Review of policies for building climate resilience in urban sanitation systems and services in Nepal

The term resilience has recently gained traction within the climate and development communities as a guiding framework to design climate-resilient development policies and programmes (Clare et al., 2017). While various definitions of resilience exist (DFID, 2011; USAID, 2022; OECD, 2023), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) definition is the most operational definition around the climate change discourse (IPCC, 2022):

The definition acknowledges that while systems may experience challenges or short-term disruptions, they have the capacity to recover from failures (OECD, 2018) and to adapt and transform to prevent future failures (World Health Organisation, 2015). Resilience in the context of sanitation means planning, designing, building, operating, and managing sanitation infrastructure and services in a way that anticipates, prepares for, and adapts to potential disruptions (OECD, 2018).

The Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) emphasises the importance of safely managing human waste across the sanitation service chain to attain Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 6.2 on achieving access to adequate and equitable sanitation for all by 2030 (UNICEF, 2020). The entire sanitation service chain must be considered when planning and designing sanitation interventions, as technologies and management approaches for each component are closely interconnected (USAID, 2020). Furthermore, climate change adaptation objectives should be integrated both in the planning, design, construction, and operation phases to enhance resilience of the sanitation systems and services (WHO, 2022b).

The Constitution of Nepal recognises the right of every individual to live in a healthy and clean environment and the government has committed to achieving the SDG 6.2 by 2030. In Nepal, there has been a commendable reduction in the practice of open defaecation from 69% in 2000 to 7% in 2022, with 51% of the population having access to a safely managed sanitation service and 30% of the population utilising basic services. On-site sanitation contributes to 86% of the sanitation facilities in the country with only 5% going to the sewer network (WHO & UNICEF n.d.). Even though on-site sanitation coverage is high, the government's focus on sanitation management has been primarily on the sewer system, e.g. through establishment of wastewater treatment plants. There have been no noteworthy initiatives with regard to on-site sanitation and faecal sludge management. This is evident from the descriptions of key initiatives on sanitation in the Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Sector Development Plan (SDP) 2024–2043 (Government of Nepal, n.d.e).

Achieving sanitation targets is challenging under the influence of climate change (UN, 2023) and climate induced hazards can potentially reverse the progress made so far in improving sanitation access (Kohlitz et al., 2017). The evidence of potential impacts of climate change on sanitation is growing (Willetts et al., 2022). Previous research has (i) provided evidence on the ways climate hazards disrupt sanitation services (Mills et al., 2020; Hyde-Smith et al., 2022), (ii) explored the resilience of sanitation technologies under climate change impacts and provided potential adaptation options and strategies (Howard et al., 2010; Luh et al., 2017; Fleming et al., 2019), and (iii) explored the vulnerability and resilience of sanitation systems (Sherpa et al., 2014). Similarly, several methods have been explored to increase the resilience of sanitation to climate change (Howard et al., 2010; Birchall & Bonnett, 2021; Keshavarz & Moqadas, 2021). Despite the increasing awareness, understanding of the potential effects of climate change on urban sanitation services and their management is still relatively limited (Hyde-Smith et al., 2022).

Nepal is experiencing an increased frequency of water-induced disasters due to changing climate increasing the risks of climate-induced hazards (Karki et al., 2009) and it is ranked the 10th most affected country in the world (Eckstein et al., 2021). The country is highly vulnerable mainly due to its fragile topography, climate-sensitive livelihoods, and the limited adaptive capacity of its people (Government of Nepal, 2020). It is already witnessing the impacts of climate change in various sectors such as agriculture, health, forests, pasture, and fuel availability (Karki et al., 2009). More extreme events in the future are expected to affect the development sectors such as water, disaster management, energy, biodiversity, agriculture, health, urban planning, and livelihoods (Ministry of Forest and Environment, 2019). However, there has been no analysis in the field of sanitation, and what exists on WASH has a limited focus on sanitation, as is evident in Ahmad et al. (2018).

In Nepal, there is a growing realisation of the need for policies and programmes to adapt to climate change and to minimise its impacts through coordinated efforts with multi-sectoral stakeholders and the international community (Government of Nepal, 2019). However, even when the significance of incorporating climate change adaptation into sector policies is acknowledged, such integration is not adequately reflected in practice (Ranabhat et al., 2018). This reflects wider evidence that water and sanitation as well as climate policies currently exhibit limited emphasis on climate change and sanitation. For instance, in Bangladesh, while more recent policy documents have started acknowledging climate resilience of sanitation (Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, 2021; Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, 2022), the linkage between climate change and sanitation remains limited. Some of the key climate change documents in India have not addressed sanitation in their strategies or missions (Government of India, n.d.; Government of India, 2022). These examples indicate that sanitation has not yet taken up a prominent position in the climate change agenda in other parts of the region. This also highlights a global gap in addressing the interplay of climate change and sanitation.

The integrated and indivisible nature of the SDGs means that each of the goals and targets depends upon and influences the others (Allen et al., 2018). SDG 13 on climate change calls for ‘urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts’ through ‘strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries’. Linking the development in sanitation with the SDG 13 targets means that the sanitation sector can make considerable progress to ‘strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards’ (The Global Goals, 2023). A key action to build climate resilience of sanitation would be integrating sanitation into national adaptation plans and nationally determined contributions and investing in building resilience of services (WHO, 2022a). It is equally important for each sector to incorporate climate change measures within its individual policy framework, including the sanitation sector (Vij et al., 2018; Nepal, 2019; The Global Goals, 2023).

In the backdrop where Nepal is a country facing both substantial threats from climate change and major deficits in sanitation and specifically in managing on-site sanitation, the objective of this study is to examine the climate change policies and sanitation policies in Nepal to assess the integration of sanitation and climate change, respectively, in these policies for climate resilience in sanitation, with focus on urban on-site sanitation. The planning guidelines developed by the government were examined to see if they provided adequate guidance for planning climate-resilient sanitation plans. The key research question we address is to what extent does the current suite of policies and guidelines support the development of a more climate-resilient sanitation sector in Nepal? The study sought to answer this question through an analysis of policy and planning documents on the basis that such documents play an important role in framing investments and actions on the ground.

The selected documents were reviewed focused on the following key terms: ‘sanitation’, ‘on-site sanitation’, ‘sanitation systems and services’, ‘climate adaptation’, ‘mitigation’, ‘resilience’, ‘planning,’ and ‘financing’. A template for policy review was developed in a Word document. For each document, basic information such as the title, vision/goal, and objectives were recorded in the template. Each document was reviewed to capture what it said about sanitation, if it specifically addressed on-site sanitation, whether it referred to sanitation systems and services, and made provisions for planning sanitation across the sanitation service chain. Finally, references made to climate change and resilience of sanitation systems and services were captured. Similarly, each climate change document was reviewed to capture what it mentioned for sanitation or sanitation components in its resilience/mitigation strategies or provisions.

A WASH policy or plan was considered to have adequately addressed climate resilience in sanitation if it clearly provided details on the issues of each component of the sanitation service chain for on-site sanitation including the sanitation services and provided clear guidance to address the issues and integrate resilience across the sanitation service chain. When a policy or plan did not cover all of this, but there was partial discussion on sanitation or if clear guidance for climate resilience was not provided for all components of sanitation, it was considered inadequate. If one or several terms of interest was mentioned with no or partial discussion, we assessed this as having limited coverage. Where the term climate change was absent, we recorded it as absent.

Similarly, a climate change policy or plan was considered to have adequately addressed climate resilience in sanitation if it provided guidance to integrate resilience across the sanitation service chain. When a policy or plan did not provide clear guidance for climate resilience for all components of the sanitation service chain, it was considered inadequate. If one or several terms of interest was mentioned, with no or partial discussion, we assessed this as having limited coverage. Where the term sanitation was absent, we recorded it as absent.

This section is divided into two parts where the first part presents findings from a review of the climate change policy and plans while the second part discusses a review of the WASH policy and plans. It summarises the content of the climate change and WASH policy and plans on the provision for urban on-site sanitation and its resilience to climate change.

The Government of Nepal recognises climate change adaptation as vital to safeguarding vulnerable communities, ecosystems, and climate-sensitive sectors from the impacts of climate change (Government of Nepal, 2020). However, climate change policy and plans in the country make little or no reference to sanitation. As a response to the changing climate, Nepal has made various commitments both at the international and regional levels and is actively working to address climate change by formulating policies, revisiting institutional arrangements, and strengthening its programme development and implementation (Nepal, 2019). Since the ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1995, Nepal has submitted an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) in 2016, a Second NDC in 2020, and developed a National Adaptation Plan (NAP) 2021–2050 in 2021. The NAP 2021–2050 (Government of Nepal, n.d.b) is an overarching adaptation strategic instrument in alignment with Nepal's NDC. It has developed priority adaptation programmes in the thematic and inter-thematic areas identified in the National Climate Change Policy (NCCP) 2019. Table 1 summarises the key components of sanitation addressed by the climate change policy and plans.

The NCCP 2019 (Government of Nepal, 2019) provides an opportunity to integrate climate change into policies, strategies, plans, and programmes. Although the NCCP 2019 does not make reference to sanitation, the subsequent plans developed, for example, NAP 2021–2050, provide the basis for integrating climate adaptation and mitigation into WASH plans and programmes, although there is a limited focus on sanitation. The NDC 2020 (Government of Nepal, 2020) places a priority on reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs) from sanitation rather than a focus on resilience. Nevertheless, it provides the basis for the sanitation sector to plan for FSM and to explore the potential for co-treatment of faecal sludge with other streams of waste for generation of resources.

Nepal's sanitation policy dates back to the early 1990s, with the first policy developed in 1994 to promote sanitation, with an emphasis on rural areas. Urban water supply and sanitation were only addressed in policies developed after 2009. The first Joint Sector Review (JSR) process in 2011 concluded that there was a gap of a strategic framework and an approach to improve performance and effectiveness in the delivery of WASH services (Government of Nepal n.d.c). The JSR process was established to assess sector performance and policy constraints and to promote a sector-wide approach in the WASH sector (WaterAid, 2016).

The new constitution of Nepal was promulgated in 2015, and the sanitation sector was restructured and decentralised. To ensure the provision of WASH services in line with the new constitution, the WASH policy and planning frameworks underwent a review process. The aim was to develop a single water and sanitation law with associated rules, a new water and sanitation policy, and a revised national WASH SDP. This exercise replaced multiple existing laws with a unified law and consolidated policies on urban and rural sanitation into one coherent framework (WHO, 2019). The Water Supply and Sanitation Act (WSSA) 2022 and the National Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene Policy (NWSSHP) 2023 have been endorsed. The SDP, which was initially designed for the period 2016–2030, has been revised for the period 2024–2043, but has yet to be endorsed. Table 2 summarises the main sanitation and climate change components of the water and sanitation policy and guidelines.

The WSSA 2022 (Government of Nepal, 2022) has a key role to implement the Constitution and enforce the government's policies and programmes to achieve the SDGs. However, the sanitation goal is limited to provisions for sewage and wastewater management and does not make provisions for on-site sanitation and its management. The NWSSHP 2023 (Government of Nepal, 2023b) includes the provision of safe and accessible sanitation services to achieve the SDG target. While encouraging promotion of on-site sanitation facilities, establishing faecal sludge treatment plants, and promoting resource recovery, it lacks a clear direction on improving on-site sanitation and details of sanitation services along the sanitation service chain. The recently revised WASH SDP 2024–2043 is intended to serve as a comprehensive and strategic roadmap for achieving universal access to improved sanitation. However, it does not have a dedicated section on on-site sanitation or provide a clear approach to addressing on-site sanitation and its management.

The Government of Nepal developed guiding documents for preparing both the WASH plan and the city-wide inclusive sanitation (CWIS) plan. The WASH Plan Development Guideline (WPDG) 2076 (2019) (Government of Nepal n.d.d) lacks emphasis on sanitation. The draft CWIS Plan Guideline (CPG) 2021 (Government of Nepal n.d.a) was developed to support local governments in preparing their CWIS Plan in alignment with the WASH plan for delivery of safely managed sanitation services but lacks clarity in its process descriptions.

While the WASH policy and plans promote access to financial resources for service provision and for climate mitigation and adaptation from different national and international sources, they fail to provide clear guidance or recommendations on how to access these funds and so offer little direction for the sector. The WSSA 2022 makes no mention of climate change. The NWSSHP 2023 makes reference to climate change adaptation and a key driver is to ‘make drinking water and sanitation infrastructure disaster management friendly and climate change adaptive’. Despite this, the policy provides little direction on planning and implementing climate-resilient sanitation and makes no reference to the provisions made for sanitation in the climate change policy and plans. The WASH SDP 2024–2043 makes reference to elements required for building resilience to climate change impacts, but the focus is primarily on water supply and it does not address on-site sanitation. Neither the WPDG 2019 nor the CPG 2021 provides guidance on how to integrate climate resilience in each component of the sanitation service chain. Table 3 summarises the adequacy of the policy and plans on the provision for sanitation and its resilience to climate change.

The review of policies and plans on climate change and WASH has revealed that sanitation and climate change are addressed but only to a limited extent. WASH is increasingly recognised within climate plans, and the need for adaptation and building resilience to climate is noted. However, where this is done the primary focus is water supply. Sanitation in general and on-site sanitation in particular are largely ignored in relation to climate adaptation and resilience. Where sanitation is referenced in climate policy, for example, in the NDC 2020, the reduction in GHGs is given greater priority. This reflects the growing attention being paid to sanitation and wastewater as a key emitting sector of GHGs, particularly methane (Cheng et al., 2022; Manga & Muoghalu, 2024). Addressing both adaptation and mitigation is essential for resilient sanitation and for meeting the international agreements on greenhouse gas emissions (UNCC, 2023a). Such integration is also important to comply with the 26th iteration of the Conference of Parties (COP26) decision to strengthen ‘efforts to build resilience to climate change and to curb GHG emissions’ (UNCC, 2023b). However, it is evident that the climate change policy and plans in the current form are inadequate to plan resilience in sanitation in Nepal. Similarly, review of the WASH policy and plan documents has shown that first, sanitation is inadequately addressed, attention to on-site sanitation and its management is insufficient, and second, guidance to building resilience on on-site sanitation is limited. This reflects the limited attention paid to on-site sanitation and to climate resilience in core WASH policies and plans.

The limited focus on sanitation in the policies, plans, and programmes in Nepal also reflect the limited global focus on climate resilience in the sanitation sector (Howard et al., 2016; Hyde-Smith et al., 2022). Ongoing debates about what resilient sanitation looks like, and the lack of clear methodologies for assessing it, further contribute to the inadequate attention it receives in policy frameworks (Kohlitz et al., 2017). These challenges underscore the need for more dedicated efforts and strategic planning to highlight sanitation in the global climate resilience agenda. In this context, developing a standalone plan and programme for sanitation could more effectively address the unique challenges that sanitation brings. Such a targeted plan and programme can generate comprehensive attention to improving the sanitation situation and systematically address climate-related vulnerabilities to sanitation systems and services, with a particular emphasis on on-site sanitation. Such a standalone plan for Nepal could for instance be a Sanitation National Adaptation Plan (S-NAP), taking the Health NAP (2017–2021) as an example (Government of Nepal, 2018).

Coordination with multi-sectoral stakeholders is necessary to develop climate change adaptive policies and programmes. Yet, in this review of climate change and WASH policies in Nepal it is apparent that such coordination has yet to take place. A concerted effort needs to be made for coordination with all related sectors for development of climate-resilient policies and programmes and for resource mobilisation. The importance for such coordination has been stated in both climate change and WASH policies and plans, but has yet to be implemented. The development of the standalone sanitation plan or S-NAP could be a starting point for concerted collaboration. Such coordination would need to include sectors crucial to sustained functioning of the sanitation service chain. This includes coordination with the transport and roads sector to ensure emptying services can continue to function. It would also include coordination with the agriculture sector to assess demand for treated faecal sludge when considering technologies and regulation of treatment.

The concept presented, while not exhaustive, provides a guide to consider while developing sanitation plans. This should be taken as an example to initiate resilience thinking during the planning process. Technology choice, design, and construction should consider the local geographical context and climate, potential hazard events, and associated threats including the operation and maintenance capacities. Consultation with local stakeholders including the community is one of the important approaches to understanding local context and practices, needs, and feasibility during these initial stages. Markets for products and spare parts are key factors for sustained operation and maintenance of infrastructures and equipment across the service chain. While both the climate change and WASH policies mention about treatment of faecal sludge, services to empty and transport faecal sludge should be regulated to ensure that the sludge is actually brought to the treatment plant by service providers. Furthermore, building containments that are easily accessible for emptying and treatment plants that can withstand climate impacts are important to ensure resilient services across the service chain. Assessment of market demand for treatment by-products and selecting appropriate technologies is equally important to promote sustainable and resilient sanitation.

Unlike for sanitation, substantive progress has been made in addressing the climate change in water supply systems, particularly through the integration of climate resilience in water safety plans (WHO, 2021) and through designing climate-resilient water supply projects (Government of Nepal, 2023a). However, similar advancement for climate-resilient sanitation safety plans or climate-resilient sanitation projects is absent. These actions should be initiated for planning more resilient sanitation through improved risk assessments.

Nepal will require significant investments to attain the SDG 6.2 national targets, but according to WaterAid Nepal (2018), the sanitation sector has an estimated investment gap of 76% to meet the target. The federal budget for WASH decreased by 24% in the 2023/2024 fiscal year (WaterAid Nepal, n.d.). Estimation shows that if the budget allocation is not increased, there will be a shortfall of 139 billion rupees or about USD 1 billion by 2030 (Government of Nepal, n.d.e). The potential impacts of climate change with increased investment required to build resilience of services are expected to further widen this funding gap. There are opportunities for the sanitation sector to leverage regional and international climate funds through new and additional financial flows in addition to the development assistance (Government of Nepal, 2023c, unpublished). However, this will require multi-sectoral coordination and capacity development (Government of Nepal, 2023c, unpublished). The issues identified within this analysis of the policy context for climate-resilient sanitation are not unique to Nepal but are commonly faced in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Mills et al., 2020; Hyde-Smith et al., 2022). There needs to be a concerted effort in the sanitation sector among LMICs to promote resilient sanitation as an important contributor to community resilience (IPCC, 2022).

This review does have limitations. Only policies for water, sanitation, and hygiene were reviewed. Policies and plans from other sectors such as health and education were not considered in this review and these may have included other insights and actions on sanitation and on climate resilience. This review only focused on Nepal and has not looked into detail on the experience of other countries in the region and beyond. It is acknowledged that other countries may have made greater progress in addressing climate resilience and this may offer additional insights for Nepal.

The review of policies and plans on climate change and WASH has revealed that sanitation and climate change are addressed only to a limited extent in these documents. In addition, on-site sanitation is inadequately addressed in policies and plans, even though it accounts for over 80% of sanitation coverage in Nepal. This indicates a general lack of dedicated attention and space that on-site sanitation deserves in the water and sanitation sector. There is a lack of a clear direction for planning and implementing measures for sanitation in response to climate change across the sanitation service chain. This lack of focus can lead to inadequate planning and allocation of resources for sanitation. The creation of sanitation-specific policies, plans, and programmes, with targeted attention to on-site sanitation, can better address the unique challenges that sanitation presents and can generate comprehensive attention to make progress on sanitation. Further it can systematically address climate-related vulnerabilities in sanitation systems and services. These actions will establish good practices on the ground for informed policy reforms.

The weaknesses identified in the policy context in Nepal reflect limited attention to developing resilient sanitation among LMICs more widely. Given the current limited global focus on climate resilience in sanitation and ongoing debates about what resilient sanitation should look like and how it can be assessed, investment in research is imperative to improving the understanding of impacts of climate change on sanitation and to generate evidence of resilient sanitation system and services. Greater inter-country lesson-learning should be encouraged to increase uptake of successful approaches.

Finally, increased collaboration among the key ministries is essential to initiate policy dialogue towards resilient sanitation and to recognise the wide-ranging benefits it offers across sectors such as water, health, and environment. Furthermore, the government must make efforts to drive the policy reforms and mobilise investments in collaboration with a diverse range of stakeholders such as the academia, non-profit, private sectors, and international organisations. As more countries engage in these efforts, there are opportunities for collaborative learning, sharing of best practices, and building a global community focused on climate-resilient sanitation, leading to more effective and sustainable solutions.

We acknowledge Sanjaya Adhikary, Freelance Consultant, Nepal, and Vasco Schelbert, Eawag-Sandec, Switzerland, for their review and comments on the initial draft of the paper.

No new data were created or analysed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this paper.

This work was supported, in whole or in part, by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation under Grant No.: INV-015713. Under the grant conditions of the Foundation, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Generic License has already been assigned to the Author Accepted Manuscript version that might arise from this submission.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.