Conceptualizing waste as a resource: Urban biosolids processing in the rural landscape

Mason-Renton, Sarah; Luginaah, Isaac

doi:10.1111/cag.12454

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper reports on social research investigating attitudes about the diversion of urine from the waste stream and its use as fertilizer in two study regions, New England and the Upper Midwest. We initially hypothesized that individuals might experience visceral negative reactions to resource recovery from human urine, as has been the case with the land application of biosolids and the potable reuse of highly purified wastewater (Jones, 2011;MacPherson, 2015;Mason-Renton & Luginaah, 2018). Our findings suggest, however, that it is distrust in how economic interests influence scientific and technical information, not disgust about biological processes, that might affect widespread uptake of urine recycling (Stern & Baird, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Nested risks and responsibilities: Perspectives on fertilizer from human urine in two U.S. regions

Schreiber

Opperman

Hardin

et al. 2021

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on social research investigating perceptions concerning the diversion of urine from the waste stream and its use as fertilizer in two study regions, New England and the Upper Midwest. We hypothesized that discomfort or disgust might affect acceptance of such a shift in human “waste” management. However, our findings suggest that a more significant concern of those potentially involved in this process may be distrust of how economic interests influence scientific and technical information. Both physical risks (to the environment and public health) and socio-political risks (to fragile farm economies and consumer communities) play out at individual, household, regional, and global scales. We describe the intersection of these complex understandings as nested risks and responsibilities that must inform the future of urine reclamation. Our respondents' shared concern about environmental risks has already galvanized communities to take responsibility for implementing closed-loop alternatives to current agricultural inputs and waste management practices in their communities. Attention to these nested understandings of both risk and responsibility should shape research priorities and foster participatory approaches to urine nutrient reclamation, including strategies for education, planning, regulation, technology design, and agricultural application.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Nested risks and responsibilities: Perspectives on fertilizer from human urine in two U.S. regions

Schreiber

Opperman

Hardin

et al. 2021

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The term "biosolids" has been adopted for treated sewage sludge more generally, as social science survey evidence suggested that it elicited a more positive perception than the word "sludge" [28,29]. Unlike for biochar, there have been numerous studies looking at its public perception [30][31][32][33][34]. This is in part because biosolid land application relies on public acceptance of key issues around its health, safety and environmental impacts.…”

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Perceptions of Faecal Sludge Biochar and Biosolids Use in Agriculture

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Full-scale pyrolysis of faecal sludge is a credible technology for the safe removal of pathogens and the concurrent creation of biochar, which has been shown to enhance crop productivity. Faecal sludge biochar has the potential to improve acidic, low nutrient soils and crop yield in developing nations more at risk of climate change and food insecurity. Little research has been conducted into public acceptance of faecal sludge biochar as a soil enhancer in agriculture. In this study of the public in Swansea, Wales, an online survey examines their awareness of, and comfort levels of eating food grown using biosolids, wood biochar and faecal sludge biochar. Our findings show that males were almost twice as likely than females to have a positive perception of biosolids (OR 1.91, p value 0.004) and faecal sludge biochar (OR 2.02, p value 0.03). Those in the oldest age group (65+) were almost five times more likely to have a positive view of faecal sludge biochar than the youngest age group (OR 4.88, p value 0.001). Deployment of faecal sludge biochar must overcome a “disgust effect” related to its human faecal origins. This factor must be centrally taken into account when implementing management and policy decisions regarding the land application of biosolids and faecal sludge biochar.

show abstract

“…We initially framed the social research work in terms of potential barriers to uptake of the products, technologies and processes for the use of urine-derived fertilizers (UDFs). We thought it likely that many individuals would experience visceral negative reactions when first learning about urine diversion and re-use, as has been the case with various forms of resource recovery from wastewater, such as land application of biosolids and potable re-use of highly purified wastewater (MacPherson, 2015;Jones, 2011;Mason-Renton and Luginaah, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leveraging integrative research for inclusive innovation: urine diversion and re-use in agriculture

Schreiber

Opperman

Nace³

et al. 2020

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schreiber, T, et al. 2020. Leveraging integrative research for inclusive innovation: urine diversion and re-use in agriculture. Elem Sci Anth, 8: 12. This report describes the evolution of a qualitative research design used in a study that integrated academic and non-academic expertise and involved multiple stakeholders concerned with the diversion of human urine from the waste stream for its re-use in agriculture. The study took place in two regions of the U.S., New England and the Upper Midwest (most specifically Vermont and Michigan) and suggests the importance of ethnographic perspectives in a participatory action research framework going forward. This manuscript presents a novel mix of researchers, from a grassroots organization to R1 University teams, and explores the perspectives of a wide range of research participants with whom we conferred to understand whether and how fertilizers made from nutrients recovered from diverted urine might be accepted, adapted, and scaled in agricultural use. Our manuscript thus articulates new territory for such interpretive social science work (focus groups, interviews and participant observations) neither within basic ethnographic research, nor within the kind of "rapid ethnography" widely used in business, engineering and international development fields. We describe how our research process entailed the modifications of our methods, and we consider the overlapping and sometimes opposed knowledges and attitudes of multiple stakeholders who are crucial to the uptake and scale of such new technologies for closing loops in our waste and water processing infrastructures and our food production systems. To best leverage these diverse knowledges, we suggest incremental steps for teams like ours towards an inclusive research process.

show abstract

Conceptualizing waste as a resource: Urban biosolids processing in the rural landscape

Cited by 12 publications

References 66 publications

Nested risks and responsibilities: Perspectives on fertilizer from human urine in two U.S. regions

Nested risks and responsibilities: Perspectives on fertilizer from human urine in two U.S. regions

Public Perceptions of Faecal Sludge Biochar and Biosolids Use in Agriculture

Leveraging integrative research for inclusive innovation: urine diversion and re-use in agriculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About