Technical Note: Is there a role for external technical support in the Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach?

Papafilippou, Nikolaos; Templeton, Michael R.; Ali, Mansoor

doi:10.3828/idpr.2011.5

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mehta and Movik, 2011;Pickering et al, 2015). On the other hand, this is often achieved by means of low quality and non-durable sanitation facilities (Papafilippou et al, 2011;Pickering et al, 2015;Crocker et al, 2016;Novotn y et al, 2017b). There are concerns that CLTS has a limited effect on the health of targeted communities particularly as, due to the construction of inadequate latrines, the rise in sanitation coverage and elimination of OD does not guarantee lower disease transmission and improved health (Galvin, 2015;Pickering et al, 2015).…”

Section: The Clts Approach and Debates So Farmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous literature suggests that it is not therefore uncommon to provide aid during CLTS implementation in practice (Sigler et al, 2015). In this context, Galvin (2015) or Papafilippou et al (2011) invokes a pragmatic strategy of hybrid approaches strongly reflecting local context (e.g. lack of knowledge or infrastructural resources) even if it breaches the basic CLTS principle of not receiving external support.…”

Section: The Clts Approach and Debates So Farmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Less analytical literature has been published about how the implementation of CLTS is evaluated by the practitioners responsible for its implementation at a grassroots level. We managed to identify just two such studies; one focused specifically on the role of external technical support (Papafilippou et al, 2011) and the other on the behavior-change techniques used in CLTS (Sigler et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comprehending practitioners’ assessments of community-led total sanitation

Ficek

Novotný

2018

Health Promotion International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Around 2.3 billion people in developing countries still lack access to improved sanitation facilities and almost one billion practice open defecation (OD). The Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) has recently become a particularly popular approach used in more than 60 countries. CLTS is a behavior-change approach that aims to ignite community action and make OD socially unacceptable without providing any external financial or material support to individual households. CLTS is sometimes perceived as a revolutionary approach that has proven to be highly cost-effective in abolishing OD. However, it has been criticized for its use of unethical practices and questioned with respect to the sustainability of its outcomes and the limited health benefits it can generate. Based on semi-structured interviews with development workers experienced in the implementation of CLTS in 14 different countries, this paper seeks to examine practical views on the issues surrounding this approach. We found that despite acknowledging some of the controversies and the possibly limited sustainability of results, CLTS is generally considered an effective and satisfactory tool for improving sanitation conditions. Practitioners first of all accentuate the normative importance of the elimination of OD attained through CLTS without weighting on (the absence of) evidence on the longer term effects or impacts on health. However, a need for various modifications of CLTS according to local social and natural environments was strongly expressed, including changes that go against the core principles of CLTS like no subsidies and no technical assistance principles.

show abstract

Section: The Clts Approach and Debates So Farmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Clts Approach and Debates So Farmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comprehending practitioners’ assessments of community-led total sanitation

Ficek

Novotný

2018

Health Promotion International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is unnecessarily expensive and can even constitute a health hazard. All these challenges reinforce the doubts (Papafilippou, Templeton et al 2011) regarding the principle of not giving technical advice to communities in advance and limiting it to showing low-cost latrine designs from other villages, as technical problems "can usually be tackled as they arise" (Kar, Chambers 2008, p.83). This applies only to low-cost latrines, but many households have been observed to start directly with more expensive designs, where there is less room for creativity and where it is difficult to tackle technical problems afterwards.…”

Section: Findings About the Policy Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, they could collapse and require moving up the ladder too early, contaminate the groundwater or be ill suited to the specific needs of women, children or disabled people. This has led different practitioners to advocate for a revision of the role of technical advice in CLTS (Papafilippou, Templeton et al 2011). …”

Section: Challenges and Critiquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathways to Sustainability in Community-Led Total Sanitation. Experiences from Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh

González¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) is a an approach where facilitation -using participatory methods-enables communities to analyse their sanitation conditions and the risks of open defecation and thus triggers a desire in the community to take their own action and become open defecation free (ODF). CLTS has proved to work better than past approaches and has quickly expanded all over the world. In India, where more than half of the world's open defecators concentrate, CLTS faces difficulties, primarily due to some incompatibilities with the national sanitation campaign, but there are several areas where it has been introduced with certain success. Apart from that, there are evidences of communities reverting to open defecation -in India and elsewhere-which raises important questions about the sustainability of the outcomes of CLTS.Trying to shed some light on these issues, the present thesis aims at exploring the experiences of introduction of CLTS in Madhya Pradesh (MP) and Himachal Pradesh (HP), looking both at the policy process that shaped the sanitation intervention and at how and to what extent they contributed to sustainable sanitation. I use an analytical framework inspired in the Pathways Approach, where sustainability is seen from a dynamic and normative point of view -maintained ODF with increased social justice-and where the policy processes around sustainability, including policy narratives, agents and interests, are very relevant. I take three case studies for the analysis: Khandwa district (MP), Mandi district (HP) and Budni block (MP). The methodology is primarily qualitative and is based on interviews at all administrative levels and on intensive field research, including short visits to many Gram Panchayats (GP) and an in-depth study in a selected GP in each case study area.Evidences are diverse in each area. In Khandwa district CLTS was introduced in 2007. State level pressure to obtain sanitation awards and local vested interests resulted however in a mixed approach, using CLTS triggering tools but with supply-led subsidised latrine construction. Initial progress was uneven and there was reversion to open defecation later on. Some of the main causes were low appropriation, poor construction quality and lack of priority after the sanitation awards and post transfers of champions. In Mandi district, with an enabling state sanitation policy and supported by a local NGO, motivated district authorities started in late 2006 a sanitation campaign inspired in CLTS principles, but using community theatre and door to door visits instead of CLTS triggering. Latrine use increased sharply and has maintained, changing the social perception of sanitation. In Budni block, a CLTS champion became block CEO. His experience and the support of UNICEF helped counter conflicting interest and start a campaign coherent with CLTS in late 2010. GPs were triggered and monitoring committees created in order to make their GPs ODF. Still in the early stages, the campaign was observed to contribute to collective b...

show abstract