The document summarizes an action research project that tested ecological sanitation options suitable for difficult areas in Bangladesh. 11 low-cost sanitation options were developed and 107 latrines were piloted. The options were tested in various difficult terrain types. Pathogen tests of composted waste found no pathogenic organisms, though parasites were found if not properly dried. The top performing options included fixed chambers with plastic fiber or modified eco pans. The research demonstrated potential for ecological sanitation in difficult areas but identified challenges around proper waste handling, land scarcity, and menstrual hygiene. Continued development, testing and monitoring were recommended.

1. Eco-toilet – An Ecological
Sanitation Option for Difficult
Areas of Bangladesh (Practice)
Monirul Alam (UNICEF Bangladesh)
S. A. Abdullah Al Mamun(Practical Action Bangladesh)
ASIA REGIONAL SANITATION AND HYGIENE
PRACTITIONERS WORKSHOP
1st Feb 2012; BARC CDM, Dhaka

2. 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The action research was implemented to try-out the feasibility
of ecological sanitation in five types of geo-hydrologically
difficult areas, characterised by:
 water scarcity areas (hilly area);
 uneven land and clay soils in the Barind regions;
 flood prone areas with loamy soils;
 urban slums where there is insufficient land to apply
normal spacing criteria; and
 heavily water logged areas (6-9 months of the year) in
the low lying Haor Basin.

3. 2. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION:
OPTION DEVELOPED
Opt. Description Hilly Barind Flood Slum Haor
Tract Prone
01 Fixed Chamber with Plastic Fibre Pan (FC+PFP)     
02 Movable Plastic Drum with Plastic Fibre Pan (Single   
Pan) (MPD+PFP)
03 Movable Plastic Drum with High Commode (Single  
Pan) (MPD+HC)
04 Fixed Chamber with Modified Eco Pan (FC+MEP)     
05 Fixed Chamber with Traditional EcoPan (FC+TEP)    
06 Movable Plastic Drum with Traditional EcoPan  
(MPD+TEP)
07 Elevated Movable Plastic Drum with RCC Column  
(EMPD+RCC)
08 Single Pit Urine Diversion Toilet (SPUD)   
09 Twin Pit Urine Diversion Toilet (TPUD)     
10 Waste Concern Model with Urine Diversion Pan     
(WCM+UDP)
11 Community Based Urine Diversion Toilet with Biogas     
Plant (CUD+BGP)
Suitable option depending on site conditions 10 10 7 7 7

4. 2. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION:
COST SHARING AND CAPACITY BUILDING
• Implemented through a NGO consortium (Practical Action
was the lead agency. SPACE, BASA and Commitment
Consultant were among others)
• 11 low-cost, user-friendly options developed with provisional
approval from DPHE (costing US$70-US$290). Users were
free to choose options considering their affordability;
• 107 latrines piloted in difficult areas with cost sharing
ranging from 10% to 40% depending on income level;
• The users, local masons, community leaders, PS & DPHE
staff were trained on construction, use, and O&M.
• Developed entrepreneurship in ecopan making (Plastic Fiber)

5. 2. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION:
OPTION DEMONSTRATED (TYPE)
Number of toilet options demonstrated
50
45
47
40
35
30
25
20
15
14 15
10 13
5 8 9
1
0
Option 4
Option 1
Option 5
Option 7
Option 8
Option 9
Option 2

6. 3. TESTING & MONITORING:
Pathogen test of composted faeces (by IEDCR) and nutrient
analysis of urine (by the Dept. of Soil Water & Environment, DU
• The colour and odour of the compost are more or less acceptable;
• No pathogenic organism identified in bacteriological examination;
• Parasitological examination revealed that, if compost is not properly
dried out, at least one type of parasite infectious to human health in
each specimen; and
• Nutrient value of compost excreta revels existence of arsenic and
cadmium are not at harmful level.
Recommendations on composted faeces by IEDCR
• To ensure application of ash after each defecation for
attaining alkaline pH;
• The compost has to be dried;
• Storage of the compost for at least one month in
airtight container may reduce the pathogenic load of
parasites.

7. 5. MAJOR CHALLENGES
 Construction cost????
 Proper handling/use of urine & composted faeces
 Land scarcity in urban slum;
 Shifting 1800 for urination during menstruation;
 Promotion of local Materials
 Limited time for follow-up and monitoring.

8. 6. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on option prepared for hard to reach areas, users choice
and cost sharing, the following rank of options is identified:
Rank Option Name
1 Option 1: Fixed Chamber System Using Plastic Fibre Pan
2 Option 4: Fixed Chamber System Using Modified Traditional Eco Pan
3 Option 5: Fixed Chamber with Traditional EcoPan
4 Option 9: Twin Pit Urine Diversion Toilet
Recommendations
 Potential to expand, especially in areas where conventional
technologies are difficult;
 Some of pilot areas can be used as demonstration centres and
knowledge hubs for replication;
 Continue development, testing and monitoring are essential.

9. 7. Photo gallery: Innovation (small but
beautiful and effective)
Eco Plastic Fiber Pan Pan Cover Handle Urine Diversion Pan
Ventilation and light facilities
Pre cast slab with Eco-pan

10. 7. Photo gallery: Innovation (small but
beautiful and effective)
Structural adjustment in the
evaporation bed for menstrual
hygiene management issue:
still there is room for
improvement

11. 7. Photo gallery: Innovation (small
but beautiful and effective)
Pictorial chart for use &
Hand washing device
maintenance

12. THANK YOU