Opinion Toilets and mobiles

We shouldn't be surprised at the United Nations University's (UNU) startling statement.

New DelhiApril 17, 2010 05:47 PM IST First published on: Apr 17, 2010 at 05:47 PM IST

We shouldn’t be surprised at the United Nations University’s (UNU) startling statement. More people in India have access to mobile telephones than toilets. There are 545 million mobile phones. Because of multiple connections,that doesn’t mean 545 million people possess mobile phones. However,growth in urban and semi-urban India

has been phenomenal and the next bastion is rural India. Ten years down the line,we shouldn’t be surprised if there are 1 billion mobile phones in India. In contrast,366 million people have access to improved sanitation,interpreted as toilets. Earlier,there was a WHO/UNICEF report that said that out of 1.2 billion people who

defecate in the open in the world,665 million are in India. There are two new data sources that will soon be available,Census 2011 and NSS (National Sample Survey) large sample for 2009-10. These are certain to change several perceptions about the nature of poverty in India,just as before 2004-05,anti-reformers refused to believe growth could have reduced poverty. However,a factoid from Census 2001 is still relevant. In 2001,India had more religious institutions (temples,mosques etc) than education and health institutions combined. At a certain level,this reflects national priorities.

But more importantly,why did the mobile revolution,especially of the pre-paid kind,happen? Had we left it to landlines provided by MTNL and BSNL,there would have been no revolution. (It is a separate matter that both MTNL and BSNL have improved,courtesy competition.) The point isn’t technology,though access to technology enables one to leapfrog. At the very high end,in expensive hotels,we may soon have toilets equipped with Net browsing. The point is competition and private sector delivery. The point is also reduced costs. UNU cites

a figure of $300 required to build a toilet,including labour and material and argues returns from sanitation are several times higher,because of lower health costs and higher productivity. $300 is a global figure and is on the high side. An Indian figure,in instances where open defecation is the norm,is unlikely to be much over $30.

The phenomenal increase in school enrolments is largely because of increased demand,though supply has also improved because of competition and NGO involvement. We should now begin to witness that demand increase for health too and poor households will be willing to pay for building private toilets,use-based user charges being another option. However,let us not squander public resources through inefficient public expenditure.