter borrower and those in the waiting listget materials of similar value. The valueadded is not an interest like that of theordinary bank, it is only to guarantee thesustainability of the service. However,many of those in the village say that theFoundation is practicing usurious len-ding. Only after some explanation thatthey began to understand. The lessonlearned from this is how important it isto conduct a continuous socialization ina suitable format and in the right placeso as to make those who oppose under-stand the essence.

Not only toiletThe steps in toilet development

apparently lead to the growth of commu-nity awareness to improve the quality ofinfrastructure for hygiene behavior. Inthe beginning the members of the com-munity came to borrow for toilet con-struction but later they also want it torepair the sewerage to dispose of waste-water from their kitchen. Others evenborrow to add a window to allow lightand fresh air flows into their house andalso repair of the floor. Hygiene mes-sages continue to transmit from SEHATIndonesia Foundation, beside toilet alsoa reminder to prevention of careless

garbage disposal through placement ofgarbage bins in mosque and mushallasby the Foundation.

Since the beginning of the first len-ding on 10 Sept. 2000 till July 2003 thegrowth of service for toilet and othersanitation facilities are as the following: Creating pride

The SEHAT Indonesia Foundationhas an obsession, i.e. to make toilet andsewerage a family pride. The messagethat says: "I am proud having a toilet"seems fit for it. This is evidenced fromseveral borrowers who got excited fromseeing their neighbors and asked howthey could borrow from the Foundation.

I R R O RM


No. borrowers Growth of service coverage Month Toilet Sewerage Toilet Sewerage Feb 2001 10 10 18 10 Aug 2001 18 2 36 12 Feb 2002 9 3 47 15 Aug 2002 5 7 52 23 Feb 2003 4 6 56 29 Jul 2003 4 10 60 39 58 38 269 128

30 September 2000 31 July 2003 Rp. 3.350.000 Rp. 8.530.000

Growth of service coverage for toilet and sewerageSEHAT Indonesia Foundation

Period of 2000/2003

"Imagine how comfortable it is, now wedon't have to go to the river any more",that was the expression of some whohave built toilet. They are proud thatnow they have a toilet.

The approach as applied by theSEHAT Indonesia Foundation:

1. Build awareness of the importanceof environmental sanitation infrastruc-ture.

2. Enhance family interest to own atoilet and put it as top priority.

3. Create a condition in which thecommunity is able to put value to theirsanitation facility and compare it withthe condition before they own one orwith those who do not have one.

4. Create a condition where the com-munity is proud of his facility thereforeuse it and maintain regularly.

5. Enhance other families to adoptwith or with outside assistance based onawareness and understanding about theimportance of a sanitation system forthem.

Ideals for the futureAlthough the scale is still relatively

small but what has been accomplishedby SEHAT Indonesia Foundation con-tains a strategic meaning. TheFoundation hopes that in the future:

Someone would adopt andimprove the community initiativeapproach in environmental sanitationsystem development activity.

Inclusion of community participa-tion approach through the role of a com-mitted and environmental-sanitation-related NGO into the development stra-tegy of the Local Government.

There still many villages withproblems in environmental sanitation,therefore a partnership with an NGO likeSEHAT Indonesia Foundation could beconsidered as a sustainable model.

SEHAT Indonesia Foundation wishesto become partner to various parties invillage/kelurahan and area developmentstrategy for environmental sanitation.

The efforts made by SEHATIndonesia Foundation

Sharing of experience with govern-ment of Kabupaten Sidoarjo especiallywith Dinas Kesehatan, Dinas

Lingkungan and Kimpraswil.Performing partnership with Kab.

Sidoarjo in facilitating community par-ticipation for the development of sanita-tion facility in 4 kelurahans.

ConstraintsAs an institution dealing with envi-

ronmental sanitation a number of con-straints come on the way:

How to change the critical aware-ness of the community from the habit ofindividualistic thinking into systemic.

How to change the partner's per-spective especially the governmentemployees who behave like a contractorlooking for a project.

How to exploit financial resourcesto fund activities that up to now areentirely based on voluntary commit-ment.

How to convince and enhance thegovernment and other stakeholders todevelop a holistic partnership schemewith SEHAT Indonesia Foundation for

environmental sanitation which is notlimited in ideas and opinions only butalso includes financial scheme in thelight of program sustainability.

Alternatives for partnership withSEHAT Indonesia Foundation

Grant fund to increase coverage ofenvironmental sanitation to be managedas a revolving fund by the communityunder the supervision and facilitation ofthe Foundation.

Provision of loan without interestby government or other stakeholder forenvironmental sanitation developmentexpansion. Fund management is fully inthe hands of SEHAT IndonesiaFoundation and will be paid back within3 years at least.

Provision of soft loan to be paidback in installments for at least 5 yearswith one year grace period.

Provision of technical assistancefor environmental-sanitation-relatedprojects.

I R R O RM


indonesia water supply and sanitation magazine. 'percik' first edition august 2003

Health & Medicine