SLIPPERY TRAIL: Washing Hands project aims at bringing down diarhoea deaths

Is it a boon or a bane? Its advocates laud it as the cheapest and best life-saving method to fight diarrhoea, the biggest factor in child mortality. Its critics rubbish it as a soap opera orchestrated by multinational companies to conquer markets and destroy indigenous culture and industry.

At the centre of the bubbling controversy in Kerala is the ambitious Washing Hands project jointly launched by the state and Central Governments, the World Bank, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, USAID, UNICEF and companies like Unilever, Proctor & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive and Johnson & Johnson. The big players find themselves on slippery ground as opposition to the $10 million (Rs 48 crore) project mounts.

At first glance, the project-expected to start from January 1, 2003, in Ghana in Africa and Kerala before going global-looks simple. The aim: promote the habit of washing hands with soap among poor communities to reduce the incidence of diarrhoea by 80 per cent by 2005 and thus bring down child mortality rate and cut down on treatment costs. The savings are estimated at $9.4 million a year-almost the total cost of the project.

The project is not about saving lives but selling soap.

VANDANA SHIVA, Environmentalist

In India about 70,000 children below five years die of diarrhoea every year. So the scheme should have been welcomed. It is the choice of Kerala as the test ground that has critics ranging from environmentalists and ngos to political parties crying foul. The state has the highest standards in hygiene, the least number of diarrhoea deaths and the lowest infant mortality rate in the country.

One of the implementing agencies of the project in Kerala is the state Government. K.J. Mathew, principal secretary, Water Resources, even attended a Workshop on Handwash in Washington in May. The report he presented pointed out that besides health benefits to the people the project will also open up "opportunities for soap manufacturers to widen market and add to brand equity".

The four corporates that have joined hands with the project are also the top four players dominating the $88 billion world soap and detergent market. The market is expected to grow by 35 per cent over the next three years. However, consumers in developing countries are demanding cheaper soap, which is a challenge to the soap manufacturers, big and small.

The commercial benefits that the project promises the soap companies have raised the hackles of many groups. Leading the campaign is environmentalist Vandana Shiva. "Why is the project implemented in Kerala which has access to safe water and is informed about prevention of diarrhoea because of high female literacy. They also have traditional remedies like drinking jeera water," she says. She points out the project attacks local culture and the herbal soap industry in the small-scale sector. "Clearly the project is not about saving lives but selling soap."

The state's soap industry is restive. Manoj Arukandathil, secretary of the Kerala Small Scale Soap Manufacturers Association, says, "It is to derail the challenge posed to global brands by the local ayurvedic soaps."

The state Government now seems to be washing its hands of it. It has shelved a proposal to launch the project on October 2. Says Water Resources Minister T.M. Jacob: "The Government has an open mind. We will weigh the pros and cons before implementing it." Even if the project is implemented, he says no multinational company will be allowed to use it to sell its products. "Do you think it is possible to compel anyone in this literate and politically aware state to use a particular brand of soap? Why can't we use the project to promote local brands?" No different from what the opponents of the project also argue.