CHAPTER 4 – Stage 3: Integrating U-CLTS across the sanitation chain

Reducing Open Defecation Through Community-Led Total Sanitation in Fort Dauphin, Madagascar: A Case Study

“…Project Malio was funded by the National Community Lottery Fund and Guernsey Overseas Aid & Development Commission (27). In February 2013, and December 2014, the National Lottery Fund gave £2,502 and £374,065 through the International Community grant programme for Project Malio (28).…”

“…Project staff also commenced all community meetings and activities with a formal apology to elders for the content of the ensuing discussions, as a way of respecting existing social structures, and ongoing discussions between project staff, elders, and local community members helped ensure that the 'shock-value' driving the CLTS methodology was preserved, while avoiding causing such offense to community members that the intervention would become ineffective (26). Some specific difficulties in implementing CLTS in an urban (as opposed to rural) context are the lack of defined borders between neighborhoods, as well as difficulties in getting a critical mass of people to attend in-person meetings and events (27). Overall, Project Malio organizers were successful in adapting the CLTS approach to these conditions.…”

“…By including mass media campaigns (through radio programs, or visual messaging such as billboards), Project Malio was able to transmit their message to a much wider audience. Finally, donors were supportive of the ongoing evolution of the project itself, facilitating the necessary adaptations and ongoing discussions (27).…”

“…Specifically, the project's failure to include stakeholders beyond residents (such as enterprises, healthcare providers, and financial institutions) neglects the reality that in urban contexts, residents often need to work in collaboration with governments and other actors to achieve meaningful changes (30). A barrier to widening the scope of stakeholders involved, however, is the potential to introduce more complexity in terms of management, illustrated by the difficulties Project Malio organizers already faced in coordinating between the behavioral change and construction teams (27).…”

“…In terms of financing, the high costs of constructing latrines in urban areas, due to a lack of availability of land and local building materials relative to rural areas, presented challenges in terms of providing material subsidies for the poorest and most vulnerable schools and households (27). While providing these subsidies -a departure from more traditional CLTS approaches -contributed to the overall success of the project, the amount that households were required to contribute towards latrine construction (approximately 1.75 CAD) was reported as being prohibitively high for many of the poorest households (31).…”