A Convening on Inclusive Climate Sensitive WASH Framework for Small Towns

Why another framework and Why Small towns, one may ask?

Small towns with less than 1,000,00 population stand at the frontline of climate crisis, grappling with its harsh realities despite contributing far less to the problem than their larger counterparts. Climate change and WASH systems are deeply interconnected, with small towns bearing disproportionate impacts of climate induced vulnerabilities such as intensified water scarcity, flooding, and degrading of already fragile infrastructure. For the residents in these small towns, WASH systems form the backbone of daily life, yet these essential services are often inequitable, poorly funded and ill equipped to withstand the pressures of changing climate. 

Recognizing this urgent need and critical gap, BORDA SA brought together a diverse group of 20 experts, practitioners, academicians, and visionaries. This initiative aims to foster a dedicated dialogue focused on integrating smaller towns into climate change initiatives and explore the need for Inclusive Climate Sensitive Water and Sanitation Hygiene (ICS-WASH) framework.  

This was not just another closed-door meeting, this convening extended beyond conventional discussions. Together, we explored, debated, discussed in groups and built a collective understanding based on evidence, lived experiences, and expert insights around the importance of linking WASH and Climate resilience and how such tools like the ICS WASH framework is a strategic, structured approach that guides small towns in developing forward-looking Climate-WASH Action Plans, enabling them to address vulnerabilities, allocate resources effectively, and deliver inclusive services amidst evolving challenges. 

A Climate Framework for Small Towns – Utility/Applicability?

One of the central debates of the session revolved around the need for another framework in itself. With numerous policies, frameworks, guidelines, tools already in place and cluttering our desks, Mr. Manas Rath, BORDA opened the session with a candid question :

Do we really need another framework with so many existing policies and tools, how many are truly effective?  

This question struck a chord and lingered in the air for a while. Frameworks often become checklists rather than catalysts for change. While frameworks serve as an opportunity to collect relevant data, what matters is how it is interpreted and acted upon.

What questions are we asking? How do we ensure the framework guides the outcomes we seek? Who uses the framework and how they interpret it can make or break its utility. 

Frameworks should serve as a tool for asking better questions, not just an end in itself.

Mr. Sarath Babu, NIUA contributed to this discussion by advocating for a focus on the 3 T’s – Tools, Templates and Training and the lack of such practical aids can risk even the most fool proof, well-crafted frameworks in becoming shelf documents.   

This sentiment was echoed by others who emphasized that the utility of the framework lies not in the creation of it rather it rests on how they are interpreted, applied, implemented and aligned with the real-world realities, ULB capacities, resources and priorities.

The Urban Local Body’s perspective - Addressing Capacities & Resilience

In this context, Mr. Joseph Ravikumar, Independent Consultant emphasized that while parallel plans, policies and schemes such as City Sanitation Plans, City Development Plans and Master Plans are valuable, they must translate into actionable insights. 

What is a city engineer supposed to do when their capacity is stretched thin? 

This question underscored the capacity challenges of faced by ULBs. Adding to this discussion, Ms. Sujaya Rathi, Independent Consultant, highlighted that the key lies in demand generation from ULBs. Frameworks must resonate with the day-to-day concerns of the city officials, engineers who often grapple with the under resourced capacities struggling to keep up with demands such as access to basic services.

The consensus leaned towards the necessity that frameworks need to account for these resource gaps while remaining practical for on ground implementation. It should act like an internal compass, that provides a shared language for climate resilience while supporting towns in decision making. 

Complexity Vs Simplicity: A Fine Balance

Another recurring theme in the discussion was the balance between simplicity and complexity.

Should frameworks strive for complexity to avoid oversights, or should it prioritize simplicity to ensure usability?

While complexity ensures that no aspect is overlooked, it can also overwhelm those tasked with implementation and application, especially at the city or district level. The common concern raised across the room was on the continuity gap- the disconnect between consultation and action. 

Ms. Mona Iyer, CEPT University, captured this thought that was echoed by many on how there are multiple frameworks which are also donor driven, but the understanding on them is fragmented – more like a glass half full endeavor. She voices that whatever modality the framework is developed in; it should be agile in nature to adapt to local situations. 

Mr. Depinder Kapur's perspective was insightful: A framework reflects an ideology and should never be internally contradictory and advocated that frameworks can provide guidance and act as a checklist through a common language bridging gaps between stakeholder and simplify decision making.

Beyond Frameworks: On Ground Realities, Practical Roadmaps, Actionable Tools

Mr. Rajesh Pai, WASH Institute, Mr. Tikender Panwar, Senior Advisor, BORDA SA and Mr. Vishwanath S, BIOME reminded the room of the ground realities on how citizens care more about immediate concerns that affect their daily lives – their interrupted water supply, flooded streets, garbage spillover, and insecure livelihoods, not on climate resilience. The challenges are then to embed climate sensitive measures within everyday issues that dominate municipal agenda and emphasized on the fact that such practical lens must anchor frameworks.

The consensus was clear - Retrofitting climate considerations into the existing systems isn’t enough. The climate lens has to be integral from the very beginning.

Geographical and Operational Nuances

Another critical insight was the need for geographical and contextual customizations. As Mr. Manas Rath rightly pointed out – “The questions throughout the country might be same, but the answers will differ for each city or town. This variability demands frameworks that are adaptable to diverse setting such as hilly regions, plains or coastal towns. Moreover, the scale of application matters too.

Should a framework operate at a district, city or state level, this must be carefully chosen to maximize impact.

Mr. Sarath Babu, NIUA highlighted the critical need to address urban sprawl into peripheral areas, emphasizing that guiding documents, tools, and action plans must be tailored to these unique dynamics. He also posed a vital question:

Should these frameworks prioritize short-term solutions or focus on long-term, sustainable planning? Both, perhaps. But only if the tools are simple, actionable and adaptable.

The consensus leaned towards a tiered approach, where the framework could guide towns towards measurable goals while also informing broader policy decisions.

Concluding thought, where do we go from here?

As Mr. Manas Rath aptly noted, it’s not merely about climate resilience rather it’s about solving people’s pressing concerns while building a resilient future.

The discussions came to a close, one of the clear messages that emerged is, that a path to climate resilient small towns cannot be walked alone. Frameworks like ICS WASH can serve as critical tools, but their success depends on collective action.

As Ms. Sahana Goswami, WRI aptly stated, “What’s next after creating the framework? Implementation is where the real challenge lies”.

This challenge requires partnerships and collaborations among organizations working in this space to ensure such tools doesn’t remain a document but transforms into actionable, impactful results on ground.

Another unified thought was to have regular convenings, such as this one, that can act as a check point for collective progress, finding opportunities to refine strategies, to learn from and share success stories and solutions to address bottle necks and challenges.

The journey to climate resilient small towns demands not just alignment of goals to broader policies but also a commitment to sustained and dedicated dialogue and cooperation. Together, through partnerships, the way forward lies in striking a balance – between frameworks and action plans, between complexity and simplicity and between ideals and on ground realities.

By harmonizing such efforts, organizations can co- create solutions that are scalable, context sensitive and responsive to small towns - Mr. Snehit Prakash, Regional Director, BORDA