Rural Sanitation


The relationship between health and sanitation is well established. According to surveys carried out by the OPP-RTI in Al-Fateh Colony, Karachi, infant mortality fell from 127 in 1983 to 38 in 1992. Of course, there were other reasons apart from sanitation for this change. Again, in Faisalabad, where settlements had acquired sanitation through the work of the Anjuman Samaji Behbood (ASB), doctors interviewed said that there had been a substantial fall in environmental related diseases and that as a result they had lost a substantial amount of their incomes (see The Work of the Anjuman Samaji Behbood and the Larger Faisalabad Context: Salim Aleemuddin et al, International Institute for Environment and Development, UK, 2000). Studies have also revealed that solving sanitation problems has created friendlier public spaces, better community relations and where communities have been involved, a more equal relationship between government agencies and communities. As a result, communities have gone on to do other things (see Working With Communities: Arif Hasan, City Press Karachi, 2001).


  • An increasing number of rural settlements are requiring urban characteristics. Rural sanitation programmes need to adjust to this reality.
  • The Component Sharing Model offers a way out of complex procedures required for the cost sharing model. It also clearly defines the area of responsibility of the household, the lane and the neighbourhood and ensures their continued involvement in the O&M of the system at the micro level.
  • Funds with local government are limited. The Component Sharing Model guarantees a wider spread and reduces the responsibilities of financially and human resources starved UC and tehsil councils.
  • The LPP process strengthens the present local government system and promotes skills within the community.


  • There should be only one rural development policy and it should be based on the Component Sharing Model. Conflicting policies confuse communities and make development difficult if not impossible.
  • At the operational level, the financial input of the community ultimately determines its continued involvement in the O&M of water and sanitation schemes. Smaller communities are more cohesive and responsive. Therefore, there is a need for decentralization in terms of scale and for miniaturization of technology.
  • The role of donors should be to fund external development only and to support NGOs involved in the Component Sharing Model.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

site design by iMedia
Mobile Menu
Responsive Menu Image Responsive Menu Clicked Image