Recasting sanitation with urban-rural partnerships

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 3 – Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation.

Introduction

The Swachh Bharat Mission, launched in 2014, aimed to ensure toilet access for every household in India. Within a decade, over 12 crore toilets were built in rural areas, and all villages declared themselves Open Defecation Free. This marked a major public health and dignity gain. However, sanitation does not end with toilets. Managing the growing volume of human waste has emerged as the next critical challenge. Without safe systems for treatment and disposal, sanitation gains risk erosion. This challenge demands not only infrastructure solutions but also institutional coordination, labour protection, and social equity. Recasting sanitation with urban-rural partnerships.

Why Waste Management Matters

1. Toilets generate waste that must be managed: Toilets are only the starting point of sanitation. Every toilet produces faecal waste that must be safely handled to protect health and the environment.
2. Reliance on septic tanks and pits: In rural areas, septic tanks and pits are the main containment systems. These fill up over time and require desludging at regular intervals.
3. Risk of undermining ODF gains:Without safe systems for collection, transport, and treatment, faecal waste is often handled by informal operators. Unsafe disposal can reverse the gains achieved under ODF.
4. Shift to ODF Plus under SBM-G Phase II: This challenge led to Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen) Phase II, with a focus on ODF Plus. The aim is to ensure sustainability, not just access.
5. Persistent gap in faecal sludge management: ODF Plus covers solid and liquid waste management, behaviour change, and sanitation service chains. Despite progress, faecal sludge management remains the weakest link, especially in peri-urban and rural areas.

Progress under ODF Plus

1. Broad national coverage: By October 2025, more than 5.68 lakh villages, nearly 97% of all villages, were declared ODF Plus. This reflects strong nationwide adoption.
2. Uneven service delivery: While toilet coverage is universal, access to safe desludging and treatment services remains uneven across regions.
3. Need for system-level solutions: The scale of the challenge shows that individual household solutions are insufficient. Area-wide and institutional approaches are required.

For detailed information on Open Defecation Free (ODF) read this article here

Success Stories of Waste Management

1. State-Led Infrastructure Model: Maharashtra

• Maharashtra invested in over 200 faecal sludge treatment plants in urban areas and promoted co-treatment in 41 sewage treatment plants.
• This strengthened city treatment capacity, but many surrounding villages remained outside the service network, showing the need to link treatment infrastructure with rural service delivery.

2. Urban–Rural Partnership Model: Satara District: Satara city’s faecal sludge treatment plant (65 KLD) was operating below capacity. Four villages were connected to this facility through scheduled desludging every five years, delivered by a private provider engaged by gram panchayats. Costs are recovered through a modest sanitation tax, while a formal agreement allows authorised rural vehicles to treat sludge at the city plant at no cost, making the arrangement sustainable and mutually beneficial.
3. Rural and Cluster Model: Mayani: Mayani adopted scheduled desludging every five to seven years, managed by private operators or local self-help groups. It was also selected for a cluster-level treatment plant to serve around 80 surrounding villages, improving viability through pooled demand.

Social and Labour Dimensions of Waste Management

1. Rapid waste growth with shrinking workforce: Waste volumes have increased sharply over time, while the sanitation workforce has reduced by about 60%. This mismatch has deepened service gaps and worker stress.
2. Informalization of sanitation labour: Secure public sanitation jobs have declined. Many workers now operate under informal contracts with low pay, limited rights, and high occupational risk.
3. Caste-linked concentration of hazardous work: The informal waste economy remains dominated by Dalits and Adivasis. Social stigma and exclusion continue, especially in informal waste handling.
4. Health risks and lack of dignity: Sanitation work is dangerous and physically demanding. A large share of workers do not reach retirement age, highlighting severe health and safety failures.
5. Marginal political focus on workers: Despite sanitation missions, worker dignity and welfare remain low on the political agenda. Infrastructure gains have not translated into social protection.

Impact of Weak Waste Management Systems

1. Public health and environmental damage: Untreated faecal waste is dumped into lakes, rivers, drains, and dumpyards. This contaminates water sources and creates toxic living conditions.
2. Growth of unsafe informal practices: Lack of treatment facilities forces reliance on illegal dumping and burning. These practices increase health risks for workers and nearby communities.
3. Economic inefficiency and governance strain: Tax evasion and weak local finances limit system investment. Informal waste economies become indispensable but operate outside regulation.
4. Reinforcement of social inequality: The poorest and most vulnerable groups bear the heaviest burden of unsafe waste work. Social mobility and access to safety nets remain limited.

Way Forward

1. Institutionalising sanitation services: Faecal sludge management must be treated as a regular public service rather than an occasional activity.
2. Strengthening urban–rural cooperation: Shared use of treatment infrastructure can reduce costs and improve efficiency.
3. Scaling adaptable models: Urban–rural linkage and cluster-based approaches can be expanded across regions based on local needs
4. Ensuring financial sustainability: Sanitation taxes and formal service contracts can support long-term operations.
5. Upgrade technology, but customise scaling: There is no shortage of technologies to detoxify and recycle human waste. The challenge is how to scale up for towns and scale down for outskirts without creating new gaps in operation and access.
6. Protect workers during technology and system shifts: If upgraded systems reduce informal jobs, there must be plans for compensation and re-training. Workers should not lose livelihoods when sanitation systems become more formal or more mechanised.
7. Create secure, caste-neutral livelihood pathways: Waste work remains caste-marked, especially in the informal economy. Breaking this requires modern jobs that are caste-neutral, along with opportunities for education, migration, and self-employment that workers value for independence.
8. 8. Expanding private and community roles: Private operators and self-help groups can improve service delivery under clear governance arrangements.

Conclusion

Sustaining sanitation gains requires moving beyond toilet construction to managing waste safely, fairly, and systematically. Urban–rural partnerships and cluster-based treatment models address infrastructure gaps, but social and labour realities cannot be ignored. Without protecting workers and strengthening institutions, sanitation systems remain fragile. The real success of Swachh Bharat lies in durable systems that protect health, preserve the environment, and uphold dignity for both users and workers.

Question for practice

Discuss how urban–rural partnerships and faecal sludge management models are helping to sustain sanitation gains under the Swachh Bharat Mission in rural India.

Source: The Hindu