NOTOYUDANSanitation Issues

Location and Context

Overview of Sanitation issues in Notoyudan

Current Community Process

Ideal Community Process

StakeholdersThrough identifying the issues four key stakeholder emerged.1. Community2. Non Government Organization3. Government 4. Academic Field

Core Strategic IssuesThrough identifying the complex range of issues within the previous theme map, two core strategic issues arose. 1. Availability of and use of space2. Stakeholder Relations

These issues were identified within the community as catalyst for secondary issues.

Availability of and use of space

In regards to this strategic issue, the critical concerns and potential constraints as identified within the community are regarding:An extremely dense settlementA lack of communal waste management areasThe inability of the settlement to expand due to

river boarders. Concerns issues of proximity and smell

Stakeholder RelationsIn regards to this strategic issue, the critical concerns and potential constraints as identified within the community are regarding:Open and transparency channels of communication Inadequacies of previous academic relationsLack of ongoing involvement in the planning processLack of participatory and collaborative planning with

the Notoyudan communityFailure of stakeholders to fulfill their roles

Methods and Analysis

Qualitative MethodsTo gain an understanding of the communities issues in regards to sanitation in Notoyudan, qualitative methods were implemented given the nature of the subject matter. The following methods were chosen for the Notoyudan case given the sanitation issue: Informal discussion Informal interviewFormal presentations (Government agencies, Arkom,

Kalijawi)

Combating potential methodology problems

Given the sensitivity and ethical considerations of qualitative analysis the following procedures were implemented to minimize potential issues: Identifying the questions prior to entering the field

Cultural sensitivity, appropriate behavior and questions

Allowing the flow of conversation to be driven by the community members

Preventing a loss of meaning by conducting interviews in the communities first language

Extra care taken when transcribing

Ensuring equal power dynamics and a conversational approach so as not to make the community a subject, but an active participator. The ideal situation for Notoyudan was a situation where no one was the teacher and no one was the student. (Scheyvens, 2003)

Informal discussion and interview

Prior to arriving in Notoyudan, an initial and flexible methodology acted as a guideline for research. In response to the workshops the following process was implemented:1. The decision to utilize informal interviews and discussion

based on the need to facilitate open and equal communication

2. Developed a set of key questions to act as a guideline to keep conversation on track

3. Enacted open discussion and where necessary referred to guiding questions

4. Establish follow up questions to clarify and ensure correct interpretation

Formal PresentationsFormal presentations from organizations and the government were used as a tool to clarify concerns and gain greater perspective on key issues. This tool is critical in regards to:Gaining a complete picture of the case and its

associated issuesUnderstanding the power relations between

stakeholdersUnderstanding the perspectives on the existing

state of stakeholder relations

Analysis ToolsTo gain an understanding of the communities issues in regards to sanitation in Notoyudan, qualitative analysis tools to allow for breakdown of key issues and information from community interviews. The most effective analysis tools were identified as:Stakeholder analysis SWOT analysis

Stakeholder Analysis

SWOT Analysis Willingness of community

leaders Openness to help leaders of

the community Resilience and adaptability Existing draining system

Capacity of leaders to drive change

Environmental and health benefits if waste was to be treated

Increased awareness of health and sanitation issues

Place-based and appropriate technology that works for the communication

Government requirements surrounding proposals of sanitation upgrades

Sense of security in government action

Sense of security surrounding funding

Very dense Lack of knowledge around

sanitation benefits Not all community members

‘are on board’ Existing belief that current

system is adequate – no blockages

Drainage system – solid waste and water not separated

Currently no treatment of raw sewerage

Strengths Weaknesses

Opportunities Threats

Ethics of Data CollectionEthics information and forms were distributed to

all respondents and participants.The forms were used to inform the respondents

that their participation was voluntary and have the right to veto any information.

Ethics forms were distributed prior to the interview where possible, and if not, were distributed immediately after.

Dimensions of the issues

Major Dimensions From our issues identification and analysis tools, a range of inter connected dimensions of influence were identified. These dimensions scale across multiple issues and are highly responsive to each other.The dimensions with the greatest impact within Notoyudan were identified as:Environmental (river condition and influences on health)Technology (determining a suitable solution with the

identified constraints)Governance (communication, stakeholder relations,

imbalance of power)

Environmental DimensionsBuilt Environment: Housing density, proximity and condition Existing infrastructure and constraints on potential infrastructure Condition of existing communal and household waste facilitiesNatural Environment: Slope of the land utilized for effective drainage Constraints of the river boundary River health is derogated by poor waste management and

treatmentBoth aspects of the environmental dimension has significant impacts on the outcomes for human health

Technological DimensionsThe technological dimensions influencing Notoyudan is the manner in which outcomes fit within and respond to strategic issues of space and stakeholder relations.Having suitable sanitation technology that can be

implemented within the built environment dimensions Implementation of the technology will occur at a significant

monetary cost, likely to have an impact on stakeholder relationships depending on funding source

Need for appropriate and manageable technology as responsibility will be given to the community for maintenance and operation

The technology must have durability

Governance DimensionsAn underlying theme throughout all investigations has been that of a connection to the issue of governance dimensions. These include:A lack of clarity on defining good sanitationA lack of communication, co-ordination and

collaboration between the community, government departments and NGO’s

Issues of flexibility regarding differences in conditions within kampung

Top down approaches

Recommendations

Key FindingsBased on the analysis tools undertaken within the communities the following findings have formed the basis of the recommendations. 1. The analysis and identification of the issues within

Notoyudan is highly community driven, and should remain as such.

2. Much of the planning power as a result flexibility is held by the City government. The community would desire the continuation of the facilitation role of the NGO, however seeks a more participatory approach by the government

3. The government currently contracts out all development with various issues of contractor responsibility and failed outcomes. The community seeks to ensure quality and control, and community based labour.

4. Regardless of preferences, the responsibility for evaluation and management of development falls to community. The community seeks a sense of ownership. Additionally, there is need for increased government evaluation and follow up.

Recommendations of key strategic issues

Option 1: Adapt installation to space

Option 2. Make space for installation Make a communal large lavatory by

buying more land and removing housing

Pro• no land needs to be

resume• more community

support

Pro• Government

willing to fund this type

Con• Might not be

in government standard

• Might need self funding

• Self mapping location

Con• Some people

will lose their land

Use small treatment technology with current infrastructure

(Filtration or Bio Septic)

Poor quality communal toilets by river Bio-Septic

Filtration system

Effective Project Cycle

Planning Action Pyramid

CAPACITY BUILDING, CRITICAL THOUGHT AND EMPOWERMENT

ACTION‘barriers & solutions’

IMPLEMTENTATION‘strong community involvement’

APPLICATION

EVALUATION & ONGOING

MANAGEMENT

Thank you for welcoming us into your community. It has been an honor to learn

with you.