Beyond binaries: Towards a gender inclusive sanitation future

PURPOSE AND SCOPE: Gender Equality is a human right, and typically considered a good
principle when designing development programs. Water, sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)
programs often publicly state the importance of gender equality measures through the use of
guidelines and policy, but the effectiveness of this documentation is under-researched. This
thesis demonstrates the challenges of implementing gender guidance in WASH programs,
exploring perceived challenges at a global, national, and community level. Beginning at a
global level, the thesis explores commonality in development program evaluations, assessing
the level of gender inclusion, querying the need for a sector shift in the way ‘gender’ is written
about and investigated. It then reflects on proposed challenges, and contextualises findings,
investigating gender guidance incorporation in India’s Swachh Bharat Mission. Inclusion of
gender guidance is documented along the chain of implementation, with perceived challenges
highlighted by key informants. Finally, the thesis examines the reality for marginalised
genders that are recognised by the national constitution in India, but are not recognised in
gender guidance.

METHODS: This thesis uses a mixed methods approach to investigate the research questions.
Open-ended discursive surveys have been used in conjunction with a grey literature review of
WASH development program evaluations to assess the level of gender inclusion at an
implementation level. Key informant interviews were completed to gauge perceptions of
government staff, academics, non-governmental organisation workers and activists in
accordance with the intention and curation of gender guidance, and the potential differing
implementation results. Community focus groups were also held to assess how marginalised
genders not represented in gender guidance are able to access and use sanitation facilities.

FINDINGS: A global analysis of international development program evaluations identified
discord between industry leading organisations’ public attitudes towards gender equality, and
the reality of gender inclusion. Evaluation practices were categorised between insensitive and
transformative, with over 50% of the practices categorised at the lowest level of gender
sensitivity due to vague language, reprioritised budgets and a lack of active involvement of
multiple genders at all levels of programming. Building on the reflections, further
investigation of the discord between intention and reality was carried out by examining
implementation of the Swachh Bharat Mission. At a national level in India there is recognition
of the need for gender guidance, and intention to create programs with an emphasis on gender
equality. However, ambiguous accountability at ministerial level creates uncertainty in
ownership of gender guidance. This leads to inaccessible funding, minimal organisational and
personal accountability, and poor dissemination of guidance. At a community level there is
need to end the homogenisation of identities; evidence showed LGBTQ+ people are often
misrepresented as ‘Transgender’ due to limited understanding of gender and sexuality.
Homogenisation fails to account for intersectional identities, and assumes people fit neatly into
discrete categorisation, which is far from reality; even within small sample sizes, there was
huge variance in answers around ‘ideal’ sanitation systems and access. The conscious exclusion
of complex queer identities in sanitation planning, especially transgender persons, creates
inaccessible and inappropriate facilities. Only by including diverse perspectives and
prioritising inclusive design can accessible and appropriate facilities be created.

IMPLICATIONS: Striving for the use of gender guidance will always encounter challenges in
implementation due to prioritisation of other program attributes, poor accountability
mechanisms, and minimal associated funding. Being able to separate gender from what is
required as a ‘basic’ need enables separation of identity characteristics; if there is limited
funding the optional and additional gender guide will be discarded. Moving towards programs
with universal design principles that prioritise the needs of people, not of specific homogenised
genders, will ensure more sustainable and inclusive outcomes.