Abstract
In India, most people have been finding it challenging to maintain their quality of life, such as standard housing, access to basic minimum drinking water facilities, sanitation, public hygiene, etc. This study attempts to study the availability of housing and household amenities among social groups and identify the inter-rural−urban differences in basic sanitation facilities. Data from the Census of India, 2011, H-Series household amenities and assets, was used to measure the dissimilarity between inter-rural−urban differences by social groups. The present study aimed to explore the differentials across the region and social groups by the availability of different basic sanitation facilities. Analysis shows striking dissimilarities in rural areas of states such as Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Jharkhand, Tripura and the union territory of Daman and Diu. Moreover, the intensity of dissimilarities is prominently observed between caste Others and ST in rural areas. However, in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the dissimilarity in the availability of bathrooms without a roof is observed uniformly across regions and among social groups. Furthermore, the study emphasizes that although dissimilarity may not be visible at an aggregate level, it is very much visible at the sub-aggregate level across regions and between castes. Hence, it is proposed to conduct and collect data based on a holistic approach incorporating people’s behaviour, attitudes, cultural norms and biases while providing sanitation facilities and those who are availing them. Such research studies will provide a deeper insight into the root causes of such dissimilarities, which may be due to geographical location, the non-availability of water, cultural practices, biases, etc., or the intersection of all these factors. Identifying hotspots at the micro level will help accelerate the success of government schemes such as the Swachh Bharat Mission.
Introduction
Housing and household amenities such as the source of lighting, safe drinking water, bathroom and drainage facilities reflect a household’s quality of life. The minimal requirement, such as water within the premises, wastewater management, bathing and drainage facilities, reflects not only the quality of life but also the overall health and hygiene of the people. Nayar (1997) emphasized the housing amenities to health improvements and examined the conventional idea that housing conditions, availability of drinking water, sanitary facilities, etc., would contribute to health improvement among the population, sometimes even more significantly than health services. The study emphasized that the contribution towards housing conditions, including sanitary facilities, will lead to improvement in the aspect of health. Thus, the quality of life, as well as the health of an individual and, subsequently, the household’s health, is mainly determined by access to basic housing amenities. The availability of basic amenities will undoubtedly contribute to people’s health improvement and determine society’s quality of life.
The United Nations-mandated sustainable development goal 6.2 targets achieving access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and ending open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women, girls and those in vulnerable situations by 2030. However, as per the census of India 2011, 13% of households in India do not have access to electricity, 16% to safe drinking water and 17% to a toilet facility. In 2015, nearly half of India’s population of around 568 million people suffered the indignity of defecating in fields, forests, bodies of water or other public spaces due to a lack of access to toilets. India alone accounted for 90% of the people in South Asia and half of the 1.2 billion people in the world that defecated in the open WHO (2020).
By 2019, according to the latest estimates, the number of people without access to toilets has reduced significantly by an estimated 450 million people WHO (2020). India’s flagship programmes, the Swachh Bharat Mission, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme, WASH in Schools (including preschools called ‘anganwadis’), WASH in health facilities and district-wide WASH interventions contributed to improved access to sanitation.
India, known for its diversities, is characterized by homogeneity in settlements, mainly by similar caste groups in rural areas. However, this may not be reflected in urban settings where space constrain is an issue. Hence, it is essential to examine the quality of life among urban and rural dwellers across states by caste to examine the differences in quality of life. Overall, every state and within these states depict uniqueness in terms of settlements and access to basic sanitation facilities. Hence, not only in-depth assessment but also factors contributing towards differences across groups by access to sanitation facilities is required. The first step towards assessment is identifying the vulnerable groups without access to basic sanitation facilities.
Several studies in the past have depicted the differences across groups by access to sanitation facilities. For example, Bhagat (2011) analysed that the deprivation of drinking water, sanitation and toilet facilities is most glaring in rural and small and medium towns of urban areas. Although Banerjee et al. (2020) highlighted across all 22 surveyed states, urban residents had better access to improved drinking water sources than the rural population. The states of Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura and Maharashtra reported the widest rural–urban disparity. Further, they emphasized access to water facilities needed work in certain districts in the Northeastern states and Maharashtra.
Recent NFHS-5 Phase-I data demonstrate substantial improvement in access to clean water and improved sanitation facilities. There is, however, a need to bridge the rural–urban divide Banerjee et al. (2020). The rural–urban divide persists widely across several states. People residing in urban areas had relatively higher access to unshared and quality sanitation facilities in most states except for Manipur, Meghalaya, Sikkim, Nagaland and Kerala, where the urban population was more deprived. The highest rural–urban gap was observed in Gujarat, Bihar, West Bengal and Karnataka (Banerjee et al., 2020).
In India, the hierarchical caste system denied the essential quality of life to a group of people kept in the lower strata, now called Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled tribes (ST) of India. In addition to the practice of untouchability, they were denied even water required for survival and were mostly relegated to geographically isolated areas (Singh, 1994). There is evidence that the social status of an individual approximated by her position in the social hierarchy plays an important role in determining her well-being (Weiss & Fershtman, 1998). Subsequently, it may not be difficult to hypothesize that the settlements of SCs and STs were mostly confined to the arid region with depleting water resources or regions with limited access to water. Further, not only rural and urban differentials; inter-state; inter-castes; gender; etc., need to be investigated to understand the intersection of multilevel disparities.
Although diversities exist in rural areas of India, it is also characterized by homogeneity in settlements, mainly by similar social groups. However, this may not be reflected in urban settings where space constraint is an issue. Hence, it is important to examine the quality of life among urban and rural dwellers across states among social groups to examine the differences in quality of life. Overall, every state and within these states depict uniqueness regarding settlements and access to basic sanitation facilities. Therefore, there is a critical need to examine the availability of basic sanitation facilities across castes and regions in India and its states. The assessment of the extent of differential in the availability of basic sanitation facilities by castes and regions will not only provide clear insight into the disparities but also identify the most deprived region and castes.
This article attempts to assess the availability by type of sanitation facilities among various social groups across regions in states of India using Census 2011 data. The study also examines the dissimilarities in terms of availability and non-availability by sanitation facilities. Further, the article intends to contribute to future planning about sanitation and assist policymakers in identifying the inter-rural−urban differences across states and among social groups in terms of access to basic sanitation facilities.
Objectives
The specific objectives of the study are as follows:
To assess the availability and non-availability by types of sanitation facilities among social groups and across various regions using Census 2011. To examine the dissimilarities in terms of availability and non-availability by types of sanitation facilities among various social groups and across regions using Census 2011.
Data and Methods
Data from the Census of India, 2011, H-Series household amenities and assets, were used to analyse bathroom and sanitation facilities’ availability. The analysis mainly focuses on the availability of household amenities during the census of 2011. The regions are states, and within the states, rural and urban areas. The social groups are castes SC, ST and Others caste. The caste Others include both caste OBCs and General castes.
To examine the convergence and divergence of the data across social groups and regions, Kullback−Leibler (KL) divergence was applied and is given as follows:
An ethics committee approval was not required for this article as it involved a secondary analysis of publicly available data.
Results and Discussions
Figure 1 illustrates the availability of bathroom facilities in the state of India. The dissimilarities in the availability of bathroom facilities between castes and regions were examined using KL divergence. Overall, for India, the total KL value of divergence of 0.06 is the lowest and does not indicate any divergence either between social groups or between regions. However, analysis of states by the availability of bathroom facilities shows that the highest value of KL divergence of 0.31 was observed between other castes and STs in the rural areas in the state of Madhya Pradesh, followed by KL values in the states of Odisha, Jharkhand, Tripura and Chhattisgarh. Furthermore, as indicated by the KL divergence value of 0.16, dissimilarities were also observed between castes SCs and STs in rural areas of the states of Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, and a Kl divergence value of 0.17 in the union territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. However, as evident from their respective KL values, the impact of the dissimilarities between caste ST and Others (0.31) was nearly double that between caste SC and ST (0.16) regarding the availability of bathroom facilities between social groups. This implies the dissimilarity between ST and Others caste in rural areas has a greater contributor to the total KL value of divergence than the between castes SC and ST in rural areas of India by the availability of bathroom facilities.
The dissimilarities in the availability of bathroom facilities without a roof are given in Figure 2. The total KL value of divergence in India is negligible (0.07), indicating the least dissimilarities in the availability of bathroom facilities without a roof among social groups and regions in India. However, in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the dissimilarity in the availability of bathroom facilities, as indicated by KL divergence values, is observed uniformly across regions and among various castes. The only exception was observed between SCs and Others caste in urban areas where the dissimilarities were at the least, as reflected by the KL divergence value of 0.07, whereas the highest divergence in terms of availability of bathrooms but without a roof was observed between social groups, that is, between SCs and STs castes in rural areas of Jammu and Kashmir with a value of 0.41, followed by caste STs and Others caste with a KL value of 0.30. In the states of Tripura, Odisha, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, Manipur, and Daman and Diu’s union territory, the dissimilarities in terms of bathroom availability but without a roof were most prominently observed between caste, that is, STs and Others caste in rural areas. In comparison, the dissimilarities between social groups, that is, STs and Others caste in urban areas were observed in the states of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh. The dissimilarities in terms of availability of bathrooms but without a roof were observed between social groups, that is, SCs and STs were most prominently seen in union territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar haveli with a total KL value of 0.22.
The dissimilarities in terms of non-availability of bathroom facilities are illustrated in Figure 3 between social groups, that is, ST and Others caste, were mainly observed in urban areas in the states of Punjab (KL value 0.28), Karnataka (KL value 0.21), Himachal Pradesh (KL value 0.18), Uttarakhand (KL value 0.19), Kerala (KL value 0.17), Tamil Nadu (KL value 0.13), Jammu and Kashmir (KL value 0.12), Uttar Pradesh (KL value 0.11), Tripura and West Bengal (KL value 0.10). The dissimilarities regarding non-availability by castes were mainly concentrated in urban areas of India, as evident by the KL value of 0.10.
Figure 4 illustrates the level of dissimilarity regarding the availability of closed drainage among various social groups in different states of India. Overall, negligible dissimilarities are observed, as evident from The KL value of 0.09 by the availability of closed drainage in households of each social group across regions.
The highest divergence between social groups regarding the availability of closed drainage was observed in Tripura, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Odisha and Chhattisgarh. In Madhya Pradesh (KL value 0.27), Odisha (KL value 0.22) and Gujarat (KL value 0.26), the divergence was prominently due to the dissimilarities in the availability of closed drainage between the social group, that is, ST and Others caste in rural areas. The highest KL divergence value is between social groups, that is, SC and ST, in rural areas of Gujrat with a KL divergence value of 0.39.
Regarding the non-availability of drainage, the highest divergence with an estimated KL value of 0.11 is observed between social groups, that is, ST and other castes in rural areas of India, as illustrated in Figure 5. The KL value was only 0.08 between castes SC and ST. This implies the total divergence in terms of non-availability of drainage was mainly due to the dissimilarities between caste others and ST and is concentrated in rural areas. Similarly, the state of Gujarat and the union territory of Daman and Diu shows high KL value of 0.13 and 0.17, respectively, indicating dissimilarity in the non-availability of the drainage system. In contrast, in the states of Tripura (KL Value 0.14), Odisha (KL Value 0.1) and in the union territory Chandigarh (KL Value 0.18), the total KL value derived in terms of non-availability of drainage was neither concentrated in rural nor in urban areas. This implies that the dissimilarities observed by the non-availability of drainage systems between Others castes and ST are observed across rural or urban areas, whereas, in the states of Madhya Pradesh (KL Value 0.25), Jammu and Kashmir (KL Value 0.14), Chhattisgarh (KL Value 0.18) and Jharkhand (KL Value 0.19), the total KL value derived for non-availability of drainage system in rural areas highlights dissimilarities between others castes and ST in rural areas. Similarly, between the social groups, that is, between caste SC and ST, the dissimilarities in terms of non-availability of the drainage system are observed in the states of Madhya Pradesh (KL Value 0.12) and Jammu and Kashmir (KL Value 0.15) and is concentrated in rural areas. The KL divergence value derived between social groups, that is, between other castes and SC, by the non-availability of drainage is the lowest. Overall, proportion-wise representation regarding the non-availability of the drainage system is less between castes SC and ST than castes ST and Others and is concentrated mainly in rural areas.
As observed in Figures 4 and 5 in households with closed and open drainage, the divergence was overall negligible in households with open drainage and is evident in Figure 6. The highest dissimilarities with a KL value of 0.137 was observed between caste ST and Others in urban areas of Himachal Pradesh and KL value of 0.10 in rural areas of union territory Daman and Diu. The overall total KL value was negligible across social groups and regions in India.
Summary and Findings
Every state depicts unique characteristics. The present study aimed to explore the differentials across the region and social groups by the availability of basic sanitation facilities. Analysis shows the least dissimilarities in rural areas at all India levels, except in a few states such as Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Jharkhand, Tripura and Chhattisgarh. The dissimilarities in the availability of bathroom facilities in these states exist among the social group, most prominently between caste Others and STs, whereas, in the rural areas in the states of Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat and the union territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli, dissimilarities exist in the availability of bathroom facilities between caste SC and ST.
In the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the dissimilarity in the availability of bathrooms without a roof is observed uniformly across regions and social groups. The highest dissimilarities in the availability of bathrooms without a roof were observed between castes SCs and STs in rural areas, followed by castes STs and Others. The only exception was between castes SCs and Others in urban areas with the least dissimilarities. In the rural areas of the states of Tripura, Odisha, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, Manipur and Daman and Diu’s union territory, the availability of bathroom but without a roof were most prominently observed between castes STs and Others. In comparison, the dissimilarities between castes STs and Others in urban areas were observed in the states of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh.
The dissimilarity by non-availability of bathroom facilities was mainly concentrated in urban India. Dissimilarities between social groups, that is, caste ST and Others caste, by non-availability of bathroom facilities, were primarily observed in urban areas in Punjab, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh, Tripura and West Bengal.
In comparison, the dissimilarity is least by the availability of closed drainage in households across rural and urban areas and among social groups in India. The most prominent dissimilarities in the availability of closed drainage exist between caste ST and Others in rural Tripura, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Odisha and Chhattisgarh. The highest dissimilarities are observed between castes SC and ST in rural areas in Gujarat.
Similarly, the dissimilarities in terms of the non-availability of drainage systems in households were negligible across social groups and regions in India and are prominently seen in rural areas of the state of Gujarat and the union territory of Daman and Diu. However, in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, and Jharkhand, the dissimilarities in the non-availability of drainage systems in rural areas were observed mainly between caste Others and ST. Similarly, between the caste SC and ST, dissimilarities in terms of the non-availability of the drainage system were observed in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and were concentrated in rural areas. Overall, dissimilarities in proportion-wise representation regarding non-availability of drainage are less between castes SC and ST than caste ST and Others and were concentrated mainly in rural areas.
The overall dissimilarities are negligible in households with open drainage sanitation facilities. The highest dissimilarity in the availability of open drainage was observed between caste ST and Others caste in urban areas of Himachal Pradesh and rural regions of union territory Daman and Diu.
Conclusion
Diversities across regions and among the social group by type of sanitation facilities are the hallmarks of this research study. Even though least dissimilarity is observed in the availability of sanitation facilities among social groups and regions in India, there are few states with an exception. The extent and types of dissimilarities vary across regions and social groups in these states. Furthermore, the intensity of dissimilarities varies across social groups and is seen prominently between caste Others and ST and observed peculiarly in a few states such as Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand in terms of the availability by type of sanitation facilities.
Hence, it is proposed to conduct and collect holistic primary data analysing people’s behaviour, attitudes or biases, or cultural norms, biases while providing sanitation facilities and those who are availing them. Such research studies will provide a deeper insight into the root causes of such dissimilarities, which needs to be explored, whether the geographical location, the non-availability of water, cultural practices, etc., or the intersection of all these factors.
To increase the outreach and sustainability of various government schemes such as Swachh Bharat and the Village Health Sanitation Nutrition Committee, an in-depth evaluation of schemes utilized by people staying in different regions of our country is required.
Finally, the implementation and success of any scheme depend upon the knowledge of existing diversity at the time of launching the scheme. Dissimilarity is one of the essential parameters to be identified at the ground level. The wider the dissimilarity, the higher the focus required when launching any scheme. Identifying hotspots at the micro level will help accelerate the schemes’ success. This research attempted to identify such hotspots by dissimilarity in the availability of types of sanitation facilities across states, regions and social groups. The study is the first step assessment of dissimilarities using secondary data by types of sanitation facilities across regions and among social groups.
Furthermore, the study emphasizes that although dissimilarity may not be visible at an aggregate level, it is very much visible at the sub-aggregate level. Here in this research study, it is social group and region by the availability of sanitation facilities. The further course of action is intervention at a micro level, phase-wise implementation of specific programs, if possible, replication of novel ideas and finally achieving the success of implementing government schemes such as Swachh Bharat.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.