Patronage, politics and toilets

Donors have persuaded many policy-makers in developing countries that the main problem with direct public service provision is the lack of incentives for public servants. They have subsequently sought to involve communities, citizens and the private sector in the management of urban sanitation services instead. Ideas about the benefits of such participatory and market approaches may, however, be overly-optimistic.

A paper from the University of Ghana and the Institute of Development Studies examines the impact of new forms of partnership between public authorities and private/citizen-based organisations in poor neighbourhoods of Accra and Kumasi. Tracing the history of two decades of failed public toilet policies, they warn that improvements in service provision cannot materialise if contractors are not accountable and the state is unable to regulate performance standards.

In Ghana, as elsewhere, donors and local authorities are committed to phasing out public toilets in favour of household-based facilities. However, funding has only been secured for tiny pilot projects. Local government continues to depend on revenue from public toilets – Sub-Metropolitan District Councils derive two thirds of their income from them.

Ghana has tried various forms of toilet management, ranging from the Committees for the Defence of the Revolution (established by the populist former President Rawlings’ government in the 1980s), to franchising, to community businesses and direct management by sub-metropolitan districts. The number of toilets has increased while funds available for their cleaning and maintenance have declined.

Public toilets represent an appalling health risk:

• In Kumasi 90 percent of human waste remains in the city because of failure to empty latrines and septic tanks and dumping of waste.
• Waste which is transported to landfills is not treated and leaches into rivers and streams.
• Vector-borne diseases such as malaria and bilharzia are widespread, due to lack of pest and vector control and hygiene education programmes.
• Large numbers of people in urban neighbourhoods continue to defecate in public.
• Both constructed and natural drainage systems have become choked with a mixture of human and solid wastes – blockages are worsened by a massive increase in the use of plastic bags.

Management and control of public toilets have become a source of political patronage with which local and sometimes national politicians reward their clients. Although contracts were supposed to be given to registered local companies with demonstrated capacity, in practice the most frequent beneficiaries have been elected local government representatives using front companies disguised as “community businesses”. Public toilets are politically protected business opportunities given out as political favours.

Decentralisation has been accompanied by reductions in capacity and finances. These have reinforced the appeal of franchising or contracting-out to relieve the local government authorities of the burden of looking after toilets while offering the prospect of an improved revenue stream.

Regulation is weak. When environmental health officers take action they are mocked by magistrates and contractors. The power of officials has declined, while the power of politicians and contractors has increased.

If urban Ghanaians are ever to be provided with reasonable sanitation facilities:

• Infrastructure for public goods-type services such as sewerage, sanitation, drainage and solid waste collection will probably need to be publicly provided.
• Contracts for service provision given to non-state agencies must be independently and transparently regulated.
• Conflict-of-interest laws should be rigorously applied to elected local representatives.

Some of the community-based organisations encouraged to enter the sanitation sector may not be the accountable development agents they claim to be. Ghana’s experience has shown the need for improved analysis of the political context within which public-private partnerships operate and better understanding of the political pressures which shape the choice of partners and performance monitoring.

Source(s):
“‘Toilet wars’: urban sanitation services and the politics of public-private partnerships in Ghana” by Joseph Ayee and Richard Crook, Working Paper 213, Institute of Development Studies, December, 2003 Full document.

id21 Research Highlight: 28 February 2005

Further Information:
Joseph Ayee
Department of Political Science
Faculty of Social Studies
University of Ghana
Legon
Ghana

Tel:  + 233 21  500381
Contact the contributor: jraayee@yahoo.com

Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Studies, University of Ghana

Professor Richard Crook
Institute of Commonwealth Studies
University of London
28 Russell Square
London WC1B 5DS
United Kingdom

Tel:   +44 (0) 207 862 8841
Contact the contributor:  Richard.Crook@sas.ac.uk

Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London

Other related links:
As urban sanitation needs go unmet, is it time to respond strategically?

As top-down toilets go wrong, can community-run loos bind neighbourhoods together?

Making public-private community partnerships work for Asia’s urban poor

World Bank Water Supply and Sanitation

IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre