Critical Analysis of the National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem

 

Manual scavenging is a deeply entrenched and dehumanizing practice in India, where a significant number of people still engage in the manual cleaning of human excreta from dry latrines, sewers, and septic tanks. Despite being banned by law and recognized as a violation of human rights, manual scavenging continues to persist in various parts of the country. The practice not only results in the exploitation and discrimination of sanitation workers but also poses significant health risks and perpetuates social inequalities. Despite various government initiatives and campaigns to eradicate manual scavenging, the practice remains a persistent problem in India, requiring sustained efforts towards its eradication and the provision of dignified and safe sanitation solutions.

NAMASTE is a Central Sector Scheme of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MoSJE) as a joint initiative of the MoSJE and the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA). NAMASTE envisages the safety and dignity of sanitation workers in urban India by creating an enabling ecosystem that recognizes sanitation workers as one of the key contributors to the operations and maintenance of sanitation infrastructure. The Scheme has been approved for four years from 2022-23 to 2025-26. The NAMASTE policy aims to improve the efficiency and sustainability of sanitation services by promoting mechanized sanitation solutions in urban and peri-urban areas of the country.

The NAMASTE policy initiative is based on the recognition that manual scavenging is a pervasive problem in India that requires a comprehensive and sustained approach towards its eradication. The policy aims to promote the adoption of modern and innovative technologies, such as pit-emptying machines, sewer-cleaning machines, and faecal sludge treatment plants, to reduce the need for manual scavenging and improve the health and safety of sanitation workers. The policy also aims to promote the use of advanced technologies for the disposal of waste, such as biodegradable waste-to-energy solutions, to ensure sustainable waste management practices.

The NAMASTE policy initiative is aligned with the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, which aims to prohibit the manual cleaning of sewers and septic tanks and provide rehabilitation to manual scavengers. The policy also takes into account the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Cleaning of Sewers and Septic Tanks released by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, which outlines safety measures to be taken during the operation of machines and the process for disposal of waste. This helps to reduce the cost of cleaning and disposal of waste and improve the efficiency of sanitation services.

The NAMASTE policy initiative recognizes that eradicating the practice of manual scavenging requires a multi-pronged approach that involves not only the promotion of mechanized sanitation solutions but also the provision of social security and rehabilitation to manual scavengers. The policy aims to provide financial assistance and support to manual scavengers for their rehabilitation, including skill development and alternate livelihood options. The policy also aims to create awareness and sensitize communities towards the dehumanizing nature of manual scavenging and promote the adoption of dignified and safe sanitation solutions.

The Objective & Scope of this Report

The objective of this policy analysis is to assess the effectiveness of the NAMASTE policy initiative in achieving its objectives of improving sanitation and waste management without human touch. First, we will do a stakeholder mapping for this policy, to assess the effectiveness and impact of the policy on every stakeholder. We will use an analytical framework to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the policy, and identify potential areas for improvement.

Policy Description

Significance of NAMASTE

·    The scheme will help in providing sanitation workers a sustainable livelihood and enhancing their occupational safety through capacity building and improved access to safety gear and machines.

·     NAMASTE would also aim to provide access to alternative livelihoods support and entitlements to reduce the vulnerabilities of sanitation workers.

·   Enable them to access self-employment and skilled wage employment opportunities and break the intergenerational trend in sanitation work.

    NAMASTE would bring about a behavior change amongst citizens towards sanitation workers and enhance demand for safe sanitation services.

Objectives of NAMASTE

NAMASTE aims to achieve the following outcomes:

·       Zero fatalities in sanitation work in India

·       Skilled workers perform all sanitation work

·       No sanitation workers come in direct contact with human fecal matter

·       Sanitation workers are collectivized into SHGs and are empowered to run sanitation enterprises

·       All Sewer and Septic tank  sanitation workers (SSWs) have access to alternative livelihoods

·  Strengthened supervisory and monitoring systems at national, state, and ULB levels to ensure enforcement and monitoring of safe sanitation work

·       Increased awareness amongst sanitation services seekers (individuals and institutions) to seek services from registered and skilled sanitation workers

Implementation

Five hundred cities (converging with AMRUT cities) will be taken up under this phase of NAMASTE. The category of cities that will be eligible are given below:

1.     All Cities and Towns with a population of over one lakh with notified Municipalities, including Cantonment Boards (Civilian areas),

2.     All Capital Cities/Towns of States/ Union Territories (UTs), not covered in (I),

3.     Ten Cities from hill states, islands, and tourist destinations (not more than one from each State).

Benefits of NAMASTE to workers

Enumeration:

NAMASTE envisages identifying the Sewer/Septic Tank Workers (SSWs) with a focus on the informal workforce who are engaged in hazardous cleaning operations.

·       The database will enable MoSJE, National Safai Karamchari Finance Development Corporation (NSKFDC), and MoHUA (including DAY-NULM, SBM 2.0, and AMRUT) to reach to the SSWs and their families and provide them necessary support for collectivization, skill building and linking with social and financial benefits.

·       The Survey would be conducted by the City NAMASTE Managers and validated by the concerned ULB.  The survey would be held in digital mode in a pre-approved format.

Extending Insurance Scheme Benefits

For providing a safety net to identified SSWs and their families, they will be covered under the Ayushman Bharat- Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB-PMJAY).

·       The premium for AB-PMJAY for those identified SSWs families who are not covered earlier shall be borne under NAMASTE.

Livelihood Assistance

The Action Plan will promote mechanization and enterprise development. NSKFDC will provide funding support and subsidy to the sanitation workers, SHGs of SSWs, and private sanitation service organizations (PSSOs) to procure sanitation-related equipment and vehicles for the total mechanization of cleaning operations.

Saturation with Social Security Schemes’ benefits

The identified sanitation workers and their family members will be extended benefits of all the social security schemes being implemented by various departments in the area, like:

1.     Food Security (Ration)

2.     Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana

3.     Scholarship Schemes at pre-matric and post-matric levels

4.     Enrolment of school, school-going-age children

5.     Atal Pension Yojana

6.     Pension Schemes for older persons, widows, orphans, physically challenged, etc.

7.     Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana(PM-SBY)

8.     Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana (PM-JJBY)

9.     Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana

10.  Allotment of free land/plots

11.  Anganwari

12.  Coaching for entrance exams and service.

13.  Any other scheme

National NAMASTE Management Unit

National Safai Karamchari Financial Development Corporation (NSKFDC) would be implementing an agency for NAMASTE. The Scheme will operate as a joint initiative of MOSJE and MoHUA, with a dedicated national team. At the apex of the structure will be the National NAMASTE Monitoring Unit (NNMU) under the Managing Director, NSKFDC, which will report to the concerned Division head in the MoSJE, Government of India. A Technical Support Unit (TSU) consisting of a team of IT professionals, Experts in the implementation of similar programs, SHG expert, IEC expert, banking experts, etc., will be established to support the implementation of NAMASTE and facilitate coordination between MoSJE and MoHUA. Maximum monitoring and reporting will be on a real-time basis through a mobile app and a dedicated website.

State NAMASTE Management Unit

The State Govt. will decide on a suitable officer to be designated as State Namaste Director to head State Namaste Management Unit (SNMU). The officer may be from SBM, NULM, AMRUT, the ULB, or any other relevant Department of the State.

City NAMASTE Monitoring Unit

While constituting the Project Management Unit as an implementation body at the city level, the PMU would be organized in clusters of municipalities to work as City NAMASTE Monitoring Unit (CNMU) to coincide with the SBM clusters. The financing of the Action Plan shall be leveraged under the Schemes of MoHUA (SBM and DAY-NULM), particularly for the following interventions:

·       SHG formation of core sanitation workers

·       PPE procurement and distribution

·       Safety devices and equipment procurement (can also be financed through NSKFDC to ULBs)

·       Occupational safety training and skilling for SEPs & Duty Supervisors (can also be done through NSKFDC under SRMS)

·       Providing work assurance to sanitation workers interested in availing Sanitation Related Projects.

·       Interventions under AMRUT

Stakeholder Mapping

Government agencies: Government agencies, including the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and state-level agencies, are key stakeholders in the NAMASTE policy. They are responsible for policy formulation, implementation, and monitoring. Their interests include improving sanitation services, reducing the incidence of manual scavenging, and promoting sustainable waste management practices. They have a high level of influence on the policy and can shape its implementation and impact.

Sanitation workers: Sanitation workers, including manual scavengers, are key stakeholders in the NAMASTE policy. They are directly affected by the policy as it aims to reduce the need for manual scavenging and promote mechanized sanitation solutions. Their interests include improved working conditions, higher wages, and social security and rehabilitation. They have a medium level of influence on the policy, as they are the primary beneficiaries of its implementation.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs): NGOs working in the sanitation sector are key stakeholders in the NAMASTE policy. They are involved in advocacy, awareness-raising, and capacity-building activities related to sanitation services and manual scavenging. Their interests include promoting social justice, reducing discrimination and inequality, and improving sanitation services for marginalized communities. They have a medium level of influence on the policy, as they can shape public opinion and influence policy implementation.

Private sector: Private sector companies involved in the sanitation sector are also stakeholders in the NAMASTE policy. They provide equipment, technologies, and services related to sanitation and waste management. Their interests include expanding their business and increasing profits while promoting sustainable waste management practices. They have a high level of influence on the policy, as they can shape the market for sanitation services and technologies.

Community members: Community members, particularly those living in areas where manual scavenging is prevalent, are also stakeholders in the NAMASTE policy. Their interests include improved sanitation services, reduced incidence of manual scavenging, and social justice. They have a low level of influence on the policy, as they may lack the resources and capacity to influence policy implementation.

Academics and researchers: Academics and researchers working in the sanitation sector are also stakeholders in the NAMASTE policy. They provide evidence-based research and analysis to inform policy formulation and implementation. Their interests include improving sanitation services and reducing the incidence of manual scavenging through research and analysis. They have a low level of influence on the policy, as they may lack direct access to policymakers.

Analytical Framework

In this report, we will do a impact analysis and risk analysis of the NAMASTE policy. This ex-ante assessment will include an impact assessment and a risk assessment based on textual analysis of the policy. The analytical framework will include the below mentioned dimensions, based on which, the assessment will be done.

Effectiveness: We will evaluate the effectiveness of the policy in achieving its stated objectives, such as improving sanitation services and promoting the adoption of modern technologies, based on the data available in the open internet, such as news reports and parliamentary Q&As.

Efficiency: We will assess the efficiency of the policy in terms of the cost-effectiveness of the mechanized sanitation solutions, and the overall impact on public health. Particularly, we will investigate the implementation issues of such solutions in non-municipality supervised cleaning works such as domestic septic tank cleaning.

Equity: We will evaluate the equity implications of the policy, particularly in terms of reducing/preventing human entry and the role of current manual scavengers in the mechanised ecosystem.

Private Participation: The NAMASTE policy calls for private participation in the sanitation work primarily through supplying of robots and machines, but it also have provision for more direct participation, such as hirings labours. We will investigate the regulatory and monitoring problems of such activity in line with the objective of the policy.

Impact Analysis

Positive Impacts

Legal Impact: An amendment to the Act including these people employed in “hazardous cleaning” under the definition of “manual scavengers” is one of the applaudable achievements of this policy. It will have an impact on lakhs of people, performing the sewer cleaning task but are not recognised by the state.

Reduction of human touch of waste: One of the potential positive impacts of NAMASTE is the reduction of manual scavenging, which is a degrading and hazardous practice. By promoting the use of mechanized sanitation solutions, the policy aims to reduce the need for manual scavengers and improve the working conditions of sanitation workers. This can contribute to improvements in public health and hygiene, as well as social justice by reducing discrimination and inequality.

Sustainable Waste Management: Another potential positive impact of NAMASTE is the promotion of sustainable waste management practices. By promoting the use of technology and equipment for sanitation services, the policy can help to reduce environmental pollution and promote resource conservation. This can contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 6 on clean water and sanitation.

However, there are also potential negative impacts of NAMASTE that need to be considered in the ex-ante impact assessment.

Negative Impacts

Displacement from Traditional Livelihood: One such impact is the displacement of manual scavengers from their traditional livelihoods. While the policy aims to improve the working conditions of sanitation workers, it may also lead to job losses and economic insecurity for manual scavengers. The policy needs to include provisions for their rehabilitation and alternative livelihoods.

Cost of Implementation: Another potential negative impact of NAMASTE is the cost of implementing mechanized sanitation solutions. The policy requires significant investments in technology and equipment, which may be challenging for some municipalities and communities to afford. In the policy document, there is some lump-sump calculation of the cost involved in mechanisation and for some reasons, each of the cost heads calculated into a value of Rs. 100 per person. These calculations, does not consider the operation and maintenance cost of the mechanised solutions. Even if we take this Rs. 100 per person calculation, in the long run, this will need an additional tax or cess to recover these costs and most of the municipalities does not have any sanitation tax. It will be a major issue to tackle in the recent future, as these kinds of taxes have electoral and vote bank politics linked to it.

Stress on Technology, Ignores Caste and Regular Jobs: The stress of this policy is on “modernisation” and “technology”, without a concern for caste or the social status of those traditionally associated with sanitation work. Moreover, the document seeks to make provision for a class of “sewer entry professionals” selected “from traditionally employed sanitation workers”. “It is not necessary to employ all the SEPs on permanent government rolls,” the document explicitly states.

However, sanitation work has to be done on a permanent basis, and regular appointment will not only go some way towards easing the unemployment crisis, but also offer a measure of dignity to those engaged in it. Communities will gain from having a scientifically trained cadre of people engaged in the daily management of garbage. Sanitation workers across the country are fighting for regularisation for a long time. It was only after a 36-day struggle in 2016 that workers in Ahmedabad got the corporation to grant them regular jobs [1]. Nearly all sanitation work in India is done by workers from Dalits.

Equity in Rehabilitation Measures: Rehabilitation measures must aim at humanizing these peoples back. The 2013 Act had categorically recognized the need to undo historical injustice and rehabilitate them to a life of dignity. The spirit must carry forward to the implementation of this scheme. However, humanizing these peoples back must not mean imposing choices on them. The state must adorn the gloves of welfare, not the crown of paternalism. A respectful space of self-expression must be the goal.

Risk Analysis

Risk of Finding Alternate Livelihood: The scheme does not recognize the importance of alternative opportunities for these people it seeks to protect. These persons have grown into this work and barely know any other work. Any attempts at escaping the vicious trap at their own expense either remain futile as the stigma on them is indelible or end up further trapping them. Lump sum settlements by the state are not enough if the object is to eradicate the practice. Alternate opportunities given must be immediate and direct so that these people do not end up stuck in the garb of poverty during transition of jobs. The otherwise will disincentivize and discourage these workers to give up performing these dehumanizing tasks which nonetheless is a source of livelihood for them.

The policy aims to create an entrepreneurship support system for the sanitation workers and calls for new sanitation startups by newly skilled erstwhile manual scavengers. But the reality is, most of these people are not educated at all and many of them would not have a means and skills to start a business and continue it despite having a low interest capital loan supported by the ministry. Even, the very few sanitation startups that are operating today are not managed by manual scavengers, but by engineers and MBAs. So, the focus should be on creating jobs for them, only skill development and creating entrepreneurial mindset will not be enough in solving the problem.

Risk of Bureaucratic Maze: One of the focuses of the policy is to make different committees from national to local level. These committees will be populated by the bureaucrats and that can turmoil the implementation of the policy. As seen in the past, this kind of committees operate on a compliance-based nature and lack active involvement in the process, which can lead to procedural injustice to manual scavengers.

The constitution of these committees, does not ensure participation of the manual scavenging community in the decision-making process. This shows that eventual casteist mindset of the state. Without participation of the community itself, the state cannot ensure development of the people discriminated for hundreds of years.

Risk of Resistance to Mechanisation: Another potential risk is the resistance of manual scavengers to the adoption of mechanized sanitation solutions. Some manual scavengers may resist the policy as they fear losing their traditional livelihoods or may not trust new technologies [2]. To mitigate this risk, policymakers need to ensure that affected communities are involved in the policy's design and implementation and are provided with adequate training and support to transition to alternative livelihoods.

Licensing and Contracts of the Private Entities: The policy mostly focuses on private participation of sanitation work; but it lack a framework for governing the contracts of the private entities with the municipal corporations. It happened in past that the private contracts has hired manual scavengers with third party labour contractors. In these cases, the problem may arise that,  who exactly should be punished? Should it be the contractor, engaged by the private property owner or municipal corporation to clean the sewer or septic tank, who hires or sub-contracts the job to workers who end up losing their life? Or, should the law affix liability directly upon the property owner and municipal corporation itself? The answer based on first principles, would depend on whether we are talking about criminal or civil liability.

Under criminal law, especially the Indian Penal Code, it is difficult to secure the convictions, of either the property owners or the contractors engaged by the former, for the deaths of the workers unless the prosecution can establish coercion on part of either the property owner or the contractor. This is difficult to prove, especially if the worker is dead. The data shows that, despite hundreds of deaths, no convictions has been done after the implementation of the 2013 act [3].

Structural Issues, a Risk to Mechanised Cleaning: Most of the sewer lines in big cities of the country were constructed in the colonial era. There have not been any reconstruction or alternate sewer lines after the independence. Even, some of the cities do not have the blueprints of the sewer lines [4]. In these cases, blockages are very common and in most of this kind of blockages, the existing machines are a failure. So, the authorities have to rely on manual scavengers. So, without a proper plan to solve the structural  issues, manual scavenging cannot be eradicated.

In conclusion, an ex-ante risk assessment of NAMASTE is essential to identify potential risks and vulnerabilities and develop strategies to mitigate them proactively. Policymakers and implementers need to engage with different stakeholders, including affected communities, to understand their concerns and ensure that the policy's benefits outweigh its risks. By taking a proactive approach to risk management, the policy can be designed and implemented in a way that maximizes its positive impact and minimizes its negative impact on society.

Conclusion

It is only realistic to not think too positively regarding the translation of this scheme into reality. Past experience shows more and bigger failures than successes. Therefore, it is hard to think that a framework setup by the state through a scheme will do what a legislative enactment could not do with a statutory framework.

However, better mechanized alternatives available today show bright possibilities. These alternatives have worked well in many societies far from ours. A dignity approach by the state rather than a functional sanitation approach must always be welcomed. A central scheme explicitly recognizing the law’s inadequacy and setting up a framework of protection cannot be anything other than a steppingstone to a bigger success. The nation calls for proactive officers and individuals who can exhort each other for giving the long overdue dignity to lives of these marginalized people. This is the ringing bell at many closed doors!

 

References

1. Thomas, R. (n.d.). New manual scavenging bill stresses on technology, ignores caste. NewsClick. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://www.newsclick.in/New-Manual-Scavenging-Bill-Stresses-on-Technology-Ignores-Caste

2. Gurmat, S. (2017) Drain deaths: Cheap Labour, distrust of machines keep manual scavenging alive, ThePrint. Available at: https://theprint.in/theprint-analysis/drain-deaths-cheap-labour-distrust-of-machines-keep-manual-scavenging-alive/6686/ (Accessed: April 21, 2023).

3. Staff (no date) No reports of people being convicted for employing manual scavengers: Centre, The Wire. Available at: https://thewire.in/rights/manual-scavenging-ramdas-athawale-parliament-questions (Accessed: April 20, 2023).

4. Gurmat, S. (2017) Drain deaths: Cheap Labour, distrust of machines keep manual scavenging alive, ThePrint. Available at: https://theprint.in/theprint-analysis/drain-deaths-cheap-labour-distrust-of-machines-keep-manual-scavenging-alive/6686/ (Accessed: April 22, 2023).

5. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem. Available at: https://socialjustice.gov.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/Amendment_MS_rehabilation.pdf

(Accessed: April 15, 2023).

6. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (MS Act, 2013) (no date). Available at: https://nskfdc.nic.in/writereaddata/files/manualsca-act19913.pdf

(Accessed: April 24, 2023).