Successful Sanitation: Investigating Gender Equality in India's National Sanitation Programming

For decades governments and organisations working in WASH have been creating gender inclusive guidelines, policies and best practice documents. Yet gender equality still does not always manifest on the ground. This research seeks to addresses why there is often such a large disconnect.

The research looks specifically at India, a country currently undergoing a WASH revolution, with national programs including the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM). The SBM has national-government level gender guidance for both urban and rural sanitation. The most current international guidance from the international community including from WaterAid and UNICEF, is also widely available. Yet there is little evidence of their widespread application in practice.

A series of 21 interviews and 2 small focus groups were carried out in summer 2022 to investigate this discrepancy. The research was completed in India, with respondents including government staff, activists and WASH practitioners

The starkest finding is the discrepancy between different stakeholders’ perception of progress. Typically activists and practitioners were quick to criticize governmental uptake of gendered measures, stating lack of targeted funding, missing accountability measures and lack of male-allies as drivers of stagnated progress. This could be compared with some government staff who were much more positive about uptake.

One specific area in this discourse was the lack of attention to challenges for 3rd gender communities (who are legally recognised by the Indian Supreme Court). These communities have some specific differentiated needs and access requirements which are not typically considered in gendered planning. Although all respondents considered it important to acknowledge these communities, few could identify specific work to address their needs.

India has progressive laws that intend to protect, yet when it comes to gender inclusion, documentation often excludes the voices of these communities, ignores the needs of some in practice, and fails to make it off the shelf into reality.