4th Brunel International LecturePoverty Alleviation – the role of the Engineer

David Singleton MEngSc CEng FICE

“

“ Brunel International Lecture 2002-2003

1 Poverty Alleviation

1 Abstract

1 Acknowledgement

2 Introduction

2 The Origins of Poverty

3 Poverty Alleviation Strategies

4 Characteristics of Sound Engineering Solutions to Poverty Alleviation

5 Case Studies

5 South African Roundabout HIV/AIDS Initiative

6 Micro-finance in Bangladesh

8 BP Solar Energy Project, Philippines

10 Communal Sanitation, Myanmar

12 Conclusions

13 References

14 Biography

Cre

ati

ve e

ng

ineeri

ng

so

luti

on

s to

all

evia

te p

overt

y c

an

be

ach

ieved

wh

en

th

e e

ng

ineeri

ng

pro

fess

ion

act

s p

roact

ively

to m

eet

chall

en

ges

po

sed

by t

he d

evelo

pin

g w

orl

d.

David

Sin

gle

ton

, M

En

gSc

CEn

g F

ICE,

Ch

air

man

, A

ust

rala

sia D

ivis

ion

, A

rup

AbstractPoverty alleviation in the developing world will invariably involve acontribution from professional engineers. However, such initiatives are toooften unsustainable. The sustained alleviation of poverty through theimplementation of infrastructure solutions requires attention to theunderlying social, economic and political influences. The engineeringprofession should not accept a role of supporting poor policy with ‘good’engineering.

The role of the engineer is important – but the engineer must work incollaboration with other professionals if sustainable poverty alleviation isto occur. Engineering solutions to poverty situations must take account of

the socio-political and economic framework that they face, if they are to achieve medium to long-term sustainability. Creative engineering solutions to alleviate poverty can be achieved whenthe engineering profession acts proactively to meet the challenges posed by the developing world.

AcknowledgementNicole Hahn of Arup undertook the research for this paper. Her enthusiasm and personalcommitment for this topic is unbounded and exemplifies the commitment of many youngengineering professionals to make a difference. I am grateful for her contribution and support.

David Singleton MEngSc CEng FICEChairmanAustralasia DivisionArup

Poverty Alleviation - the role of the Engineer

1

David Singleton

IntroductionThe statistics on world poverty are frightening. Close tohalf of the world’s six billion people live on less thanUS$2 a day. One percent of the world’s population hasan income equal to that of the entire bottom 57%(World Bank, 2000c). Poverty, however, is not only aboutlack of wealth in monetary terms; it also implies the“denial of various choices and opportunities basic tohuman development. These include the ability to lead along, creative and healthy life, to acquire knowledge, tohave freedom, dignity, self-respect and respect for others,and to have access to the resources needed for a decentstandard of living” (UNDP 2002).

Community infrastructure is a key element in alleviatingpoverty – thus engineers have an essential role to play.Without ready access to clean water and sanitation,productivity is severely reduced through illness and timespent in water collection. Without roads, the poor areunable to sell their goods at market. Basic infrastructureis not a luxury that can wait for better economic times,but a precondition for creating them. The provision ofbasic infrastructure is an urgent and on-goingrequirement.

The Economist “observed over the past 50 years richnations have given US$1 trillion in aid to poor ones. Thisstupendous sum has failed spectacularly to improve thelot of its intended beneficiaries. Poor countries thatreceive lots of aid do no better, on average, than thosethat receive very little” (The Economist, 1999). Poverty isnot being ignored; however, the effectiveness of povertyalleviation strategies needs to be improved if worldpoverty alleviation is to be achieved.

The Origins of PovertyIn order that solutions to poverty may be implemented,the origins of poverty must be clearly understood. Thebasic causes of poverty and barriers to humandevelopment are:

� Lack of access to safe water and sanitation

� Lack of facilities for adequate health care

� Lack of access to educational opportunities

� Shortage of adequate nutrition

� Lack of adequately paid employment

� Inadequate or expensive transport facilities

� Limited or expensive power supplies

In general, poverty has different causes in urban andrural areas; many of these influences are not mutuallyexclusive. In urban areas, the predominant causes ofpoverty are likely to be:

� Lack of adequate income or no income, due tounderemployment or unemployment

� Inadequate housing, sanitation and water supply

� Limited opportunities for education

� Inadequate or expensive transport facilities

Poor health and lack of access to education tend tominimise skills and, therefore, compound the problems ofun- or underemployment and, therefore, reduction ofincome-earning capacity.

In rural areas, the predominant causes of poverty arelikely to be:

� Lack of access to a range of facilities: healthcare,education

� Inadequate shelter, sanitation and water supply

� Lack of access to markets for agricultural products

� Limited opportunity to earn income

� Inadequate or expensive transport facilities

� Lack of access to power and telecommunicationsfacilities

Poverty in rural areas tends to be more widespread andmore intense than in urban areas; this is because:

� Employment opportunities are more limited

� Access to a range of key facilities is significantlyreduced

� Many households are headed by women – often dueto abandonment of the family by the males, withcommensurate reduction in income

2

Figure 1 : Open drain (WEDC Jonathan Rouse)

3

Poverty Alleviation - the role of the Engineer

� Sanitation and water supply deficiencies are moreintense, leading to ill-health

The trend in developing countries worldwide - wherebymale family members gravitate to urban areas in searchof employment - often reduces the rural family’s abilityto survive in a subsistence economy.

Poverty Alleviation StrategiesUnderstanding the potential role for engineers in povertyalleviation is informed by past and current projects.Historically, poverty alleviation strategies have focussedon direct intervention to provide facilities that arelacking. Investments by the international lendingagencies over the past two to three decades haveconcentrated on solutions to deficiencies in infrastructurethat are usually expensive, often with apparently limitedthought to ongoing operation and maintenance. Localobservers in a number of recipient countries and otherstakeholders have commented on inadequacies in theimplemented projects and programs:

� Lack of planning for on-going operation andmaintenance of the facilities

� Limited attention to the development of a sense ofownership by the local community

� Political interference and intervention

� Allocation of funds to countries without a povertyalleviation strategy of their own

� Corruption, leading to ineffectiveness of investment

At the recent Johannesburg Sustainability Summit, boththe United Nations and the World Bank called foralleviation strategies involving "no more hardware",pointing out that major investments over the last 20-30years in water infrastructure schemes had often failed tobenefit the people at whom they were aimed. This isbecause the majority of facilities involving technologyare generally abandoned within two years, as revenuestreams are insufficient to pay for repairs andmaintenance and because of the lack of local skills to

carry out repairs. Corruption is also often a barrier. Inagreeing to a target to halve the number of peoplewithout sanitation globally by 2020, the Summit notedthat the emphasis should be on smaller scale solutionssuited to local capabilities, understanding and skills. Therole of engineers in delivering infrastructure schemesneeds to change significantly.

Over the last 20-30 years, experience with theimplementation of large-scale infrastructureimprovement projects has led to an improvedunderstanding of the conditions that are necessary forsustainable reduction in poverty levels:

� The local community must be empowered by thedecision-making process

� The local community must be involved in on-goingoperation and maintenance

� National and regional governments must also beinvolved in the project

� Project selection must favour those projects that leadto economic growth

� Strength of the market economy is a prerequisite toeconomic growth

� Close involvement of the local community willimprove the chances of project success; the projectneeds to be ‘owned’

Poverty alleviation requires interventions that involveconsiderable social and cultural change. Poverty hasmany aspects and solutions require more than atechnical or engineering basis. Provision of infrastructurealone will not alleviate poverty, without access beingprovided to that infrastructure. We can ask the followingquestions: What good is a road, if there is no means oftransport? What good is a latrine, if it is not being used?What good is a water supply system, if it is in disrepair?

In developing strategies for the alleviation of poverty, wemust take account of and address these wider issues.

Figure 2 : Grameen Bank micro-credit weekly meeting with the bankmanager (Building and Social Housing Foundation)

Figure 3 : Peri-urban drainage (WEDC Andrew Cotton)

4

Characteristics of SoundEngineering Solutions to PovertyAlleviationEngineering solutions are integral to the mitigation ofpoverty; however, engineering is not the sole contributorto successful poverty alleviation programs. Sustainedalleviation of poverty also entails attention to social,economic and political influences.

Sustainable engineering will be achieved when theengineering solutions adopted take into account theiruse of natural resources; optimum solutions will have apositive or neutral impact on natural resourceconsumption. Unsound engineering solutions, bycomparison, may leave the environment depleted andsociety poorer over time.

Life-cycle engineering takes into account theoperational and maintenance cost of the engineeringsolutions proposed, such that the completed projectshave effective and affordable operational andmaintenance regimes.

Empowered engineering will take into account thecapabilities of the local community, in particular itsengineering and technical professions. Where possible,the solutions developed will involve local professionaland technical staff and will establish an on-goingengineering and operational resource.

Appropriate engineering will consider various optionsthat meet the engineering needs of the project and mayadopt labour-based construction techniques. Labour-based construction1 has been shown to comparefavourably with plant-based construction. In addition, itfacilitates knowledge transfer, creates jobs, encouragesprivate enterprise, creates ownership and may reducecost.

The case studies that follow illustrate the application ofengineering to poverty mitigation programs and identifythe associated social, economic and political actions thathave been put in place. Each case illustratescharacteristics of sound and appropriate engineering.

1 Labour-based construction differs significantly from labour-intensiveconstruction. Labour-intensive construction is basically the substitutionof men for machines eg the construction of a concrete framed buildingfor which the concrete is mixed by hand, without the use of a mixer.Labour-based construction, however, aims to change the technologyemployed in the construction process so as to make it appropriate formanual labour eg eliminating the concrete frame and building thestructure using load-bearing masonry. (Croswell 1993)

South African RoundaboutHIV/Aids Initiative

Project BackgroundThe AIDS epidemic is tearing apart the social andeconomic fabric of many African nations. 70% of theworld’s AIDS infected adults and 80% of infectedchildren live in Sub-Saharan Africa. There are 11 millionchild AIDs orphans and grandparents are forced toassume the responsibility for childrearing (AVERT 2002).Affected families lose income-earning capacity, boththrough the unavailability of the income earner and thetime and cost incurred in nursing the infected. Theproblem compounds itself: poverty is a key factor leadingto the behaviour that exposes people to risk of HIVinfections and the resulting HIV compounds the poverty.

Project DetailsThe scheme concept is simple: a child’s playgroundroundabout is bolted on top of an existing borehole. Theenergy of the children at play is harnessed to pumpdrinking water into an overhead storage tank. Thesetanks are screened with billboards promoting HIV/AIDSawareness to the children and communities. A communaltap is located at ground level.

The roundabouts/pumps cost US$5,000 each and arebased on standard windmill equipment located belowground (BASD & UNDP 2002a). The above groundequipment includes a tank and galvanised sheet asadvertising boards, available at any farm supply store.Project construction and replication is assisted by the useof standard and easily procurable materials.

Play power has advantages over conventional energysources. It is clean, renewable and robust and theborehole recovers naturally during the night. There is norisk of pumping the hole dry or engine burnout if the

pump is accidentally left on overnight.

At least 50% of the advertising space on the billboardsis used to promote health-related information, inparticular with regards to HIV and AIDS. This is aneffective advertising medium in the absence ofconventional first world media such as newspapers,magazines, television and the Internet. Revenue fromcommercial advertisers in the remaining space willprovide a regular flow of income for the manufacture ofnew roundabouts and to cover maintenance costs.

Women and young girls benefit from the saving of timeand energy previously spent fetching water for dailywater needs from deep wells at long distances and areplaced at less risk. In addition, they benefit from theHIV/AIDS awareness campaign.

Progress ReportMore than 300 roundabout pumps have been installed inSouth Africa, each serving a community of over 2,500people. Various improvements to the standard of livinghave been noted, including the ready availability of cleandrinking water that has resulted in the reduction ofwater-borne diseases such as cholera and thedevelopment of thriving vegetable farms that providefresh produce for schools and for sale at market.

Case Study

5

Figure 4 : South Africa (courtesy of Arup)

Figure 5 : The Playpump (courtesy Roundabout Outdoor)

Figure 6 : Children at work (courtesy Roundabout Outdoor)

6

Micro-finance in Bangladesh

Project BackgroundBangladesh is one of the poorest, most denselypopulated and least developed nations in the world.With a population in excess of 125 million, it is theeighth most populous country in the world. Per capitaincome is estimated to be around US$280 (BSHF 2002).Situated in a low-lying delta where four major riversystems come together, the country is blessed withhighly fertile soil, but also suffers regular and severeflooding.

Shelter is one of the most basic requirements, but manyBangladeshis cannot afford the cost of housing capableof withstanding the monsoon and winter periods.

Typical houses are made of jute sticks placed side-by-sideand cost between US$25 and US$30. Such houses tendto collapse in moderately severe weather. Even housesconstructed with bamboo walls and hay/thatch roofing,at a significantly higher cost, are not very durable. As aresult, almost ever year, people replace or repair the roofof their house at a cost of up to US$40 per year. This costis increasing as the price of bamboo and hay isconstantly increasing. This on-going expenditure is aheavy burden on the poor. If they do not have access tocash, people are forced to borrow money frommoneylenders at very high rates (10% per month) (BSHF 2002).

This situation could be avoided if more durable sheltercould be constructed; this in turn is dependent on theavailability of finance.

Project DetailsThe Grameen Bank, the largest rural credit institution inBangladesh, with 2.4 million borrowers, 95% of whomare female, was established in 1976. The bank recognisesthat it is the lack of access to collateral, rather than aninability to make loan payments, that perpetuatespoverty.

Regular micro-enterprise loans are typically disbursed toindividuals for one year and are paid back in weeklyinstallments at 2% of the loan amount, which isnormally no more than $20 for the first loan. Toparticipate in the loan program, a member must gatherfive people with similar economic and socialbackgrounds who will agree to apply for, and signtogether on, loans (a group). A cluster of groups(between two and 10) constitutes a centre that ispresided over by two officials (BSHF 2002). Theborrower's group and centre members must agree tostand behind the loan for the individual member. Thecollateral system, based on peer support, means thatfamilies help eachother out with payment to ensure thatall repayments are made on time.

Grameen Bank operates as a specialized bank for thepoor, generating income from its investments; it is notreliant on donor funding. When the bank was formallyincorporated in 1983, the original rural membersprovided 40% of the initial capital and the Bangladeshgovernment contributed the rest. The bank has sincebecome largely self-sufficient, with the government nowholding less than 10% of the equity.

Housing Loans In 1984, the bank started to lend moneyfor housing loans and to date 450,000 houses have beenbuilt using these loans. An average of 7,000 to 8,000new loans are made every month.

Figure 7 : Bangladesh (courtesy of Arup)

Figure 8 : Jute house : typical house before the Grameen Program(Building and Social Housing Foundation)

Although exceptions are made for the poorest of poor indire need of shelter, relatively strict rules govern theseloans. To qualify for a housing loan, a member must fulfilthe following:

� be an existing bank borrower, with a 100% repaymentrecord and have completely repaid their first two loansfrom income generating activities;

� prove that they have an adequate income and haveacquired savings;

� have a history of regularly attending weekly meetings;

� provide legal documentation of land ownership wherethe house will be built. If the member does not ownland, he/she is encouraged to use the loan towardsland purchase; and,

� must submit a proposal on the type of house plannedand devise a repayment schedule.

The House Design The Grameen Bank has developedhouse designs for borrowers. The houses, althoughvarying in appearance, have the same basic structuralcomponents. There are four reinforced concrete pillarson brick foundations at the corners of the house and sixintermediary bamboo posts, with bamboo tie beams,wooden rafters and purlins supporting corrugated ironroofing sheets. This design provides stability in flood andstrong monsoon winds and protection from rain.

Although the borrower is responsible for the constructionof the house, the bank ensures that it meets basic healthand safety requirements and achieves minimumGrameen standards. Since mid-1998, the bank hasrequired members to install a sanitary latrine with eachhouse.

Progress ReportThe bank is operating efficiently and is widely consideredinnovative, progressive and corruption free. The rate ofrepayment for all loans is 98%, and for housing loans itis close to 100%, compared to a 25-30% for otherbanks. Loans are currently available at 8% interest,which compares very favorably with the 20% interestcharged for regular or short-term loans from other banks(BSHF 2002). The bank provides employment for 12,600people.

To date, the Grameen Bank Housing Program hasassisted hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshi familiesto break out of the downward spiral of poverty. A sturdy,well-built house is a symbol of social status and soborrowers experience an improvement in their dignityand standing within the community.

The larger houses are providing improved environmentsfor work and study, and hence they have directlycontributed to higher income generation. It is estimatedthat 95% of borrowers' children attend school, wellabove the nationwide average. By demandingstandardised construction practices, such as the use ofcement pillars and installation of sanitary latrines,Grameen Bank assists in improving the health and safetyof borrowers. In one survey, the general health of thosewith the new Grameen houses compared well with thosein pre-existing or more traditional houses. Fever,influenza, and typhoid (among other diseases) weredown by almost 50% (BSHF 2002). Micro-creditprograms based on the Grameen experience have beenestablished in 56 other countries.

7

Case Study

Figure 9 : House after the Grameen Program(Building and Social Housing Foundation)

BP Solar Energy Project,Philippines

Project BackgroundThe Philippine archipelago is made up of around 7,100islands, 1,000 of which are inhabited. Less than one-halfexceed 2.5 sq km in area. Many of the villages(barangays) dotted over the country are remote anddifficult to access by both land and sea. For manyvillages, connection to a national power grid is notfeasible. Most district hospitals and regional health unitshave little or no electricity. Lack of lighting in communityhalls limits opportunities for further education andinvolvement in community affairs. Many villages rely onshallow wells or surface springs for their water, hencewater-borne disease is endemic. Latrines are unsanitary,if in existence at all.

Solar power can provide a highly effective, low-cost andenvironmentally friendly alternative to extending powerlines and/or transporting generator fuel to these areas.

Project DetailsAfter the success of a solar power project completed inSri Lanka in 1993/94, BP Solar Australia approached thePhilippine government with a concept for large-scaleimplementation of solar power across rural communities.The idea was well accepted by the Philippinegovernment. The initial objective of the project was toinstall about 1,000 stand-alone solar poweredequipment packages in 400 villages in remote areas ofMindanao and Visayas provinces. At its time, this was the

largest solar contract in the world at a total project costof US$27 million.

Simplicity in funding arrangements for this project wasfundamental to its success. Funding was provided by asingle loan recipient, the Department of Interior andLocal Government (DILG), by way of a grant of 33% fromthe Australian government plus a soft loan from theAustralian government for the remaining 67%.

Community Mobilisation Phase Communityinvolvement throughout the entire duration of a projectis essential to project success. Involvement fosters asense of ownership and responsibility. The MSIP projectwas implemented with help of two full-time BP stafffrom Australia. The other 500 staff involved in the projectwere Philippino, selected from the communities in whichthey were to work to enable communication in localdialects.

Prior to project finalisation, officials used communityassemblies to introduce the project, discuss the benefitsboth to the individual and to the entire community andto explain the basics of solar electricity.

If the community, and in particular the mayor, wereinterested, agreements were made to proceed. Site andsocial surveys were used to determine the developmentneeds of each individual community and to identify themeans by which solar energy could be best used as theenabling technology to meet these needs. BP also spenttime with each barangay exploring revenue-generatingactivities that would enable them to pay for the servicesprovided by the solar-powered systems.

Provision of Systems Solar systems were supplied andinstalled in the specified areas. The logistics werechallenging, due to the difficulty in getting constructionmaterials, equipment and systems into the communities.As this was a ‘tied-aid’ project funded by the Australiangovernment, BP Australia was obliged to source aminimum of 87% of components from Australia.However, some construction items, videos and televisionswere sourced locally/nationally (BASD & UNDP 2002b).

Training and Capacity Building In each barangay, twopeople were elected to form the Barangay TechnicalTeam (BTT). The BTT was trained on simple systemmaintenance: cleaning the modules, topping up thebattery electrolyte etc. Municipal engineers andoperatives were trained on the more technical repairsand maintenance of the system’s components. Spareparts were distributed to the municipality in order thatthe communities could have easy access to replacementparts. High-level training was given to the universities,and university staff and students were able to fullydismantle, repair and reassemble the components. After

8

Figure 10 : The Philippines (courtesy of Arup)

9

Case Study

the commissioning and handover of each system, BPSolar carried out three separate follow-up visits with thegroups that had been formed.

Over 2,000 people have been trained (including 'trainingof trainers') on both the governance of the project (howto, organise meetings, accounting and reporting; how tocollect fees/local revenues for sustainingservices/maintenance, etc) as well as on the technicalaspects (maintenance, including local repair andreplacement of parts). Experience has clearly shown thatwithout such training, systems fall into disuse anddisrepair and communities are then left disillusioned.

Progress ReportMSIP commenced in November 1997 and was completedin May 2001. In total 1,145 packaged solar systems wereinstalled in 11 provinces, 53 municipalities and 435barangays. The quality of life for over 720,000 people insome of the most remote and poorest provinces of thePhilippines has been improved (WBCSD 2002b).Improved health, safety, education, governance andeasier access to potable water will bring about povertyalleviation.

The project improved local governance. The projectenhanced the Local Government Units (LGU) to deliveressential social services and elicit the participation ofcommunity organisations and individuals in improvedgovernance. Although it was necessary for BP Solar topull out of several areas over the life of the project dueto political uncertainty, an impressive list of communityfacilities have been upgraded:

� Four District Hospitals, 11 Rural Health Centres& 104 Barangay Health Centres: more than half amillion people will directly benefit from improvedservices. Improved capacity to store and utilisevaccines, and other medicines will reduce infant ofmaternal mortality rates, assist in tetanus preventionand improve general illness treatment.

� 289 Communal Area Lighting for Markets andFishermen's Wharves: facilitating safer night vesselnavigation and reducing night fishing wharf accidents.

� 260 Barangay Potable Water Supply Systems: willlead to substantial reductions in water-borne disease.Women in particular will benefit from time savings inwater collection and caring for ill family members.

� 266 Schools, Six Municipal Halls and 201Barangay Halls: access to school facilities at nightfor adult education or entertainment will furtherimprove quality of life.

Figure 11 : Equipment provision (courtesy BP Solar)

Figure 12 : Communal lighting to wharves (courtesy BP Solar)

Figure 13 : Improved education facilities (courtesy BP Solar)

Communal Sanitation, Myanmar

Project BackgroundAccess to clean water and adequate sanitation isessential to the development of a sustainablecommunity. Access for the poor is a key factor inimproving health and economic productivity and is,therefore, an essential component in any effort toalleviate poverty.

In 2001, 16% of the world was without water supplyand 40% without access to adequate sanitation.Water-borne diseases are responsible for more than 80%of all sicknesses in the world, resulting in the death ofmore than four million children annually. Diarrhoealdiseases are the third most significant child killer (afterrespiratory infections and malaria), accounting for 15%of the under five years mortality rate, especially in ruralareas. Substantial decreases in the frequency ofcontagious disease that is caused by inadequatesanitation and water supply would result in substantialsavings in healthcare costs. These savings could beinvested in national development, thus further increasingnational productivity.

In 1997, Myanmar was crippled by diarrheal disease,killing 30,000 children. Sanitation coverage stood at only39% of the population and personal and domestichygiene was poor (Yango 2001). Myanmar ranked 190out of 191 in the World Health Report 2000 (WHO 2000).

Project DetailsOver the past decade, significant attempts have beenmade to improve sanitation in Myanmar. In the mid-1990sthe government, in a bid to promote communityparticipation, adopted a strategy in which families wereprovided with free latrine pans. However this proved toocostly, failed to achieve community support and wasphased out.

The government then recognised that they could nolonger be the sole provider of sanitation services. Theyrecognised that the key role of government should be tofacilitate and stimulate local communities to recogniseand meet their own needs. This was to be carried outthrough organising and financing communitymobilisation and household motivation and running anawareness campaign, known as the National SanitationWeek. For the past five years, UNICEF has supported thisprogram.

National Sanitation Week activities are carried out underthe guidance of the National Health Committee and withthe active involvement of the entire nation. The weekhas three key objectives:

� educating the general public in the values ofsanitation

� assisting the people in the actual implementation ofsanitary work

� reducing the spread of communicable disease

Community Mobilisation As individual users are theultimate decision makers in the acceptance or rejectionof new technology, community involvement is widelyaccepted as a key ingredient in the success of any aidproject. Participation of local people in all stages of aproject, from design, construction, operation andmaintenance, is paramount in fostering a sense ofownership and to ensure that facilities are properly usedand maintained.

Sanitation cannot be imposed; use had to be created, bydemand. In the past, supply-driven approaches to theprovision of sanitation have led to widespread disuse oflatrines, leaving latrine slabs as a health hazard and anegative influence on any future sanitation attempts.

Demand for use of sanitation systems is not somethingthat is easily generated, as rural populations do notoften perceive the health benefits arising fromsanitation. It is therefore fundamentally important thatsanitation be effectively promoted, as part of healtheducation, to create demand.

Promotional Campaign The campaign treatedsanitation as a product to be marketed to individual

10

Figure 14 : Myanmar (courtesy of Arup)

11

Case Study

households, using all the skills of the advertising andmarketing industry. All available and affordable mediaand communication channels were used to promotesanitation messages. A broad-based approach wasadopted that emphasised not only potential healthimprovements but also benefits such as privacy andconvenience, elevation of household status, respect anddignity (especially for women), environmental awarenessand the potential economic benefits of generatingresources out of waste.

Social mobilisation was intensified through communitymeetings organised at various levels, supported byvisiting health teams and input NGO’s, school teachersand local leaders. A range of information andcommunication materials, such as posters andpamphlets, and models of affordable latrines wasproduced. National television and media played asignificant communication role. UNICEF contributedabout US$100,000 per year to these promotionalactivities (Sanda 1998).

The communication and social mobilisation package hasbeen improved each year, to give greater attention to theupgrading of unsanitary latrines and the integration ofwashing of hands into the sanitation cycle. Interestedhouseholds form a village sanitation committee, whichplays a fundamental role in coordinating activities.

Implementation Construction activities commencedonly after the awareness campaign had been launchedand hygiene and sanitation education provided.Construction occurred only in motivated communitiesand with the cooperation of the end user.A do-it-yourself construction program was promoted.Families were responsible for the installation andfinancing of their own sanitation facilities; subsidieswere only available for schools and for the communitiesthat could not afford self-finance.

Households were subsidised during the floods of 1997but an element of self-help was expected. A low-cost(Kyat 900 or US$2.75) locally-manufactured plastic panand pipe set was made available to each household thathad excavated (and lined where necessary) a pit andthen built as good a superstructure as they could afford(UNICEF 1999).

A wide range of low-cost and appropriate latrine designswas developed, suited to individual family preferenceand affordability. Every effort has been made topromote capacity and income generation activitiesamong community members, in order to allow them toparticipate by contribution of labour, cash and/ormaterials towards construction of the project.

The private sector responded to meet the rising demandfor parts. Local production of plastic latrine pans hasincreased by a factor of six in the last five years, fromabout 40,000 in 1995 to more than 250,000 annuallytoday (UNICEF 1999). To reduce costs, locally availablematerials were widely used and some village leadersorganised the bulk purchase of bamboo.

Progress ReportIn 1997, prior to the launching of the national campaign,the sanitation coverage throughout rural areas stood at39% (Yango 2001). In 2001, sanitation coverage standsat 57% (WHO 2001). Hand-washing with soap and waterafter latrine use has also increased, from 18% in 1996 to43% in 2001 (Bajracharya 2002).

Too frequently, the success of sanitation programs ismeasured by the total number of latrines constructed,with little attention to actual operation, maintenance, orusage. Long-term success of these systems depends onthe availability of supplies, parts, equipment and theavailability of trained people needed to monitor,maintain and repair the systems, as well as continuedcommunity demand for their use.

As sanitation coverage in Myanmar grows, campaigningcontinues. Programmed follow-up to National SanitationWeek is being provided in selected townships throughmore intensive social mobilisation targeted at hard toreach households and communities and activity-basedsanitation and hygiene education in selected schools.This approach recognises that schools create an excellentparticipatory and enabling learning environment inwhich to promote sanitary habits and hygienic practices.General training of decision-makers, planners andtrainers in social mobilisation programs for hygiene alsocontinues to be widely undertaken.

The 2002 National Sanitation Week accordingly gavespecial emphasis to activities to be carried out in 73 of atotal of 324 townships, where 50% or more of thehouseholds still do not have access to a sanitary latrine(Bajracharya 2002).

Myanmar’s success is a model to other countries and hasbeen internationally recognised by South-East Asianregion countries. Government delegates from Indonesia,Pakistan, Bhutan, China, Vietnam and Laos have come toMyanmar to observe their activities and learn from theirexperiences. Nepal launched its own National SanitationAction Week in March 2001.

12

Conclusions

Each of the case studies illustrates the application ofrelatively low technology engineering in small-scaleinvestments that enjoys high levels of communityengagement. The success of these programs is due insignificant measure to this level of communitycommitment and to the extent of understanding ofsocial, economic and political influences in that localcommunity.

In each of the case studies and in many similarscenarios, the solutions developed have not beenprimarily engineering solutions, although engineeringplays a key part in the outcome adopted. It is not knownwhich profession took the lead in which scenario, but itis clear that engineers with appropriate sensitivity couldhave lead in all of the case studies.

The case studies illustrate the application of soundengineering solutions to poverty alleviation.

Sustainable engineering has been achieved, as thesolutions adopted will have a positive or neutral impacton natural resources.

Life-cycle engineering has taken into account theoperational and maintenance cost of the engineeringsolutions. The completed projects have effective andaffordable operational and maintenance regimes.

Empowered engineering has taken into account thecapabilities of the local community, in particular itsengineering and technical professions. The solutionsdeveloped involve local professional and technical staffand will establish an on-going engineering andoperational resource.

Appropriate engineering has considered variousoptions that meet the engineering needs of the projectand adopted labour intensive construction whererelevant, in order to create community involvement andknowledge of the project’s operations and to stimulatecommunity income.

The challenge for the engineering profession is to revisitour Brunel roots and to develop a suite of solutions tothe issues raised in this paper. These should includesolutions not only to the alleviation of poverty when itoccurs but also to the development of sustainable urbaninfrastructure, that recognises rather than resists theinevitability of migration to urban centres and thenmakes provision for these rapidly growing populations.

As engineers, we can work effectively with otherprofessions and community leaders to developsustainable solutions to poverty. As engineers, we cantake the lead in developing sustainable concepts for theurban areas of the future, concepts in which:

� access to and opportunities for employment areenhanced

� housing, sanitation and water supply are provided ataffordable prices

� access to and opportunities for education areenhanced

� affordable transport facilities are available.

This is our Brunel challenge; it is worthy of ourcommitment.

14

References

AVERT (2002) "How many people in Africa are infected with HIV/AIDS?" [online], http://www.avert.org/africa.htm(Accessed: October 20 2002)

Bajracharya D. (2002) Myanmar Experiences in Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion: Lessons Learned and FutureDirections UNICEF, Yangoon

BASD & UNDP (2002)a "Virtual Exhibit - South Africa: the Roundabout Outdoor HIV/AIDS Iniative,"[online], http://www.virtualexhibit.net/new/home.php (Accessed September 18 2002)

BASD & UNDP (2002)b "Virtual Exhibit – The Philippines Municipal Solar Infrastructure Project,"[online], http://www.virtualexhibit.net/new/home.php (Accessed September 18 2002)

Botha D., Hollway A. (2002) Addressing poverty alleviation through engineering development, South Africa

Building and Social Housing Foundation (BSHF) (2002) World Habitat Awards – "The Grameen Bank Low-costHousing Programme, Bangladesh,"[online], (http://www.mandamus.co.uk/bshf/cgi-bin/wha/show.a.wha.cgi?whaNo=31 (Accessed September 30 2002)

Cleary P. (2002) "Africa’s Holocaust - How the West is ignoring the disaster" The Weekend Australian FinancialReview, 14-15 September, 2002

Croswell J. (1993) " The role of the consultant." Symposium on labour intensive construction, 1993, Midrand, SouthAfrica

Department of International Development (DFID) (2002) Making Connections – Infrastructure for povertyreduction, Copyright UK Ltd, UK.

Grameen Bank. (1998) "Microfinance", [online] http://www.grameen-info.org (accessed May 11 2001)

Sanda D., Oya K. (1998) "Community-based water supply and sanitation improvement." Proceedings of the 24thWEDC Conference, 1998, WEDC, Islamabad, Pakistan

UNDP (2002) "Understanding & Responding to Poverty" [online], http://www.undp.org/poverty/overview/ (Accessed September 20 2002)

UNHCR (2002) "What is poverty?" [online], http://www.unhchr.ch/development/poverty-02.html (Accessed September 18 2002)

UNICEF, Myanmar (1999) "Rehabilitation of Water Supply and Sanitation Facilities Affected by the flood," [online], http://www.unicef.org/myanmar/pages/WES_Echo.pdf (Accessed: September 18 2002 )

Usaka & Gaborone. "Helping the third world: How to make aid work", The Economist, June 26th, 1999

Whyte A. (1986) Guidelines for planning community participation activities in water supply and sanitation projects.WHO Publication Centre, Geneva.

World Bank (2002)a "DM Past Projects: South Africa Journal," [online], http://www.developmentmarketplace.org/safrica3journal.html (Accessed September 20 2002)

World Bank (2002)b "South Africa: the Roundabout Outdoor Playpump,"[online], http://www.worldbank.org/afr/findings/english/find218.pdf (Accessed November 20 2002)

World Bank (2000)c World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty, Oxford University Press, USA.

World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2002)a "Developing Countries and TechnologyCooperation – Ten Business Cases" Austria

World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2002)b "Sustain online - A ray of sunshine in thePhilippines,"[online], http://www.sustain-online.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/265/A_ray_of_sunshine_in_the_Philippines.html (Accessed September 18 2002)

Yango R. (2001) "Fourth National Sanitation Week 2001" (Myanmar Information Centre),[online] http://www.myanmar-information.net/infosheet/2001/010225.htm (Accessed: May 22 2001)

15

Biography

David Singleton MEngSc, FICEDirector, Arup Group LtdChairman, Australasia Division

David Singleton is a Director of Arup Group Ltd, a member of the Global Board and Chairman of the AustralasiaDivision, with responsibilities for the Arup businesses in Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Singapore andIndonesia. He is the Board ‘champion’ for Arup’s global Business Sustainability Consulting Services.

He is also a Trustee and Director of The Arup Partnerships, the global coordinating organisation of the eight worldwideArup practices, which employ some 7500 staff in over 50 countries.

David graduated in Civil Engineering at the University of Nottingham in 1971, with a scholarship from the Institutionof Civil Engineers and joined Arup & Partners in Melbourne in 1973, after graduate training in London as a civilengineer with the Greater London Council. He gained a Master of Engineering Science degree by research inTransportation Engineering at the University of Melbourne, graduating in 1977. He has in excess of 30 years ofexperience in infrastructure and transport planning and civil engineering in Australasia, Asia and the United Kingdomand has led multi-disciplinary projects in these regions.

He is a Fellow of the Institution of Engineers, Australia and was Chairman of its Civil College and a Federal Councillorfrom 1995 to 1998. He is Immediate Past President of the Association of Consulting Engineers Australia, is the Chairof the Australian Construction Industry Forum and of the National Engineering Registration Board. He is a Director ofthe Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation, a government and industry funded centre for appliedresearch across the construction sector.

He is an alumna of the Harvard Business School’s OPM program (Class of 1998) and is a Fellow of the AustralianInstitute of Company Directors. He is a Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers.

ICE would like to thank Arup, BP Solar, Building and SocialHousing Foundation, WEDC and Roundabout Outdoor fortheir kind permission to use their images throughout thispublication.