Let's wait for that minute. Give them another minute. Okay. I think we should start. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Prit, representing ISAN. And it's wonderful to see many familiar faces again in Stockholm. A very warm welcome to this session. On SFDs, it's use and potential in the sanitation sector. Well, SFDs are not new for most of us. So I will cut the introduction and go straight to the efforts that have been focused on developing the SFDs so far. And of course, we've seen a lot of uses of SFDs. And I think today we will focus on the use, not only the use, but in different areas such as planning and policy, but also different areas like resource recovery, climate change. And in the end, we will also talk a little bit on the technical aspects that have come in, a bit of new innovations that are coming in with regards to SFDs. So based on that, we have three sessions. We have very interesting speakers here in total nine, I suppose. And I'm pretty sure it's going to be a very interesting event. But at the same time, it's going to be a packed day. So let's hope that we keep time. Before I open the floor, I have a few announcements to make. Firstly, the session is being live-streamed on YouTube, I guess, for people who, for participants who have not made it to Stockholm this year. So it is being live-streamed on YouTube. If you can, and if you want to, interact on Twitter with various presentations and say how great it was, please do so on hashtag SFD exchange 2016. The final addition to the announcement is that we are having a few interviews from members of the SFD promotion initiatives, but also other members who are here. And for that, a lovely lady called Sophia will approach you for interviews. So please be supportive and give her your time and your best thoughts on this regard with regards to SFDs and the SFD initiative. Now without further delay, I would ask Anna to come and give opening remarks. Anna doesn't need any introduction. I think it would be rude on my part to give him an introduction. So Anna, please, the stage is yours. Yes, OK. Hello from my side. Is it the mic working? Perfect. Yes, it seems so. It's maybe not too much working here, but working in that whole globe. Great to see you here. Great to start with you the water week or even before. I'll drop a few words on how I met Barbara. I was in the beginning of the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance. I was quite active in the first five years. Then I was working in GIZ in a different part, but I went in 2013 to the World Water Week and saw that diagram and was absolutely excited because it brought together centralized, decentralized system. It brought together matter flows. It brought together percentage. It was all in one picture and people who usually don't see that they relate to another, with that picture they can see they relate to each other.  And happily, I was happy Barbara liked the idea and that Susanna could be a neutral platform and as well from the World Bank and from the other fathers and mothers of the idea liked to have that controlled explosion. And as well the Gates Foundation liked the idea and we got some support there and so that's how the promotion initiative came into being. So we developed tools to make an SFD. We emphasized how important this is to have a context description. We had as a backbone the World Bank study on the 12 cities which are sort of where it came from. And in every discussion on SFD somebody came up with another brilliant idea what you could do with that. And to have the broader discourse, how it influenced thinking to harvest that, to bring it to the website was always the intention on one hand and to as well use the Susanna network for roll out to as a sounding board and to have it on the Susanna platform. That's what we are having. And last year in the Susanna meeting I pressed the button and the website was on and launched and this year we're having this meeting on different actors who use SFDs in various ways, who have technical ideas or who have other uses and I'm very happy that you're all here and I look forward to listening to you. I think that's it for the opening. Thank you. Thanks Anna, thanks a lot. All right, without wasting any more time going straight to the presentations. A few clarifications. We have three sessions as I mentioned. Each presentation is 10 minutes and then we have a question and answer round of five minutes after that. But I would request you to direct your questions which are pertaining to the presentation, the methodology x, y, z to the presenter. If you have any remarks, comments, inputs, so on and so forth please hold it back for the discussion round which will take place after every session. We want to have a very lively discussion so please hold those thoughts then. But if you have any questions pertaining to the presentations go ahead and ask them during the question and answer round. I'm sure we are going to fall short of time and not all questions will be answered. So in that case I would ask you to kindly approach the speakers personally after or during the break we have. Good. And my kind request again to the presenters to keep it within 10 minutes. Right. Our first presenter today is Ms. Surajah Raj from Emory University. Surajah is a public health program associate at Emory and is coordinating the research and dissemination activities there. She's going to present us the linkages between SANYPATH and the SFD tool focusing on what to do once you have the results from an SFD and how SANYPATH can provide additional information to the SFD itself. Surajah, the floor is yours. Thank you. Is this mic good? Okay, great. Thank you. As is mentioned, my name is Surajah Raj and I'm from the Center for Global Safe Wash at Emory University and I work on the SANYPATH team and we'll be discussing with you today how the SANYPATH tool can build on the results of the SFDs. So I'm going to do this through a case study from our work in Velour, which is the city in Tamil Nadu in India. In Velour, we worked in two neighborhoods, Chenalapuram, also known as CAP, an old town. And this work was done in collaboration with the Christian Medical College Velour and the MaliD study. So I'm going to focus on two of the study objectives we had in Velour. The first was to understand the dominant pathways of exposure to fecal contamination in these two neighborhoods. And the second is to quantify the associations between household toilets and FSM with fecal contamination. And so as I go through this, I'm going to divide the rest of this talk into three parts. The first is the deployment of our SANYPATH tool in Velour. The second was work that a colleague of mine, David Brenda, did in creating shit flows diagrams from the SANYPATH data in Velour. And then also some additional spatial analysis that was done building on the work with SANYPATH in Velour. So starting off with the SANYPATH tool, many of you might be familiar with it, but the tool essentially is a way to assess exposure to fecal contamination in urban setting and provide sort of a systematic and customizable method to do so. The idea is that this can help guide decision making and advocacy surrounding urban sanitation. And it also includes a software package which is mobile data collection as well as an online interface to complete the analysis. The field methods that we use in SANYPATH can primarily be divided into two categories, one are environmental sample collection and the second is behavioral surveys. We conduct, we collect environmental samples from different pathways that we, we call them pathways in the environment where people might be exposed to fecal contamination. So this includes soils, open drain, public latrines, drinking water, bathing water and produce. In the case of Velour we also collected additional samples at the household level which I won't spend too much time talking about for this presentation. All of these samples were actually then analyzed for E. coli in the laboratory as an indicator of fecal contamination and in Velour we did sort of an extension of this along with our work with the MALID study and tested for enteroagrative E. coli and norovirus G1 and G2. We also collected behavioral surveys and these surveys are really trying to understand sort of the populations, behaviors that put them into contact with these different pathways that we also take samples for. So we asked for example how often someone might consume the municipal piped drinking water in a week. And we collected household surveys, school surveys of children ages 10 to 12 as well as community group surveys. Additionally we also had GPS data to go along with all the samples collected and the households where we conducted these surveys. So real quick, the analysis that we do with the data that's collected from Sanipath is we take the behavioral data from the surveys up there on the left and then we also have the environmental contamination data from E. coli, about E. coli. And this is combined with other parameters from the literature, so this includes sort of the average, in the case of drinking water, how much the average person might drink in a day, the duration of their exposure, if it's something like maybe open drains, et cetera. And we create what we're calling risk profiles. And these risk profiles have two components to them. One is the percent exposed and that's what you can see from these red people, which might be a little light to see on this slide. And so in this case, from this example, we're looking at piped water and we see that 89% of the people are exposed to piped water, so that means they've reported drinking the piped water on a weekly basis. The other component to this is the color of the redness. So there is a scale. So a darker red versus a lighter red and a darker red indicates that there is a greater dose of E. coli that's ingested. And dose means sort of how much E. coli someone ingests per month. And this again takes into account these other parameters. So I don't have time to show you all the results as much as I wish I could, but we will focus on the dominant pathways that we saw in these two neighborhoods in India. So in both the CAP and Old Town neighborhoods, we saw that piped water and drain water were the pathways that pose the greatest risk of exposure. And this is shown by the number of red people in each of these graphs, as well as the dose. So both all of these sort of have, in piped water we can see, oops, too much, okay. Piped water, we can see that over 80%, whoo, sorry, this is slipping down. That went through everything. Just want to make sure everyone's paying attention. Okay, so the number of red people shows the amount of people exposed. So piped water was dominant in both neighborhoods and then the degree of redness again shows how much E. coli is ingested. So drain water, again in both situations over 50% of people were exposed to drain water and ingested a pretty decently high dose. This was true for both adults and children and the children graphs are not up here but I'm happy to show anyone who's interested later.  Talk a little bit about how Sanypath can build upon these SFDs.  So what Sanypath can help try to get at is, should quantify how much, how often and how much contamination people are exposed to when it ends up back in the environment.  These were based on the household surveys that were conducted as part of the Sanypath work, and it also incorporating several assumptions based for the data, which I'm happy to again expand on later if you're interested in. But this is the one for CAP, this is the one neighborhood and what we can see here is actually that coverage of toilets is pretty decent, it's about 73 percent, but a lot of the shit just ends up back in the environment anyway. So 89 percent of the sludge ends up back in the environment, only 11 percent is safely disposed. In Old Town, we see kind of a different situation where the onsite sanitation is not so high, but open defecation is quite high, so you still have a lot of shit ending up back in the environment, and very little safely treated. Knowing what we do know, David also conducted some additional spatial analysis, which uses the information that we collected during Sanypath as well as some additional information that was collected, and this is essentially doing some analysis with clustering, which we'll get into a little bit more. What happens is we conduct a spatial scan that statistically tests the differences of certain clusters in the neighborhood and compares that to the rest of the neighborhood, and if that makes no sense, here's an example. So the circle that you see with the solid line, I'm sorry I don't have a pointer right now, but the circle with the solid line shows a cluster of households with high reported toilet coverage, and the spatial analysis compares this area to the rest of the neighborhood, and shows that relationship to the pathogen concentration in the drains. So this clustering of toilets and poor FSM was looked at for both neighborhoods, and it was looked at for various amounts of coverage and poor FSM, and what we saw was actually that in areas of high toilet coverage, that the concentration of pathogens was actually higher in the drains outside these households, and what that really gets at is that toilets alone are not necessarily enough to contain the feces, and that FSM needs to be considered, and so the far left shows high toilet coverage and that relationship to the concentration of norovirus, and then the one on the right shows these high toilet coverage specifically that leads directly into the open drains, and how that actually is associated with the higher norovirus concentration. So in summary, the deployment shows that the pipe drinking water and open drains pathways were the highest risk in both these neighborhoods, and from the SFDs we can see that while the estimated toilet coverage is quite high in one of the neighborhoods, the proportion of safely managed excreta was still low in both of them, and really what we can tell again from this latter spatial analysis is that we see that these are complimentary, and we see that the information about the higher coverage of toilets and poor FSM actually had more pathogens than drains, and this is consistent with the data from Sanipath that show that drains were actually a high exposure for these populations. So I've run out of time, but I'm happy to answer any questions that you have, and just want to quickly acknowledge everyone who is a part of this work. Okay. Any specific questions? I will take three. Unfortunately, run of the time, Linda. Hi. Hi. Hello. Linda Strande from Sondac. Could you just briefly explain exactly how the SFD links to Sanipath? Is it that you use it to identify these clustered areas? So I guess I'm not trying to say that the SFD leads to Sanipath. I'm just saying that the infer- Oh yeah, links. So I think the way I'm trying to present this and I'm sorry if it wasn't clear, is that really that more information about this area is what Sanipath can provide.   But what Sanipath can tell you is maybe where specifically in the environment. So we're talking about open drains or piped water, etc. And also what that means for the people, because it might be that this is ending up in the environment, but people aren't actually exposed to it because of their behaviors. So that's really where Sanipath comes in. Any more questions? Yes. Thank you both. Yeah. Hi. My name is Ingeborg from IRC. I was wondering in these two neighborhoods. Yeah. In Velore, how did the authorities react to this? Are they taking this up or is there any linkages with the authorities? So that's a great question. And so David, my colleague, has actually just finished his dissertation work related to this. So we're still in the process of dissemination for this. So we'll let you know how it goes once we start sharing it more with the local stakeholders. Yes, ma'am. Could you be wondering a little bit about the... Speak for the world. Yeah, I'm Meera Mata from SEPT University, India.  If I understand the results of your work correctly and if you walk around in any small town or even large town in India or other developing countries where there is no sewage, the drains obviously are key too. And therefore, I'm again asking that whether we need to focus on waste water flows equally as fecal matter and cannot separate out the two. Barbara, I saw you shaking your head, so... Can we keep this for the discussion? Perhaps? Well, just to clarify, there is never intended to be a distinction. I mean, what we're trying to do is understand where fecal pathogens are flowing in the system.  So there are ways of handling that. Just by chance, this one we're looking at here has only on-site sanitation and no water-based flows. But obviously, if you use our methodology, you would see where a lot of that would be going into drains. We'll come to it, yes. But your point is extremely valid. The whole point is to understand what's your biggest problem, which is, I think, what exactly the Sanipath team are also pointing at. And just wanted to say that this issue of drains is really super important because it keeps getting neglected and ignored and it comes right back down round to that sort of whole drainage question. Sorry. Okay, I'm sorry, I've run out of time. I have to go to the next speaker. Thanks a lot, Suraj. Thank you. All right, moving on to our second speaker, Professor Dinesh Mehta from SEPT University is, please, the floor is yours. Okay, unlike the previous study which talks about two neighborhoods, we're talking about a project that we've been involved in in India for about now seven years. We have information of nearly 700 cities and we've been collecting this over time and we have some pamphlets of this project. So if you're interested, you can end of the presentation, we can send you. So we started doing this work. Of course, the Gate Foundation support started in the, if you know India, then the two states of Gujarat in Maharashtra. Now the work is extended to the states of Chhattisgarh, Telangana. Our team is currently in the state of Assam training the municipal authorities. And we have a pending request from Rajasthan, which we have not yet managed to reach out to. The idea is to develop performance indicators on water, sanitation, and since it was partly also linked to government of India program, we also collect information on how solid waste is collected, disposed. So we have all of these information. And then we use this to monitor it by the local government, by the civil society, it's out in the website. And then we build capacities of cities to how to use this information with various tools and methods to improve their delivery of services. Anyway, I've just said this. So the idea is on the website, we have all these interactive dashboards. You can even go to the website now, pass.org.in and see for various cities, all the information that you want. As I said, 750 cities, five states. And then in between the government of India had collected some information in the year 2011-12. So we've sort of put that also on our system. So we now have some 1800 data cities information. Since we were funded by Gate Foundation and their focus was on sanitation. So for the past two, three years, we've been focusing on sanitation and we've done a range of things. SEPT University, some of you may know, we are primarily an architecture planning university. So our approach is always city as a whole and no sample, no nothing. So a lot of work that we did came from looking at cities, supporting cities and then developing tools, et cetera. These are the sets of indicators nearly over 100 plus. So the top row are the KPIs, the key performance indicators that are aligned to the government of India system. But we have these range of other what we call local action indicators which actually help cities to develop their plans, et cetera. I'm just going to move to this slide. So the government of India's indicators, the KPI on sanitation focused only on sewerage system. So they thought any city that has a sewerage system is a sanitized city, I mean no other city. So we found that in our sample of 450, now these two states, if you know India, Gujarat and Maharashtra are more developed states and even in these states, only about 30 cities had a functioning sewerage treatment plant and only about 50 cities had a sewerage network. Now there are cities with network. So a large number of cities depended on onsite networks. So we said, let's develop another sets of indicators for how do you measure onsite indicator system in a city. And then we have a, so we have a range of indicators that we collect information from the cities on this onsite indicator. And then we have a situation cities that have partial sewerage, partial onsite system. So then we have the mixed sanitation system. And we call these as the sand benchmark because this we think is the kind of a system that we really need to use.   These are the numbers. I mean, you can draw them in a diagram or you can look at them in the numbers and we can generate these numbers for all those 500, 600 cities that we have. And we try to compare sewerage with non sewer cities at the state level and we find that in the coverage and in the collection efficiency things work but in the treatment capacity because large number of cities in Maharashtra the waste is not treated so that efficiency goes down but in a state like Chhattisgarh that much more of waste is treated so it goes up, et cetera. We have brilliant team of experts on Excel they can play around. So all our data is downloaded onto an Excel sheet. Oops, where did we go? Sorry, we need to go back. How do we go back? Here, oops, went wrong way. Yeah, so on this Excel sheet you can just click here and it's a downloaded kind of a statement. You can either do a wastewater diagram.  Wastewater is a bit more complicated because that is linked to how much water is used and how much of water is actually so our information on water consumption, how much LPCD is used. Now because it's Excel we can't draw your downward curve Barbara but other than that I think it's the same kind of a diagram. And so these are the kind of diagram that we do. We tried linking with the GIZ system so one of the cities that we worked on we tried to use the format. We almost were tempted to develop a Excel macro, a word macro where we could just plug in the data and generate 400 of this report but we just held back and we said that will be overkill just to do that. We are saying that you need to go much beyond SFDs as they are understood when you want to deal with cities and when you want to deal with city planning. So this was the existing waste flow in one of the cities in Maharashtra that we work. You can see the details that we have done. Now this will require little more studies at the city level and look at the flow of how it is going and then see what the cities need to do to make all the reds into green and so what are the range of actions that are required. And this is something that we found very useful in dealing with cities and in dealing with city planning and that's been the approach that we have been following. This is the city where we have been working and there are a range of things. It takes time. We've been working in the city for two years so it's not this one short kind of a work that you do but we are engaged with the cities on a, this is it.  Whether you want it in a diagram which takes a bit of an effort, especially the downward flow arrows but otherwise the numbers are there. SFD is an advocacy tool but I think in Indian context the advocacy is done. The government of India has bought onto FSM every city recognizes that they don't really, so we don't really need to spend enough effort just advocating for FSM. I think that challenge is how do you plan for it? How do cities actually work? And that is where the decision support tools, et cetera that we've been working on, the kind of thing that we showed. We're saying it should never be a one-off activity if you really want to engage with cities and you need to be engaged with them on a continuous one. Thank you for your attention. Thank you very much. Perfect. Yes, the floor is open for questions. Yes. Thank you. I am Christophe Fischerli from PSU. Thanks very much Dinesh for your presentation. I think very interesting to consider not only a crater but also wastewater and I am really interested by your last points because I think it's very useful to have such data but what we could expect is to follow the improvement or not improvement in the various cities. How do you expect to respond to this last point? I think it could be very useful for all of us to have to share with us your feeling about this. How do we do this? Yes. How do you update the data? How do you update the data needed for the sheet floor diagram or for your wastewater floor diagram? As a part of this project, we do this every year. So annual information collection work. I mean, that's part of the, we work with local governments and the state government. When we have to help cities to- For 500 cities. Yeah, for 500 cities. But when you want to get cities to develop a FSM plan and implement, we realize that our information system requires little more hand-holding. And there we have a tool, I'll put out that as well. So we have an FSM planning tool which the cities really need to. So there we need to do the assessment. How often are the septic tanks emptied? And you know in Indian context, septic tanks are much larger than what they are supposed to be. They are emptied not every two, three years, but they are emptied once in seven years, eight years. So in our diagram, we have two columns emptied regularly. So that's really safe emptying. Then emptied not frequently. And so that's something that is like an unsafe emptying, but it is still emptied.  So every septic tank is actually emptied, but this is the information that we have to collect. In the field, going around, I keep saying our work is to develop tools. So we have another tool because everybody calls Senni, Senni path, Senni plan. We have a tool called Sennitab. It's just an Android-based app on a tablet. So you can go around the cities. You can take the pictures. You can do all the geo-coding. And we've used this in the cities in where we work. So that is what is used to collect the additional information. Okay. Arno. And then, gentlemen on the right. Yeah. Arno Rosmarin from Stockholm Environment Institute. I'm interested in knowing how you generate this data. Is it from sampling from within your team? Or is it through interviews? And is there any hesitancy about the provision of data, for example, from the utilities and the cities about how good they are or how efficient the treatment is? Have you had any experience with that kind of thing? Okay. The data is collected from the Indian context where we work in these five states. The city government, the local government itself is the utility. They provide water, sanitation service. So they provide this information. We have an online module on our website. We have trains. So our teams, actually in the first two years, we used to go to every city and collect the information on our own. But these days, every city just spends once. There's a cycle of two months. The state government issues directives. And then they all start filling up the information. There is no hesitancy because there is an incentive involved. There's a performance grant that is linked as a part of the National Finance Commission. So if they don't fill in the data, they don't get that money. So there is that incentive. What about variability? Is there something that might be useful in some, for example, rainy season data against dry season it? Yeah, we haven't captured that. Much of this information is what we would call average information. We haven't done the seasonal variation, et cetera. In Mumbai city, we are now trying out, there are, I mean, Mumbai city is 20 million people, like much bigger than many countries. So there, now we are doing a ward-wise spatial information collection. So hoping to see spatial variation, but it'll still be. Meera, you want to? And we are linking it to the e-government system so that this information is then on a continuous basis. I have one more question here. Hi. It's on. Yeah, this is Martin Gamble from the World Bank. Thank you for the two presentations. Very interesting. I know the Sandy Path one well. I think what would be interesting would be to understand, picking up on the last point, would be to understand how much works involved in doing this, what the skill profiles are of the people that go out and gather the data, how long it takes, how much it costs. I think for all of the different examples, that would be really helpful. We've discussed this with Christine in the Sandy Path, exactly how much it costs to do it. And it would be great, I think, for all of these different approaches to understand, again, the skill profiles, the tools, the surveys and modalities, the costs and the time that is needed to do this. And another thing is we know that a lot of informal sludge, be it manual or tankering happens at night, it's done when people can't see you for a number of reasons, because it's embarrassing or because it's illegal. And I wonder how you get around that to also measure what's really happening, which is a big challenge as we know. Well, the first part is the information in the first year of the project, it took us a year for the whole state of Gujarat. And we had a team of 40 people working in Gujarat and Maharashtra, the two states. So total of this 300 cities, 300 plus cities, it took us one year, every city, because they had to be, I think like the question wall, they had to be first convinced that this is information that they have to provide it for their own good, so on and so forth. We did not really have online tools, we were doing it on an Excel sheet and doing all that. Today, it takes three hours for every city to fill up this information, because it's online module in the state of Assam where our team is going, 40 cities, our team will spend two weeks building capacities of cities, show them what it is, gather them in a room, and then they will go to their respective cities and fill up the data. We'll finish Assam in a month, 40 cities. And sitting in Mumbai, we will not go to Assam except for this capacity building program. So that's what, how the system has been developed. So today, this system, it's designed for Indian context, but in India, any state can use this system anytime. Second question is a more difficult one because lots of septic tank emptiers are not registered with the local government. If they are registered with local government, then we have the log books, and then we know how many times they have gone and how many they have emptied. The unregistered septic tank emptiers, fortunately in the state of Maharashtra that where we are working on detail, much less of that happens, but it happens. I mean, we're not saying that it does not happen, but that is something that we don't capture in our day. But it's not as bad as Bangalore or something that you have heard stories of. No, Maharashtra is much saner, there are more regulated efforts then. Okay, unfortunately I'm short on time, but maybe you can keep your thoughts for the discussion round. Thank you very much, Professor. My slide. Okay. All right, our next presenter, Barbara, where everyone knows Barbara, she doesn't need an introduction there. Can you just say that, it's always bad news. Well, for people who don't know Barbara, I would rather add that she has been one of the prominent members within the SFD community right from the beginning, or should I put it the other way around, Barbara is the beginning of SFDs. Well, and the floor is yours. Thank you very much. Shall I just do this one? Okay. This is really nerve-wracking. I'm really freaked out now. Okay, so I just want to say that this whole SFD conversation has sort of spun out of some work that was done by colleagues of mine at WSP along with myself and Andy Peel. And I do want to just say now, and I'll probably say again, it's so exciting that we're now actually all talking once again as probably was happening 30 years ago about whole sanitation systems, which was our original objective in kind of raising this issue. So I love the fact that we can talk about where are our boundaries? Are we including wastewater, not including wastewater? What do we care about the drains? Shall we include solid waste? Because that's the whole purpose of the conversation is to get cities thinking about what actually is the problem I'm trying to solve. The other thing that's very interesting is about levels of detail and data. And Dinesh has just told you a really great story about a system that is sufficiently well advanced that cities are using it for sort of ongoing planning and monitoring process, which is fantastic. We're not there everywhere. And also, we don't always need data at that sort of level of detail. So sometimes we're thinking about what's going on in the local neighborhoods, sometimes in the city level.  This work, this presentation was prepared by Andy Peel and Kate Medelko at WHO, also Luca DiMario. And Lars Scherwitz was quite involved in this work. I'm really just the spokesman, although I do occasionally poke my nose into this. So if it's wrong, blame me. But if you really like it, I think we have to give the credit to them, really. So I'm just going to talk a little bit about target 6.2 and 6.3, how they link to the sanitation service chain, a little bit of the rationale about monitoring. And I'm going to present to you what WHO are currently trialing in four cities to see if we can use this as a framework for reporting on safely managed sanitation, which I'm sure you can all appreciate is the right thing to do, but much harder than monitoring access to toilets. So that's what we're talking about. As you may know, target 6.2 and 6.3 fit within the whole target six area. So one of the things that's interesting is that by monitoring safely managed sanitation, it's forcing us to engage with the interactions between sanitation and water resources. Target 6.3, to start with, just in case you don't know, is really all about couched around water quality. Its objective is to make sure that we don't put too much nasty stuff into water bodies. And of course, the nasty stuff can come from diffuse agricultural sources, it can come from domestic wastewater, and it can come from municipal, sorry, from industrial wastewater. And we tend to cluster the latitude together as municipal. Nobody's talking about going out and monitoring every diffuse point source of pollution because I think even the UN realized that that's gonna be a little bit too tricky. So partly to get to that, we have this focus on water quality, which I think is really important. But we do also have quite a sort of strong mandate now to really understand what's happening at the municipal level, because it feeds into water quality, but it also feeds back into the types of services that people are experiencing. So for me, Target 6.3 is really powerful because it links together the sort of water resources and environmental aspects of what we do with the service and household experience of sanitation, of what we do or community level sanitation. I'm not going to talk about industrial wastewater in this presentation, because that's a big topic and I don't have time. So let's go back to Target 6.2, because by monitoring Target 6.2, what we're doing is contributing that domestic piece to Target 6.3. The indicator, well, no, the indicator is the percentage of the population using safely managed sanitation services. And the definition that we're using for safely managed services is that it's the population using what we used to call an improved type of facility, which is not shared with other households where the excreter is either safely disposed in situ or transported and treated effectively offsite. So we have to capture both that on-site action and the off-site action. And the reason for that is something that we've already heard from Sirajah and Dinesh raised it and some of your questions raised it is that I think everybody understands now that if you don't, you can build toilets as much as you like, but you've got to capture, get the crap out of the environment. So just in case those of you who don't know, essentially what we're saying is that we're going to, well, in the JMP, we're going to go on monitoring everything that we've always reported on up to what's now called basic sanitation equivalent of what used to be improved sanitation, but there's an added level at the top, which is how much of that improved private sanitation goes into a system which results in safe management. And there's a sort of similar ladder for monitoring because of course, monitoring that is very difficult. So we've got to monitor beyond the household and we've got to monitor multiple systems. So this speaks to Mira's point that it's no good just talking about pit latrines, it's no good just talking about sewers. And I have to say as a reflection, I feel quite often that I'm in a time walk because I've been in an awful lot of meetings with an awful lot of people who don't seem to have been paying attention for the last 30 years and still seem to think that sanitation is utterly and 100% equivalent to pipe sewerage and wastewater. And I'm just going to look at Arno for sympathy because I think he'll understand how painful that is to me. Okay, so essentially we have a matrix where we're interested in who has access to these types of systems on the left and what happens to them. So for sewerage, we're interested in how much of the wastewater in pipe sewers actually reaches an appropriate treatment. I'm not going to talk about what that means at the moment. That's the side conversation which we can come to in a moment. For onsite sanitation, we're also interested in those onsite systems which are emptied and where the waste reaches treatment. And we also have to measure those systems where treatment happens onsite and it's acceptable either because there's a twin pit nutrient that actually works or there's safe abandonment of the toilet or whatever it might be. So it's quite fiddly. And of course, in order to do that, we have to go, we have to split that framework out a little bit because to understand how much waste is reaching the treatment plant, you can't just look at the efficiency of your treatment plant. You've got to work out how much of the crap that you took out of the toilets or put into your sewers at the start actually got to that process. So we do need to understand what's going on in the transportation system, what's happening when pits are emptied and what's happening at the household level because how many of these systems are actually working properly. And that gives us the proportion of people using safely managed sanitation. And that contributes to target 6.3 which is the percentage of safely treated wastewater. We've done this work. We've done some proof of concept work in four countries. This is a country in Latin America that for reasons of me not being taken outside and shot later, I can't tell you which country it is, but this is actually quite a nice story. But what you can see is that we're disaggregating the yellow, the orange and the red is what we've always said is not what we want at all. The green is people who have decent toilets but where we really don't think we're solving that drain problem, essentially. And then the little dark green arrow at the top is first prize. And I think as a sort of way of conceptualizing this, what we've found in the proof of concept engagement is that that makes a lot of sense to people. So in conclusion, what is the proposal for monitoring targets 6.2.1 and 6.3.1? It builds on existing MDG monitoring. So we don't want to throw away what we've already got. We want to keep that, but we want to do this more difficult additional piece. It allows flexibility because countries are allowed to transition into reporting on safe management fairly slowly. I'm sure there's a whole load of technical questions about how you collect this data, which I could bore you until the end of the day on. We do like to use this simple graphical overview and we find that's really helpful for understanding this distinction. That has really been a big success. And we have a whole ongoing discussion about what safely treated means. And of course, one of the ideas that we're trying to build in there is the same idea that's in the 2006 wastewater reuse guidelines, which is safe treatment is determined by what happens subsequently. So we're trying to build in the concept of risk. And that's it. Thank you very much. Questions, Linda? Yeah, I just had a quick, easy question. Could you touch on when you're using such a simple diagram, how do you capture national complexity in one quick snapshot like that? Because you have rural areas, urban areas, all different types of systems. Yes, so one of the things that we've done so far is that we always report separately on rural and urban. And we don't know yet, but I think what's likely to happen is that some countries may also want to disaggregate further into major cities, small towns. And one of the things we're trying to build in is basically we're saying to countries, we don't mind how much you disaggregate. There is a data availability, data reliability question. It's not very easy, but your point is very well taken because to use that as any kind of driver for decision making at the country level, you need to see the differences between those categories. This may sound like a very trivial question, but terminology, I don't think we penetrated the terminology challenge with the MDGs. And that's okay, we have lots of... That was God striking us down for saying that. You know, the word sanitation to me is not globally understood, especially in the U.S. so that it means solid waste collection. So how are we gonna deal with the fact that a lot of the people within the U.N. system are not using the same terms as maybe what you might use in the U.K. or what we've just heard from India? You know, I think that's a challenge in itself because everything's about words when it comes to the SDGs. Yes, I absolutely agree. And I think one of the things that we're sort of unpacking a little bit in trying to sort of work out how we do this monitoring is some of that. But I think that's a bigger question. I think it's a really important question and I don't know the answer, but I think it's a good thing to sort of flag. And maybe we can discuss it more generally later. Thanks, Anand. To refer to, and I was a little bit involved with some of those exercises, that the GMP database is very correctly and based on household survey database. And one difficulty of getting the rest of the chain, so to say, from household survey database. And how has that been addressed in the POC countries? Yeah, that is the $100 million question and it's a really difficult question. It's one of the reasons why I now dye my hair because underneath this it's all pure white, I can tell you because of that. No, it is a really, really big problem. And one of the things that we're trying out is a bunch of different ways of marrying together institutional data with household data. One of the things that I think is really important and I personally think it's a really good decision is the idea that we maintain the old ladder and add this additional level because the quality of the data that we report on that top level will be materially different. I wouldn't say it would be better or worse, but it will be a different type of data, there's no doubt about that. We should know in a few months time what it really looks like for these four countries and then we'll have a better idea. But it's a big exercise and we are, well, the WHO team particularly are extremely aware that we can't jump every country straight into doing this because it's much harder than what we've been doing before. Just aside, I mean you could marry the household data that comes out of DHS or NSS with the kind of information system that we have. That would be exactly what we do. And so then you would really have it. No, no, no, you can do it and there is a sort of a logical way of trying to statistically link those pieces of data together, but it's still not trivial to do. You have to do it with some care. Any further questions? I mean, I'm happy to talk to people out of this session on a bit more on the sort of techy stuff that we're trying. Well, but they're trying. Good. If no more further questions, I'd like to open the floor for the more discussions. I asked the presenters to come up on stage and we could probably then have a bit more lively discussion. Please. So we've, ah, but we can kick off some questions. We can kick some dirt. Don't worry. Oops, sorry. All right. They're all in the light there. They're all like pushed on the power point. Yes, we can push the power point down. Do you want a blank screen? Yeah, kind of blank screen. Like that or even next time? Like what? You could just escape it. It's not going to work.  Yes, great. So we have seen interesting cases from neighborhood city going on to the national level with JNPs. So quite a nice step where the SFTs are taking their different activities within. And I personally would like to start with one discussion round, especially on the validity and reliability of data and when you're feeding into the system. I know it's a difficult one, but is there a way around it? Can we get through to it? And especially when you're going from city level, you mentioned that you expect the cities to feed into the system and then generate the SFTs. But since it is based on their performance, they would of course show them the data in better light. I would put it in that way. And is there a way around it? Because if that feeds on to the JNP, then on the national level, you'll have a very false image of what the whole thing should look like. Barbara? Okay, so I'll just chip in first and say, yes, this is always a problem. And it arises for some of the sort of negative reasons that you mentioned. It also arises just from a straightforward lack of information and lack of knowledge. And so all over the place, we find informal systems, we find, and one of the things that we find is what I call, well, in fact, we talk about it in the SFD initiative a lot, the sort of storytelling problem that you go to a city and people say, well, do you know 40% of these pit latrines are safely abandoned and we don't have a problem? And that's just, it's a persistent story that's very hard to address. Or, oh yes, well, we have a wastewater treatment plant and it works fine. And you're like, well, actually let's go and have a look at it. It doesn't seem to be working fine today. So one of the things we talk about, and I'm sure it's the same in the past project, is that there's a sort of progressive engagement with the process. And the first prize goes to getting people to have the conversation.  The process is really important. And we've had loads of experiences in the SFD initiative of, you know, you start off with something and then you end up around the table with people actually sort of arguing the toss together. And that's what you were trying to achieve. And maybe, you know, I'm a little bit of an academic these days. So, you know, maybe the answer, then somebody says, do you know what would be really good? Let's go and measure some of this. And then suddenly you've really moved on. So I think this is quite a dynamic thing. And it speaks also to the point that Dinesh made about definitely not thinking of this as a, as a sort of single point of intervention. Would you like to add on? The issue of reliability is always on our mind. In the first two years, as I was, I think, responding to the Martin's question, that we had teams going out. But that, I mean, we really didn't have, now that we are working with five states, seven, 800 cities, that process just can't happen around. And we wanted to develop a system that can be replicated in India. Others can take on. There is no proprietary for our system. So what is happening is that over time, cities have started, as Barbara was saying, the first two years when we worked, they had no information. Now that it happens in the annual cycle, so they know that the months of February and March. So in fact, they start calling up our people and say, look, it's February, you haven't sent us letters that we have to feed in information. We have the whole file ready. I mean, and that's like music to our ears because large number of cities have begun to prepare themselves for it. And our final effort is now that many cities are moving to what they call e-government system, large number of information. Today, it's more the consumer driven. So you get birth certificate, death certificate, property tax bills, all on the system. But we are saying, what other information can we add so that all these water and sanitation related information? And because we work with the state governments and the local government, we can always feed in. So now a lot more of these onsite information in terms of septic tanks, emptying, licensing, is all becoming part of the records and registration. Hopefully, reliability will improve. And with one, it is linked to this e-governance. But Sirajah, would you like to add something? I think most of it's been covered. Any more discussion, questions, comments, remarks? Yes. Alex Wolff from Border. Much of my question has been answered by you, Dimesh, already. So regarding advocacy and visibility, the shit for diagrams seems to have already fulfilled their point for these Indian cities. But no, the point I made is that even without it, the FSM was part of the agenda. Yeah. They had not seen this before. Exactly. And also having the electronic tool at hand is very helpful for that. But to me, the question still is, at one point there needs to be more efforts for regarding the origin of the data that might be doable by having the system in place and the mindset. Yeah. No, absolutely. And I think that's one of the things that is always a problem. And I wouldn't say that I can find this here.  I'm a public health engineer and I run a program in a university training public health engineers. I would hate to think that anybody would take any of this and on the basis of any of this, go and design a whole sanitation system for a city. At that point, you still have to go back to your detailed technical design. You still need sewers that go downhill. You still need biological processes that work. You still need septic tanks that properly leech that don't leech. You need pit latrines that do leech, et cetera, et cetera. So I think your point is very well taken that there is a cautionary point to make, which is at a certain moment, if everyone's convinced that this is an important thing to do and you've identified broadly your kind of sanitation intervention, the next step is go hire some good technical people and make it work properly. And your social people for management purposes and your institutional people to get the costings right and all of that stuff. So, and I really appreciate you saying that because I think that's really important. And I don't think we can stretch any of this to some sort of magic. I press a button and I'm going to design a sanitation system for a city of 100,000 people. That would freak me out slightly. Wouldn't you agree? There was a common question there. Yes, please. Thank you. So hi, I'm Christine Moe from Emory University and I just wanted to add on to the work that Sirija presented. So I will be talking about the consistency and reliability of the Sanipath tool in our meeting tomorrow because I think that's also a question. When you collect this data and you start putting the effort and the money to collect data on the ground, is it consistent? Is it reliable? So I think that's an important question. But the other thing I wanted to point out is part of this link between what we find with Sanipath and the shit flow diagram. So I know Sirija presented the map and there is a lot of information on that map. But if I can sum that up, when you start actually pinpointing the households with toilets and the toilets that go into a septic tank versus the toilets that go directly into a drain and you start measuring E.coli, fecal contamination, what we see is that when you have the toilets that go into the drain, indeed you have high levels of E.coli in those spatial hotspots.  It's in the drains, but people come into contact with the drains. If you have the toilets that go into the septic tanks, then we saw that there was less fecal contamination in the drains because the toilet feces is going into the septic tank.  So I think that the way these two back each other up is important. Thank you very much. I'll take a last comment, question, discussion. Hi, I'm Cécile Laboudry. Okay. I'm a WASH consultant. I had, you talked about scalability and within the cities and how more and more cities are using the tool. I wanted to know how we can come to more organization and more experts using the tool. So are the open sources tools and how can we make sure we use them correctly? So I saw the fecal slot diagram. There's a website you can try to log on your data and then I had the feedback from the team. But what about, for example, the SaniPath and the SaniPath? If we think they might be useful in one of our projects, how can we make sure we use them correctly and how can we be supported? Yeah, great question. So we also have a website. It's SaniPath.org and the information about the tool is up there and we have this software will be freely available. It's not up on the website right now, but we've developed everything so that it's open source. So not only is it freely available to download, but if people want to access the source code and build upon it, that they would be able to do that in the future and kind of makes it more specific to their context. We've also tried to kind of lower the barrier to be able to do this sort of exposure assessment by having all the fancy analysis kind of happen in the background and really have it be kind of a clicking the button once you have the data. But if anybody wanted to do additional data analysis, that data is all available for downloads that people could do other things with the data. So yeah, I totally agree with you. Like making this information is more accessible, making it easier for people to use these tools is a very important part and including, for SaniPath, we've developed protocols, videos, et cetera, so that people can kind of follow these guidelines and sort of using it in their own cities. Great. Is it in complement to? It's first. Okay, okay. Quick question. Regarding the number of samples that were collected, maybe you've mentioned it. I was just wondering in terms of numbers because it's also related to costs then. Yeah, absolutely. So Barbara alluded to this sort of the kind of balance between trying to sort of balance the rigor and also ease of using something. And in SaniPath, what we have a recommended amount of samples which is depending on the pathways that are appropriate for the context. So whether it be drains, surface water, et cetera, we recommend a minimum of 10 samples for a pathway. And so the costs will really depend on sort of the number of areas that you're looking at. So are you looking at one neighborhood, two neighborhood, 10 neighborhoods, that all kind of falls into the costs and happy to talk to you a little bit more about the specifics later if you'd like. Great, Anna. To Dinesh, if the awareness raising is done, so then what's the use of an SFD in India? And to Barbara, if the local, what's the specific contribution that the SFD and the context description can bring to that national discussion? Yeah, I mean, in the two years ago when we started doing this whole exercise and recognizing that we needed indicators for onsite sanitation and how it is done, this was not on the radar of the government of India or the state or local government. Over time, not because of SFD, but because of lots of efforts that people have made and cities recognizing that when they build a sewerage system, there is no water to carry the sewer. So it's just lying, people don't connect to it in cities because they have already functioning septic tank. So range of issues, there is a growing recognition that FSM, fecal sludge or onsite sanitation system maintenance is very important. So that awareness has already come. I personally, my opinion is that it is important to recognize how much of waste is treated in what manner. So whether we have what we call the Senn benchmarks, the way we have these numbers, how much of waste is generated, how much is treated, where and what's going in the environment, I think that recognition has to come to the cities. Now, whether you do it through our Senn benchmarks or whether you do it through SFDs, I think it's, to me, they are the same, except that lots of SFDs, at least so far, I have seen have stopped at that stage, that here is an SFD, you do it. I think it requires, as I say, getting into action and how do we bring or translate that SFD into an action plan, into the kind of thing that they require is something that is very important. Sorry, Amira has an answer. Yeah, I guess. To some extent, I would argue that although in India there is now so-called government of India recognition that onsite sanitation is there and should be properly managed. But if you go to towns, and especially medium-sized towns, large-sized towns, the aspiration of local politicians, local officials will be still sewerage. That change will take a long time to come and I think the Senn benchmark or SFD, both actually attempt to do that to show that onsite sanitation properly managed can be as good as sewerage systems. But that, I think, is something that is still equally needed. I'm 100% sure right now if we go to cities in Maharashtra, most of them will say, if we are getting money, we'll prefer sewerage. Nobody will say, oh, I want to build. So that is something that we need to recognize and how do we address that? How do we both create onsite systems that are as good or better than sewerage? And how do we get people to recognize that? That is equally relevant even now, I feel. No, and I would make exactly the same answer, actually, to your other comment, I know that that same problem we see repeated at the national level all over the place. So, you know, classically, if you go to Latin America and you start talking about assessing what's going on in the whole sanitation system and you start talking about urban sanitation, there's a kind of, well, that's fine, because everyone has 100% sewerage and 100% perfect treatment.  So I just wanted to actually touch on something that Dinesh pointed about, that I don't think it doesn't matter at all what the diagram looks like.  And to me, that's, and the most important thing you do is you overcome that sort of, as I say, I call it storytelling. There's a sort of illusion of what's happening. I mean, and for me, the classic example is Dhaka. If you go to Dewasa and you ask Dewasa, what's the sanitation situation in this city, they will tell you, we have 100% sewerage in this city. 100% sewerage coverage. Everybody in this city has sewerage. What they actually mean to say is all the people who are on our list as sewerage customers have sewerage. And the other eight and a half million people do not. But getting to that point of that conversation is like, that's almost to me, that's a huge prize, just having that conversation. I totally agree with Meera. True. Great. Running short of time. Thank you very much. Excellent discussions. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, moving on to our next session, which is more on the other uses of SFDs and how people, organizations have used them in what we would say a bit more unconventional way. I'd like to call upon my next speaker, Kim, Kim Anderson from SEI. So he's a native boy. Please, Kim. Okay. So I have to get this going again. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yes, I'm Kim Anderson from SEI, where you're at now. I'm leading the Stockholm Environment Institute initiative on sustainable sanitation. And today I'm gonna talk about work that is actually inspired by the SFDs. And it's about resource value mapping and seeing the potential resource recovery for productive sanitation in urban areas. With that one? Yep. So I'm gonna start with this shift we have now from the Millennium Development Goals to the Sustainable Development Goals. And focus on the 6.3, which I think is really important. Of course, the 6.2 and all the others are important, but from a resource management point of view, we're starting to talk about which will not be in the MDG improve water quality by reducing pollution, having the proportion of untreated wastewater and increasing recycling and safe reuse globally. So this starting to get interesting, I think. So if we look at the MDGs, a lot of focus on like the facilities, the access to sanitation, but then with the SDG, we can actually, oops, sorry. And we will take us to treatment, hopefully. But if we do it well, we can go all the way to maybe resource recovery and reuse as well. So, and also considering that the sanitation waste is one of many waste streams that we could potentially make use of. So, looking at the urban challenges, many people may know that, but just focusing on cities, for example, in urban area, then about 700 million people lack improved sanitation around the world, about which about 80 million of those are still practicing open defecation in the urban areas. So, why I think resources, actually cities, they really need to start to consider in this. They are a major resource consumer, 75 to 80% of all natural resources are consumed in cities or urban areas, I would say. 80% of supplied energy, about 50% of the waste emissions from urban areas and about 75% of all the G8s, the greenhouse gas emissions. But that's the state today. But it's, we also see an increase because the population is increasing. For example, in developing countries, it's supposed to double from 2000 to 2030, the population in urban areas. Already from 2000 to 2015, it raised from 2.8 to 3.9 billion. So, it's quite a fast increase of the urban population. So, of course that will have a further pressure on the resources as well. Then we have global water demand as an example, which is estimated to increase by 55% to 2050. And on top of all this, climate change impacts with droughts, floods, that directly or indirectly will affect also urban areas. So, as I said, we were inspired by the SFDs this is the Dakar. We have just remade the diagram a little bit because we want to do an exercise after this. But it's based on the SFD for Dakar, this one. And here we have identified the waste, the sanitation waste streams. And we thought, hey, this is really a lot of resources that we are wasting. Why don't we take that a step further and see what's the potential of those resources and do something productive of those? So, that was kind of the start of the initiative. So, that was like the initial idea for a new tool, a resource value mapping tool. So, what we want to do in this diagram want to show that, for example, what do we really talk about when you talk about waste flows in the urban context and try to map that as resources. So, actually we are talking about energy, we're talking about nutrients, organic matter, water, and maybe other valuable minerals, for example. And there are actually a reuse potential using these resources. So, then go back again. So, then we did this with the Dakar case. We started to calculate what if we do something good with all this waste that you saw, the other one was red and they're going dumped in nature or leaking out. If we start to really have a good collection, more or less city-wide, we started with the onsite systems. We didn't touch, for this exercise, we didn't touch the sewage system at this point. So, if we collect and we process it in an aerobic digest and make biogas, what's the potential of that? Maybe we could have some kind of urine separation, simple urinals for men, for example, or even female. And what's the potential then on the productive side? So, actually, even when we discounting for the collection service that this would require, we could see that the energy output would be more or less equivalent to 16,000 kilometers of bus transport per day. So, it actually could support quite a good and more efficient and renewable energies bus system in the town. When it comes to reuse in agriculture with the nutrients coming out of the digesters and from urine. Yeah, I should say also that it's also other organic waste collected from households. So, that could more or less produce, support the production of 50 hectares of rice or more or less 200,000 of tons of rice, which is more or less one fourth of the import of rice to Senegal, which is an important amount. So, what do we want to do with our tool? We really want to have an integrated resource management for cities. So, visualization of what are the resources in the waste so we can get other actors into the discussion around the table, not just the sanitation, water and sanitation people, the users that we target, policy makers, planners, but of course the managers in water, sanitation, waste, entrepreneurs, investors, development practitioners, and of course we want to, these are the primary use of course, we want to get to the agricultural side and to the energy side as well. So, some key initial features to estimate the resources in these flow streams, the waste flow streams and what are the quantities of the reuse products that we can produce, what are the potential revenues in these and compare different reuse options. So, when I was on parental leave, then we had a really excellent student, Daniel De Viva, who made his master thesis, making a first initial development of the tool. So, in, testing it in Campala. So, this is more or less the, what you see in this diagram is the input of that tool as it looked today. So, you can put in different scenarios. So, he used two scenarios, which is the current daily collection of waste, for fecal sludge, for sewage sludge and also organic solid waste in Campala. And also looked at the potential, if all people in the town would have sanitation systems and have collections, then we could reach these values on the right, on the second scenario too. So, some of the results. So, we could look at the revenue. Yeah, I should say also the resource recovery options we looked at were biogas, it was solid fuels, it was black soldier flies and compost fertilizer. Partly because these are techniques that is some scale is being used in the area. And for the revenues, we could see that the solid fuel processing it, for example, as a briquette would give good revenues. If we look at the nutrient content, then the solid fuel, the most nutrients will go up and it will be really hard to capture in a good way in the ass. So, that will be very close to zero while the digested material could be reused and also the material from the co-poster and the black soldier fly. When we look at the energy content, yeah, then the solid fuel is really high and of course the biogas. And the interesting thing is as a solid combustion, if we looked at really the potential value, then we saw that they could almost cover the whole cities, what they used in firewood today. So, actually contributing quite a lot to a more sustainable energy system for the city and reduce forest loss. So, what's the next steps? And we want to expand on what the tool can do, what waste streams. As you saw, we haven't included waste water yet, but of course there is a potential for reuse and irrigation. Animal manure we could add and we could also have more resource recovery options, of course, and also see what we actually are measuring. We need to look at the cost side, I guess, as well. That's the first thing that city planners and managers will ask, but what does it cost to do this, to implement these technologies, resource recovery schemes? We also, today it's been developed in Excel. We want to migrate the tool into a more, to a better tool or platform that is more visually interesting and intuitive for the users. And do cases and validate the tool. In a participatory process, so you actually gain kind of capacity building at the same time when you do it and awareness. And then look at potential integration with other tools and we would really like to see other partners involved in this and co-funding. So, I think more or less my time is out. Just thanks and also say that we have a book on sanitation, wastewater management and sustainability. So, you talked about conflict with sanitation and the wastewater. So, we've tried to capture this in a new book which is released on Monday, water week. So, yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Any questions directed to Kim? Hi, this is Linda from Sondak AirVog. I just had a quick question about how it's a bit more of a technical question about how you look at the cost. Are you looking at dealing with existing fecal sludge infrastructures in a city or are you considering a hypothetical example where things are how you would like them to be? And are you looking at the cost of the resource recovery or are you also looking at the cost of different treatment technologies? Easy question. We're not looking at the cost yet. So, that's the next step. Just looking at the revenues. Revenues. So, it's the value in it. But then, yeah, the next step is to really look at what's the cost to produce this and, yeah, I guess the alternative cost of not doing. So, we should actually compare it to the cost for the society as things are today as well, I guess, if we do that correctly. Like, really look at the cost benefit analysis. So, I guess that's the next step. So, we haven't at all looked at the cost side. Revenue is like intrinsic values like electricity or... Yeah, yeah, yeah, and, yeah, that's, yeah, actually monetary value of the resources with the prices in Kampala today. We haven't actually to do that, I can share with you. Okay, that sounds good. Thanks. Any more questions? Yes, please. I'm Cecil, a Welsh consultant. You talk about like a matrix and Excel sheets. So, it seems you have a very quantitative methodology what about the qualitative aspect which is the capacity of the small enterprises to do this, the willingness, the adaptation of the infrastructure to do this, et cetera, et cetera. The context, actually, and the enabling environment. Yeah, I guess, as it is now, it is Excel sheet and it's based on a lot of input value. But, yeah, the idea is to make the tool as simple as possible. So, if you don't have values, it is based on scientific research to fill the gaps. So, you can actually start with a city without knowing too much and then the more you know about your city, for example, based on SFD data, for example, then you can populate it with more, and I guess then you need to know more about how to do it, be a bit more of a technician. But, the idea is to get going quite easily. And, the idea is to have really good output material. So, you can discuss this with practitioners, with non-technical persons. So, I guess that will also be the next step. How can we present this in a good way so we can communicate with communities? Because, I mean, and that's also, I think, for the future. Now, we kind of have some basic, what do you call it, scenarios. But, I guess in a city, for example, Africa, then we probably will want to continue with decentralized solutions. So, I guess a tool also has to adapt to that to have maybe one scenario but with five cases under that, like five different solutions under that. So, I guess that's something we have to really take into the next phase of the development. Okay, thanks. Barbara first, and then... I'm going to make a very quick observation. That's a great presentation, thanks, Kim. And just to say, again, I think it's important to see these as steps along the chain. So, if you're in a city where you've never had this conversation, I think it's quite good, as you are doing, to have a fairly, sort of almost, you could say, one-dimensional analysis with some understandable data. This represents a quarter of your rice imports to start the conversation. If you then get interest, I think that's then the time to go to the next step and say, well, how are we actually going to do that? So, I would urge you to sort of feel quite positive about the fact that it's not a complete story but it's a way of starting the conversation and it's such a nice, clear representation. I think it's great. And maybe once you think of that, maybe even when we develop it further, maybe one should have this kind of step, a first step where you just screen, screen. So, you actually can start to discuss things and then in the next, you're more in a participatory way, you start to involve more people and then you can start to populate more, et cetera. So, yeah. If you're looking at further steps, then I think following up Linda's question, you also need to look at markets. Where is the market for, because in Indian case, I mean, I think all the solid waste in Indian cities are supposed to be composted.  There is no market. People are not buying it. There is nobody coming forward. So, you really will need to look at what are the reality. The demand side for the resources. On the demand side, exactly. Yeah, definitely. Thanks. But I think you know when Linda pointed it out in Kampala, you're lucky that that research in parallel has been done. So, there are good chances that you hit the nail. Yeah, I think it's a model. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So, I guess that will be challenges where we go elsewhere.  If there are no further questions, I would like to Yeah. call upon the next speaker. Okay. Thanks a lot. Thanks a lot, Ken. Thanks. Our next presenter is Astrid, Michelez. Astrid is based in Thailand, working with GIZ. And she is going to present a case study from Thailand that demonstrates how SFTs have been used in conjunction with another tool that they have developed, the energy and carbon assessment and monitoring tool. Astrid, the floor is yours. Thank you very much for the introduction. My name is Astrid Michelez. I'm with the GIZ. I'm actually not based in Thailand. I'm based in Germany. But we are implementing in Thailand. And I'm going to present to you a story. We're coming here using the SFTs from a little bit of a different angle. And it is the climate, we're coming from the climate change agenda angle. The program that I'm leading is a global program. And it's a joint initiative between the GIZ and the International Water Association. It's implemented on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Natural Resources. We're working in four countries, in Thailand, Jordan, Peru, and Mexico. And the overall objective is to reduce the emissions through greenhouse gas-reducing measures in urban water systems, in utilities, so to reduce the carbon footprint. So it actually has a really nice link to the presentation that we heard before. Why do we do this? What is the rationale for this? Well, climate change is water change. Climate change is affecting our waters. We've heard before that water availability is going to be reduced. I think the number that Kim had shown you was 55% in 2050, while at the same time the demand is going to increase. Utilities are energy intensive because utilities, water and wastewater services, need energy to produce, to extract the water, to transport the water, to treat the water, to collect the wastewater, treat wastewater, and then discharge it to reverse cleanly. So we're using as our concept the urban water cycle, a cycle because we're looking at closing loops. When we're looking at the national level, energy intensity of water and wastewater services in some countries can be up to 15%. This is true for Jordan, for example, a country with huge water scarcity, diminishing aquifers, lots of energy to transport the water. Looking at the municipal level and at city level, the intensity that is being used, energy intensity can be up to 40% of the municipal energy intense consumption. On a global level, estimates around the water sector's contribution to mitigation, to greenhouse gases is up to five, six percent of global emissions can be attributed to the water sector. So there is a need to reduce emissions while maintaining or improving the performance of utilities. As I mentioned before, we're using the urban water cycle. We're using a systems approach. We're looking at water supply and wastewater. In Jordan, actually, we're also looking at water efficiency and closing loops, so reusing water. And we're looking at different stages within this urban water cycle. And I'm just going to show you briefly the emissions that we are actually considering. And you see here, the orange flashes are indicating processes where emissions through where electricity is needed for certain processes and emissions are related to this energy use. In addition to this, we have to remind ourselves that a little cloud is showing GHG greenhouse gas emissions that are actually in wastewater itself because wastewater is a huge source of methane and nitrous oxide. And I want to remind us in this context that methane and nitrous oxide are emissions that have a much, much higher global warming potential than CO2, 38 times higher for methane and approximately 300 times higher for nitrous oxide. We're also looking at water loss reduction. Why water loss reduction? Well, in many countries, water losses are up to 50%. Reducing water losses means less energy has to be used to transport water. So we are working, as I mentioned before, in four countries. I'm going to focus for the rest of the presentation on Thailand. What I want to indicate here is that in all three, in all three other countries, we're actually looking at the complete cycle, water supply and wastewater. In Thailand, we're only focusing on the wastewater system. And this is due to a fragmented water sector in Thailand where the responsibilities for water and wastewater are separated. Climate change is affecting Thailand's water sector through extreme events causing droughts and floods. Thailand is an agriculture-based country, so lots of water is actually needed for agriculture. Extreme events are affecting climate change, it's affecting water quality too, through erosion and severe impacts and there are severe impacts on human society and the environment. In terms of the cost, intensity of the energy used for utilities is up to 40%. The town that we're looking at is Chiang Mai. Chiang Mai is the second largest town in Thailand, 150,000 inhabitants and it's a tourist destination. Wastewater treatment in Chiang Mai is impacting or is impaired and is impacting the quality of the groundwater and surface water through chemical contamination, bacterial contamination. Very briefly, the system, septic tanks connected through sewers with a wastewater treatment plan and aerated lagoon. The influence is very low, less than 10% of the capacity is being used and very low organic load. Now I'm coming to the tool we have. Part of our project is to develop a tool for GHG accounting, this is a free tool, similar experiences as Kim has mentioned before, we started with a spreadsheet, now it's a tool that is free available. The objective is to reduce emissions and costs to have an idea of our GHG, about the carbon footprint, but also to indicate for the utilities areas where they can improve, so they can optimize and then they're able to monitor the progress. These are the examples, the results for Chiang Mai and what I'm going to point out here is so you see a pie chart and those are the different percentages of the emissions and the purple and the pink is indicating the emissions, it's almost 90%, that are actually attributed to untreated wastewater. So it is collected wastewater but it is untreated because it never reaches the wastewater treatment and approximately only 10% are actually related to the energy intensity. I'm going to skip this, the tool itself tells us also about the service level, I'm not sure if I used the proper language here but what we're calling service level is looking at how many people are actually benefiting from a treatment. So it indicates here that is very little, five to 10% of the population actually receives treatment to the wastewater. It also indicates where improvement has to be done in terms of when we're looking at the system itself. So in this case it would be here the 53%, which is a certain pumping station. I'm going to skip this now. From this analysis we know that there are key priorities, one is energy efficiency, the other one is reduction of leakage, repairment of infrastructure but really what is needed is stakeholder engagement because the partner that we're working with, the wastewater management authority is responsible for the management of the utility but repairment of infrastructure, taking care of a fecal sludge is the responsibility of the city.  So 29% is managed safely, 71% is managed unsafely. Again, we've heard the discussion, it's not about 70, the percentages, it is about the red and the green and it is about talking to the stakeholders and the decision makers who are usually, who usually don't have a huge, not necessarily have the technical background but they need a visualization to understand where the role could be and how the problem could best be tackled and come up with a joint action plan. So we have discussed this with our partner and our next steps are to actually have the workshop in Chiang Mai with the key stakeholders such as the city, the ministry of interior and the wastewater management authority. At the same time, we're working on upscaling our approach and we're also working on the enabling environment, working on policies, capacities and financing mechanisms to mainstream the approach to include a strategy for emission reduction and for low carbon climate resilient water services. And I think my time is over and I want to thank you and yeah, looking forward to hear your questions. Any questions? I think it's time for a coffee break. Yes, Mike. I just want to ask a question just so that you don't go away thinking we weren't interested. That was great. And I like all these different angles are coming at this. It was, that's great. And it's helping do what Barbara said. It's helping us depending on where your city is. I mean, these are really important issues that we work with a number of utilities at the World Bank and this would be a great lens to engage them with. Do I get it right? You identified the problem and then you needed a tool to get people to talk to each other? Exactly, because the problem itself cannot just be solved by the utility itself. There is no point in starting with energy efficiency measures if we don't actually tackle the repairing pipes and tackling actually the deficiency in the treatment in the sewage system. Yes, there's another question. I find it interesting that, so the same diagram is used on different angles and I think a powerful tool to trigger the interest of the decision makers and push to action would be also to have a mathematical formula that would transform this into amounts and monetary. Like how much does it cost to the country or what could be not only the potential for recovery but also the economic potential of each other flow? Yeah, we actually have that, that we're looking at monetary values but I think it would have been too far to show that. For me, it was important to show the story that we're actually starting with a very technical way, very complex system and we actually need then a simplification, a tool to simplify it. Plus, we're starting from the angle of the utilities and we need to reach out to a larger stakeholder group. Great. There are no further questions. I'll ask Kim to come on stage and we could kick off another round of discussions. Yes. I would like to start with, we are talking about institution and institutional alignment. I'll just get this off. Yeah, I mean, please. Oh, okay. I mean, wonderful tool, really liked it. Would like to know how you would like to use this in actually the next steps, for examples. I mean, you're talking about different areas of resource recovery. There were tiger, sorry, the worms. You had charcoal, briquettes, XYZ. But all of this are quite, they fall in different brackets with regards to institutions. And how do you get all of this together? I mean, if you make that tool, probably you're pointing at stakeholder involvement within this. I would say that I think that's the idea with the tool actually to show that there are potential for resource recovery, showing that it can be in different fields. It can be in the energy. It can be in the agricultural side. Other reuse, water reuse for, I don't even drink in purposes, but actually to see that this is resources and we need to be a lot of people discussing this actually. So I think that's the idea to get where you are now, like having a tool that you can actually gather, a lot of stakeholders around. So I think that's our aim to get there, yeah. Okay. But institutionally it is very... I don't know, I'm a bond pessimist. So sorry about that. But institutionally it's extremely difficult to get all these people on board at the same time. And I think that's also just to say that. I think therefore you have to have a really visual tool to, you have to really capture some important decision makers that, for example, a mayor of a city that really likes the idea. And if you get a really important person on board, then I think you can do a lot. If we start to say that this is interesting and starts to invite different divisions in the city or departments, then I think things can really happen. But if you can sell the idea to the decision makers, it's gonna be hard to work from bottom up, I think. It would be nice to have like the vision of the city, I think, to make some progress. Yeah. I think from our experience, it depends on the country. Like in Jordan, of course, there is a huge interest in reusing water. Like looking at Peru, for example, there is a huge interest in reusing nutrients from sludge. Well, you have to work on the other side, on the standards and on guidelines and political framework, which we're also doing. But I don't, I think we're, and on risk communication, of course too. But I think actually, I do think there is a huge market and I think this is where we're going towards to resource recovery, like recovering carbon, recovering energy, recovering nutrients and reusing the water for the right purposes. And in Mexico too, we have the experiences that the treated water is being reused, it's used by the industry or any agriculture. Yes. Couple of points. First, like the idea you are saying of convincing local stakeholders, one thing that we find that's very useful and very important is to have good examples to share. Because if there is really so much potential, are there any cities in the world that have done and if they have done our countries properly, well documented cases are extremely important and maybe Susanna can help in this. But this is going to be critical in really convincing. I don't think just diagrams and, you know, results, numbers will really convince. So that story is critical. The second point is related back and you just now made a reference to the issues of guidelines and things like that. But what is critical is also the kind of legislation that is present, the current laws, whether they permit or not. Some of these resources that are recovered, where is it going to be used and how is that going to be marketed? That, those issues, for example, in one of the cities where we are working, there was great hesitancy by people who are, for people to use compost from sludge, fecal sludge especially, in their agriculture practices because they actually export and the EU regulations apparently do not allow, you know, import of products that are developed using such materials. So such kind of regulations and all is much wider kind of agenda that will have to be looked at. In India, there is great subsidies that is being provided to chemical fertilizers. And that makes it very difficult to market organic substitutes. These kind of aspects would also become, to our experience, very, very critical in. So one is good case studies where things have been done, have worked, and second is addressing these other issues. I think it's a really good suggestion. We have thought about that also. When we choose case studies in the future, development of the tool, it's really important to find, even if it's not very large scale, but at least at some scale, there are some resource recovery schemes going on. So we can actually build it on things that are functioning, where there is, there are experience about the cost side, the revenue side. Maybe there are some small markets on the nutrient recovery or, so I think it's really important for then selling the tool to the next city that we actually base this on real experiences that are out there, and so, yeah. I agree, John, thanks. Hi everyone, John Sauer from PSI. Astrid, you really just burst my bubble. Here I am thinking, Thailand was the one success story we could point to in the sanitation sector. I mean, I'm sure we still can on many fronts, but wow. I'm so depressed now. But I liked your point about, utilities can't do this alone.  I mean, there is a lot of progress and now it's just kind of getting to the finish line, right? Well, thank you. Well, I think what's new to our approach is that we're bringing in GHG accounting. So in a way, we're combining the SDG and climate agenda and there is a way to also get into climate financing. I also think the approach is, this is not just about mitigation, it's also about adaptation. Your point about stakeholders, I think that is crucial. I think it is not just important to have, to look at the public stakeholders, like city mayors, representatives of the specific ministries. It's also important to work with the end consumer. And this is where I actually like the e-governance, work with people because we can work on, I'm talking now from the emission side, from reducing like we have to work from the consumer side in our emerging countries that we're working on in terms of being more aware on our water use. I'm not sure if I answered your question or... I sort of know the private sector too, but I'm not sure it's... You were thinking about private engagement of private sector. Yeah. Yes, and I do think... And yes, and this is, you know, those are areas like in terms of ESCO models, what we're also looking at, what kind of private sector involvement can we have to have actually investment into utilities to bring them up in terms of efficiency and performance? Great, Linda. I had not so much a question, but just a discussion point to just get your feedback too. Like at Sondack, we also advocate for resource recovery whenever possible. And one reason is also that I always hope that the treatment plant operator will operate the treatment plant better if they're meeting a customer demand. So it's not only about cost recovery, but also just sustainability in general. And I also advocate that you need to, when possible, pick the resource recovery first, because then you can design your treatment technology to meet that goal. And I know you know that, and that's clear to you, but it's amazing how many people don't think about that. And the third point is that we did partner with Economist, it's a little self-promotion. We also have a document that's coming out this week to really look at how can you actually put a market value on resource recovery products? And because I'm an engineer, I didn't have a quantitative way to do that. So we partnered with experts in economy and business models. And just as one tool to put in the whole toolbox to put a number on that for people. I think they're really useful points. And I would say that I hope that this resource mining will be a new motivation also for expanding the sanitation. So actually that, if we start to really look for the resources, then the city wants to also expand, invest more in sanitation, and maybe the other sectors as well are willing to invest in sanitation, which is not happening today. So that's, I guess that's a motivation. Anna. I was just curious, you said you used the tool to bring stakeholders together. Did it work? We're going to, we have the, it will work. We had, we have presented it to our partner when they were in Germany. And there is a plan to have it in September to roll out a workshop in Chiang Mai itself. And then to discuss the next steps with the stakeholders. So it's not yet. And then there's as well sort of the vikis that's here. The process is the important thing. You showed a result, maybe to come to that result together with the stakeholders will be important. To start a discussion on responsibilities, roles and next steps. I think there are no further questions. I will close the session. And I'm sure we're all dying for a coffee. I am, certainly. Thank you a lot. Thank you a lot. We'll come back in 20 minutes. Can we do that? Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Maybe it's time to start talking. Yeah. Ladies and gentlemen, please sit down. Please take your seats. Ah! Yeah, just yeah. All right. I think I'm just going to push everyone out. On that side, yeah? Okay. All right. All right, ladies and gentlemen, the last lap of the session. Could you please be seated and we carry? Ahead is Ingeborda. Thank you. Okay, we are in the final session of this side event. And we have four presentations left. So please bear with us. And hopefully by six o'clock we would finish and end up with a glass of wine or two. Okay. Okay, the next session is, we're going to talk about, or the presenters will talk about how SFTs have been involved in different aspects with regards, technical aspects with regards to fecal sludge estimation. We have simulation, different kinds of simulation models attached to it, how additional fluxes and diagrams can be added onto the SFT and other graphic generation tools. And our next speaker is Ingeborg. It's going to talk about an FSM tool method that they've used in two Indonesian cities. I'm not mistaken. Yeah. And that is to calculate fecal's waste volumes in conjunction with SFTs. Yeah, we've been testing this tool in two cities in Indonesia and I've just come back from Agra, India, where we also tested the tool. But this is mainly on Indonesia. So I would like to take you all to Praia. It's a city in Lombok, Indonesia. Compared to India, it's a very small city. It has like 160,000 people. And that includes like urban and more or less peri-urban villages also. And about 80% of the population in this city have access to on-site sanitation facilities, about 100 communal septic tanks, or mainly DEWATS, decentralized wastewater systems are in that place. And in that city, we have Pa Firman and he is from the Department of Public Works. And in Indonesia, many cities have working groups around different types of topics, including sanitation. And he's sharing this sanitation working group with all relevant departments, including health, environment, finance. And he is getting funds, he's raising funds himself from the municipality, but they also get funds from the provincial level and from the national level. So how will this tool help this Pa Firman in improving the sanitation in his city? And he is about to, or the whole team actually, are about to develop their new five-year city sanitation plan. So it was nicely timed. And this also turns into the why of the tool, because the tool is indeed meant to support city authorities to give them information on real issues to address and that they can give priority to those issues they feel should need are. So it's not up to us to say, well, here you have like the biggest red arrow, so you should focus on this one that's up to them. This tool helps them to give that information. And it also helps to use or spend their public funds wisely. So the focus of the tool is calculating volumes. That's mainly the thing of the tool. So it calculates volumes of fecal waste, so fecal sludge and wastewater along the sanitation chain. And we're working with municipalities, so it's not something we do first and then try to come up with how to connect to the government. So we only do that in those cities where the cities are willing to work with us and in the end hopefully do it themselves on the tool. And it's rapid, so it can be done in like six days. And maybe that already also explains that it's not a scientific tool. So it's really what I think Barbara was also mentioning. Maybe the answer is not even that important at some stage. First you want to have that dialogue and then you go take it from there. So how do we do it? We look at the whole sanitation service chain and then we calculate the volumes. So the whole idea is to look at all the elements. So the capture containment, emptying, transport, treatment and in the end safe reuse or disposal.  So it's really about the volumes itself. So not only percentages but actual volumes.  So ideally of course all would end up 100% for safe disposal or safe reuse. But in real life as we already have seen in all the other presentations, that's not happening. So somewhere it is disappearing. This tool has data input sheets for value and calculation. So you have to collect all kinds of data from residents but also from non-residents. So tourists, workers, we also look at hospitals, these kind of things. So it's the whole group of people who produce fecal waste. We have calculation sheets reporting based on those calculations for each of the elements of the change. In this case this is the volumes of fecal waste produced. We try to do it in such a way that municipal authorities can get an idea of what exactly does it mean. So in this case the cubic meters of fecal waste that was produced in this particular town was the equivalent of like 100,000 public trucks. Or they only had like one or two public trucks so most of them were private emptiers. Then you would need like 560,000 of these private trucks. So to give the municipality authorities a bit of an idea what exactly does it mean. So the two trucks we have, yeah, how does that match? Containment same thing, so for all the elements in the chain we report on the issue we found. So that's I think no different from any of the other tools. There are spot checks so we do visit the fields which is not a scientific sample but just some quick spot checks with Barbara were saying well yes our treatment plant is functioning but sometimes just a simple visit and you don't even have to be an engineer to see that it's actually not functioning. So that's how these spot checks are used to quickly check what I get is that more or less in line with reality. Next to that there's also input data input for more qualitative information and those are things around planning, budget, regulations, standards, things on permits, safety. And I think this also links to what Miramito was saying on this whole composting issue with legislation that it's not even allowed to have human waste in compost in many situations. So these kind of things we also take into account and then it's the visualization. So we struggled a lot with all kinds of different types of visualization so we used actual pictures from the field to make it more appealing to the municipality. But for a tool that's supposed to be generic and also be able for others to use that's a bit difficult so you have to do this manually. So we came up with more visualizations that can be automatically generated from the Excel and that's I think the same what's used in past with these smart people who can convert Excel into nice graphs. So we have done similar things so it would be nice to discuss a bit further. So we have graphs, just simple bar charts showing the safe passing on of fecal waste or not these shit flow diagrams which we have both for the combination of wastewater and or black water and fecal sludge but we can also do it for fecal sludge only. In those situations like in Indonesia that made sense in India it doesn't make sense at all you want to have this combined thing. And then both percentages and cubic meters because 81% well sounds a lot is a lot but how much is it actually? So that helps planners to actually calculate and get their budgets maybe in order for that. And something like this is what we can now generate from our tool. So this is based from the Excel sheet based on all the figures data input and then this can be generated from the tool. And we have a scorecard overview to give you a quick overview of both the fecal waste flows and the qualitative information. And as you see now this is a lot of it is red, red, red, red, red, red. So that's, yeah, you still need some steps to take I think for many of the municipalities to start yeah, getting the act together on getting this information right because we're using only the information the governments, local government municipalities are using. So did all this help? Par Furman actually it did and what helped him especially was the combination with putting the fecal waste flows next to the budget they had. And in their situation it's not supposed to be discussed in depth but I think the key message from this sheet is that it was an eye-opener for them that actually the, yeah all of their budget went to only 1% of the population and actually those 1% were not even the ones who produced the most waste. So that was very extreme. So in many other cities it may not be that extreme but this is very helpful for a city to, yeah, to see. So what next? Finalizing the interfaces for these input sheets and also for the reporting sheets. So result sheets and this is the last slide and to fine-tune all these, yeah, the tool based on our findings in Agra in India where there was this combined sanitation framework with sewage and onsite sanitation and in Chemri which we will do in September, mid-September which also has this mixed system and hopefully also with feedback from you, yeah, on the tool. We have a bit more time during breaks to discuss. I think this was it. Yeah, that was it. Thank you. I'm sure there are a lot of questions now after the coffee break. Yes, please. So what did Pac-Firman do then after seeing this? Well, he changed actually the, what happened in Pryor was they had this city sanitation strategy and it's more or less what is done every year is copy the budget of the previous year and then you add a certain percentage and that's a bit how it was done. So what he did now, he reconvened with this pokia with the working group on sanitation discussing, well, do we actually need to have like two more fickle sludge trucks which actually cannot go anywhere because they were also trying to build a treatment plant which was not there. So they were rediscussing to keep that off the budget and I think the main thing that was changed, at least by saying, so I think that takes a bit more time, is to refocus on the whole community toilet discussion and the D-WATS discussion in Indonesia because they still kept, it helped him to get the discussion with the Ministry of Health focusing on open defecation free, mainly and that's why there was also lots of emphasis on the community toilets and now this helped him to go to the Department of Health saying, well, actually it is very important but look at these figures, maybe we should focus and do a bit more on this onsite sanitation, all these septic tanks that are leaking, so let's focus on those first. So that's, I don't know if it really happened, but that is, like in the plan, but that is what he said and what was discussed in the briefing because this was debriefed with the whole team. So this was the discussion I heard in that team. So that was what happened. Anna, Linda, Rebecca. One question, I get it right. You show as well the percentage of the population and you show the volume. The percentage of the waste and the cubic meters of the waste. Yes, and that might differ. Open defecation is less on cubic meters. Yes, because it's only fecal. Very nice, I like the presentation. The other is more a comment that in India, we have CSE with the approach, we have the city sanitation place, we have the national strategy, we have what Dinesh and Mira is doing. If you do something, it would be useful to somehow see if it can be used in this existing processes. There might be a potential, but I think that's important. Yeah, no, absolutely. Fully agree. I have a question that sounds a little bit pedantic, but I'm going to ask it anyway because I think it's kind of emblematic of a lot of things we deal with in fecal sludge. How did you define a truck? Because if I'm working in a city, total solids are from 0.5% to 15% and a truck is from 2 cubic meters to 10 cubic meters. So even if I want to give you a number of tracks, it's really complicated. No, very true. So what we did, as I said, is not scientific at all, but considering the problem, even if it's 10% off, you still know that there's a huge problem. So what we do is, from all the data we have, just take the average off. And we did make a difference between public trucks, which are often bigger and smaller trucks. And these private trucks often also had like two types, so like the three-wheelers who could get everywhere and then more the fans with the water tank on top of it. So it was like a bit of an average. Rebecca? Hi, Rebecca Scott from WEDEC. A question about your data on non-household sources of fecal waste, wastewater production. Can you just explain a little bit about how you got hold of that data and some of the constraints to get reliable, credible data? Because I think a lot of the tools just look at household production, where there's often existing data from surveys and census sources. But when you're dealing with new realities, how are you finding that data and how credible is it? In Indonesia and the two cities, there was quite some information available per city on number of schools, number of hospitals. And schools was really like Madrasa's universities, secondary schools. They have like everything in India and Agra. It was like very difficult to get all this information in one place. So hospitals, hotels, actually in Indonesia, it was amazingly quite good to find. Plus what they also did in Indonesia, they had this environmental health risk assessment, which they have to carry out on a regular basis. And that is a sample, but we compared with what came out of that sample and that was very much matching with what we found. So that was also a nice way of checking. But in other situations like in Agra, and we're also going to check in Cambodia, we expect that's much more difficult to find. But whatever we use is what the, yeah, what the government can come up with and then with spot checks from ourselves. So that's, yeah, it's, reliability is always an issue. And can you continue to use the tool if you don't have some, if some of that data is missing? Yes, yeah. I think you have to make sure it's as long as, I think as long as you make clear that whatever you found and what your assumptions were, I think it's still useful and we use like the worst case scenario. So even, and that's also part of what we said, it's you have to use this as a start of a discussion because then municipalities said, this is really a wrong figure. But then we say, well, but we use your figure. It's from this and this and then they maybe can come up with better figures or then they say, okay, let's come and measure it really, how it should be. So it's also meant like that. Yes, please. Final question. Yeah, Christine Moe, Emory University. So I really like the addition of the volume because I think that that brings in important information. My question is both of these cities are big tourist cities. So I was wondering if there's a specific reason why you are focusing on tourist cities that have a lot of transit population. And my comment is that we are collecting SaniPath data in SIMREAP right now. So it would be wonderful to link up with the data that we collect and the data that you collect and have some synergy with that. Yeah. On the last point, we will because that's why we choose SIMREAP. So that we have this connection already. So that was one of the reasons. So we have more on the other. Prya actually is not really a touristic city. Mataram was. So we did two cities. Mataram was more like a tourist city. And that was to test in how far, yeah, how does it really work to also calculate and use a fecal waste of the non-residents in it. But there was still quite limited and that's why we this exercise in Agra, which is like, yeah, 6 million tourists. So that's a bit of a, then you can't really say does it work or not. So we're now finalizing that report. So it's, yeah, it was just meant to get more information than just the household data and see if that worked. Yeah. Good. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Our next presenter is Dr. Manfred Schütze. He's going to present the Simba tool. Right. Please. Hello. Yes. I come from EFAC Institute for Applied Research, a non-profit research institute in Magdeburg, Germany. And I will start with some experiences from an earlier project we had in Lima, Peru. Lima is a city with many problems related to water, wastewater, and sanitation. I won't go into all the details of it. It's a very dry city, 9 million, if not more, population and water is scarce already and it's not going to be easier in the future. Within that project with many Peruvian partners, many German partners, different stakeholders involved and so on, one of the elements of this project was the development of a model of a very simple, crude model of the water and wastewater system of the city, representing the water fluxes, the resource fluxes, pollution, and so on. Also adding costs and revenue and energy consumption, and so on. But the very positive experience of the project was we used this model in the round table events we had in the project, using in the discussion the model to do a what-if scenario, someone from the audience suggesting what would happen if we did that and that in the next years to come. And then doing a quick run of the model, getting obviously a very approximative result, but that really helped the discussions in the stakeholder meetings and it also led to an ownership of one of the results of the project in action plan, NEMA 2040, which has been signed by the water company, by the regulating agency, by several NGOs and so on, by let's say all the important actors in the water sector. So it was very positive experience of using visualization and a very simple model in water management.  One way obviously is to do it manually. I think the later presentations, we also hear about how to generate them automatically. But with the simulator we use in the Peru project, it's also easy to derive these blocks to create such shit flow diagrams very rapidly and in a graphically nice way by composing the blocks of the diagram, entering the number like this percentage number to get from the Excel sheet and then press a button and get the SFD, this case example of Dakar as found on the website. So it's easy to do it also for other cities without having to fiddle around too much with graphical representation, how to do it and so on.  NEMA was very helpful to visualize the water and sanitation system to run time series, predictions, assumptions of how population development, how effect of implementation of measures like leakage reduction and whatever. Very useful for the project results. Obviously NEMA availability of water, demand of water, how to balance them is also important part for the calculations. The system with water reuse and has a lot of feedback loops which makes the system, let's say, more interesting but also more challenging to model but possible. As the SFDs as we just heard very useful for understanding the system or discussing about the system in talking with stakeholders. I put it as a question, would it be useful to combine these two to extend the idea of SFDs to allow for example time series so far an SFD is a static representation of the current situation but it could be perceivable to produce SFDs of how could the city look like in five or ten years time by making certain assumptions obviously. Spatial distribution, not to do an SFD just for the overall city but maybe situation, different city districts is very different including maybe also nutrients and talking about resource recovery and so on. Calculation is already also done. Costs or greenhouse gas emissions, maybe also to go into more detail on individual technologies for sludge management, sludge treatment and so on. Important, who are the users? Who is actually creating the SFDs? Is it the International Cooperation Agency? Is it a consultancy working on the local level? Is it the city engineer himself in the partner city? I think it's also important to define in order to define whichever tool we use so it brings maximum benefit. We are talking here, as it has been mentioned before, not about detailed modeling. Of course it's also possible, but that's not the objective here because we also have very crude numbers, assumptions and so on. So we don't claim to do detailed modeling but very useful crude representation visualization of the system. If you wanted to do detailed modeling, of course there are also simulators for detailed modeling of wastewater treatment plants or sewer systems or whatever. By the way, the same simulator could be used for that. But there's a sidestep. And the simulator I presented so far is very general. It's a general purpose simulation environment, easy to use. But the advanced user can also write scripts to do more specific tasks towards automatic model building or evaluation processes. Some steps we did already in that direction. Everybody, I think, knows these resource fluxes from the airbox sanitation compendium. And easy to build a crude, very crude, let's say model, I would say more visualization tool for the sanitation chain using the individual blocks of individual sanitation options. And each one of them obviously having some parameters which are useful for assumptions and calculations. Within the blocks need to be defined. And let's say processes or factors or mathematical relations. But if you have them, you can implement the equations directly without any programming knowledge. You just enter the equation or in the simplest case some conversion factor or so. And then you can create these things like in this case nitrogen fluxes in this example system. Or here shown an example well known in the German discussions for examples of potential applications of new and alternative sanitation technologies in Germany and representation of one of these examples as a diagram. So it seems to be possible to combine SFDs with ideas of simulations. Some questions which I put on the slides have to be discussed, but then we can go ahead. Technically, the tools are there to implement creating or calculating shit-flow diagrams and so on. So the framework is there and now we have to or we can fill them with life. And I just mentioned several projects which gave input to the slides I showed. So it's quite a bunch of projects in more or less this topic area we have been involved in so far and are currently involved. One of them is also funded by the Gates Foundation. Thank you very much. I find it quite fascinating personally. Okay, questions open to the floor. Yes, please. Simple question. Are these tools in the public domain? I mean, can we all use it and where is it available? Some of it is under development. But the overall simulation framework is available on the Internet. Simba.efact.eu. When you look at the site, it looks more like detailed modeling of wastewater treatment plants, but it's a general simulation framework in which you can do all of these things I mentioned. The download is a free demo version with which you can do everything. But if you want to save your own models, then you need to get a license. But the Simba is all the modules which come with it. It's quite comprehensive. It has a lot of things which for the SFD context you don't need. You don't need detailed activated sludge modeling of treatment plants. You don't need sewer system modeling in detail and so on. So the idea is if this, in principle, is of interest, we could instead discuss to offer or to make a downscaled version containing only what is relevant to the SFD, etc. But I wanted to present some concepts and maybe send an individual or together we could define what is necessary, what is useful and maybe in some cooperation. We can finalize it to something which is really useful and which then obviously should be made available for free or at very low cost or so. On the slide before, there were a couple of partners that were mentioned. Yes, like German Ministry of Education. So what is your relation to these partners? And also what is your relation to the original SFD developments? Like for instance, did they ask you to put some more engineering or more modeling to refine the use of the tool or how did you come up with this development? Most of these are funders of the projects like German Ministry of Research or the German Environment Association. So we should maintain very good relationships with them. Some of the partners funded by the Ministry, and in this project we developed some of the elements I presented here but so far we don't have an explicit SFD further development project or so on. So creating the SFD which I presented, I did in my free time. When I read about SFDs, I was so fascinated about it and I thought the tool is so easy to do it. So I did it in one hour on a Friday evening. Okay, I have one question here and two here, Daniel and Rebecca. Thank you. So my question is for you and also Barbara for you because your presentation has made me think, do you do a sensitivity analysis of these models so that you know if you're going to spend money to collect some data that you would know what's the most important data to collect in order to improve the reliability of the model and of the prediction or the simulation? Yeah, very good point, very good question. Of course you should do sensitivity analysis also to challenge the assumptions you make. I mean if you make assumptions about population development which obviously has a lot of influence on anything. So you should do it but using the tool is also quite straightforward to do it. I mean with the scripting features you can easily implement the routines for sensitivity analysis or for example Monte Carlo or optimization and these sort of technologies. Yeah, very good. Maybe that's another Friday evening for you. And we haven't done it in a formal way in the Peru project but let's say more like informally, I mean in many of our partner and stakeholder meetings we're also running the model, testing it with different assumptions and getting a feeling for the impact of the changes in the assumptions so I wouldn't call that a formal sensitivity analysis but in that vague sense we have done it. But you're right, very important. If you go and look at the original work on which all of this is based which where my professorial had I have to say but never mind, we did. I mean because when we were starting we were trying to work out well what do you need to know and how do you make those estimations as you go down the chain. So that's one thing. We did do it originally. The other thing just to mention is that I think whether or not you do it depends on the purpose of the intervention. I always use the example of Dhaka in Bangladesh. So when we did the original SFD for Dhaka in Bangladesh in 2012 we got an answer of 2% safely managed, 98% unsafely managed and we went to Dhaka and had a lot of very entertaining conversations with people saying oh I actually think that should be 1.5, not 2 or oh I think actually it's 4 not 2 to which my answer was I really couldn't care because 98% is a very big number but when you get down to the level of actually wanting information that might allow you to design and plan an intervention then it becomes much more critical. And I'd also say that's one of the very specific reasons why we didn't go down the route of using volumes at all in our work because in my opinion actually working out what's going on in terms of volumetric production is immensely complex and it's driven by so many variables that it rapidly becomes very difficult to have that conversation with people certainly in a short period of time. So to me that's, for me generally that's something that you can do it, of course you can do it I mean as the colleagues at IRC have demonstrated but I think at a certain moment you have to do it with a fair degree of caution and I absolutely agree with a lot of attention to looking at the sensitivity of the assumptions. That's really critical and it's the same with pathogen I mean we never say we can make a specific direct comparison in terms of health risk on the basis of just the SFD analysis because there's too many variables in there. So we've dealt with the sensitivity a little bit by leaving out a lot of the very, very important to something the ones that change your conclusions and you would come to that as your next step in my view. Can we take this discussion into the discussion round? Alright, Daniel and... Okay, Daniel Diba here. I'm wondering because I've looked at some versions of SimbaSharp that is a product of IFAC and I'm wondering that is this simulation for the SFD already available within current versions of SimbaSharp or is it something that is a standalone that would not be integrated within the general versions of SimbaSharp or is this something that is just in development that you intend to do in the future? I didn't get the last part of the question, sorry. Yes, I'm wondering that is this simulation of the SFDs in combination with the SimbaSharp is it already available within existing versions of SimbaSharp or is it something that you intend to be a standalone simulator on its own? For example, it's a more specific question perhaps you could have a bilateral chat I don't think anybody out here, including me don't know what SimbaSharp is, so perhaps... Sorry. Alright, but if it's too specific can we just take it to a bilateral discussion please? Okay. There was one question here, yes. Simpler but more Excel-based tools for we call it SaniPlan which essentially helps to look at options at city level and then we link it to finance. So what are the costs, what are the financing options and what are the implications for tariffs? I was wondering whether this, what you were describing you have done it only in terms of assessing what are the options that are coming up or are you getting into more planning related aspects also as to... first to assess various options but then also leading on into let's say strategic overall planning as a step before doing detailed planning. Strategic planning, I mean to model or to visualize the entire city and to crudely play with options like we did in Lima for example or like we're doing now in a project rapid planning and cities in Vietnam, Rwanda and Egypt. Of course many calculations you could do in Excel but for the visualization because we already have the tool where you can define these blocks and to put them on the screen and pressing the button to get the diagram so it's easy and straightforward to do it and if you implement more, slightly more complex things in Excel it gets a bit nasty, it's not so easy to see and that's the nice thing about this. Here you can define the equations describing for example input-output relationships or input-state-output relationships also taking information not from the previous block but also from the successor block which allows to handle availability demand issues and here you simply type the equation and it looks nice, you can print the equation and it's hard to document what you've done in Excel when you want to document all the equations you have included in your Excel sheet or Excel macro and here you have a good documentation as well you see what you're doing and because all these tools are already there you're attempting to do it. Good. I would like to close this round. I have to get on to the next speaker, sorry being a bit brutal with time but... Thanks a lot. Great. Our next presenter is Andrew Weitzel who's going to present the Bergman SFD generator. Am I right? How do I get out of this guy? You have it? I think it should be there. My name is Andrew Weitzel and I have a small company called Beaumont and for the last four and a half years I've been working on the fecal sludge Omni-Ingester project with the Gates Foundation. I've been managing the project and then for the last year I've actually been developing technology related to the Omni-Ingester. I don't know if anybody knows what that is but it's a waste processing system mobile waste processing system. We mainly do mechanical and electrical type work and software but I got interested in the SFD generator just like a few other people here did and was sort of intrigued by how to make it easier to interpret the diagram itself. So I decided to self-inflict the pain of developing a web-based application. So my motivation was really just to make the creation of the diagram easier and to make the diagram easier to interpret and these were the sort of issues that we identified just with informal conversation with people that I forced to use the current SFD. One example was it took somebody a day to generate an SFD. The model or the system that we came up with the first user did it in 15 minutes, the same diagram. Another issue is when you're generating the PowerPoint you're trying to size those arrows and it's kind of complicated to get those actually accurate and then on the interpretation side I think the biggest issue was the text and the diagram itself overlaps and it gets kind of difficult to interpret it. So we spent a lot of time and I don't mean a Friday evening. Yeah, we took three. This was actually a number of weeks of engineering time to get this as simple as possible and get it to work on multiple web browsers. So this is our data entry table. So you enter your location information, population so we're going to model Stockholm. This is the data that you enter based on what you extract from the Excel table that's generated with the usual SFD tool. We have error chec