Survey of attitudes and perceptions of urine-diverting toilets and human waste recycling in Hawaii

Lamichhane, Krishna M.; Babcock, Roger W.

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.039

Cited by 68 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison to the international studies, for example in a survey which was carried out on Swiss farmers by Lamichhane et al, 25 there is a difference between the responses in that 57.0% of the farmers accepted the urine based fertilizer and 42% were in favour of buying the products fertilized by urine whereas in the present study the majority of the respondents were not willing to use human urine as fertilizers.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 85%

An assessment of university students and staff perceptions regarding the use of human urine as a valuable soil nutrient in South Africa

Mugivhisa¹,

Olowoyo²

2015

Afr H. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The declines in soil fertility associated with insufficient commercial fertilizers have resulted in the use of organic manure (human urine and faeces) as a source of fertilizers for production and cultivation of crop plants. The aim of this study was to assess perceptions of students and workers at the University of Limpopo (Medunsa Campus) regarding the fertilizing effect of urine. Methods: A total of 225 questionnaires were administered to staff and students. The questionnaire sought to establish the knowledge, attitude and behavioural changes as regards the use of urine as a fertilizer for the cultivation of vegetables. Results: Descriptive statistical analysis of the data indicated that 86.8% of the respondents were unaware of any human urine use as a fertilizer, 82.7% and 81.1% would not eat spinach and maize fertilized with urine respectively. Only 38.3% said they would eat vegetables fertilized with animal urine making it more tolerable as compared to human urine. Health reasons were given as the main reasons why respondents were unwilling to eat crops fertilized with human urine. However, 69.9% of the respondents [74.3% females, 69.9% students, 75.0% (27-36) age group] were willing to change their attitudes and unwillingness if they were better informed about the safety of human urine use for agricultural purposes. Conclusion: Education, awareness and reassurance on the importance and safety of urine would have to be done so that urine for agricultural purposes could become more acceptable to people.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 85%

An assessment of university students and staff perceptions regarding the use of human urine as a valuable soil nutrient in South Africa

Mugivhisa¹,

Olowoyo²

2015

Afr H. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was used semi-structured questionnaires. Some questions were adapted from the literature (Lamichhane & Babcock 2013;Manyanhaire & Mutangadura-Mangeya 2009) and the rest were created based on the local situation. The main questions were about: social characteristics (schooling, age, sanitation access…); agriculture (use of pesticides, cultures types, field area, bio-fertilizers); and questions about human urine (knowledge, use availability, ways for the collect human urine, and others).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A third of the participants believe that it is possible to use human urine in their crops (figure 3). A study in Hawaii found satisfying results when asking if human waste could be used as fertilizer, where 92% of the participants answered affirmatively-despite the fact that no historical evidence of the use of human urine as a fertilizer exists for Hawaii (where the study took place) (Lamichhane & Babcock 2013). In Brazil, we identified some studies conducted on corn (Araújo et al 2015), lettuce (Chrispim & Nolasco 2012) and millet (Santos Júnior et al 2015) with promising results and good applicability potential, but none were conducted in Amazonas state.…”

Section: Use Of Organic Fertilizersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers’ Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Urine in the Central Amazon

Müller¹,

Pedro²,

Freitas³

2017

Mundo Amazonico

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urine Diverting Dry Toilets (uddt) provide a technological alternative for the challenging environments found in Amazonia, and have the advantage of not consuming water. To verify their viability, however, it is necessary to understand users' behavior in relation to the use of toilets' byproducts. The objective of the present study was to evaluate farmers' perceptions of the use of human urine as a fertilizer for agricultural crops in Central Amazon. We interviewed 73 smallholder farmers from a rural village in Tefé County and in the municipal farmers' market of Tefé. It was verified that 12% of farmers have knowledge of the use of human urine in agriculture, and that more than a third consider it possible to use urine in their gardens and fields. However, more than half did not consider the possibility of using urine, manifesting concerns about crop development and doubts regarding the efficacy of its use as a fertilizer. The informants believed that crops watered with urine would be adequate for human consumption. It is possible to conclude that human urine has the potential to be used in agriculture in the study region and we understand that dry toilets should not be taken as the only alternative for sanitation in Amazon.

show abstract

“…With South African home dwellers, current use of fertilizers from toilet pits was 2% while the acceptance to use their own urine as fertilizer was 53% and the acceptance to use other's urine as fertilizer was 21% [7]. In Hawaii, USA, the acceptance to install a UDT at home for free was 86% while the willingness to pay $50 to install one was 61% [8]. In one Turkish case, the acceptance for natural fertilizers was as high as 100% and for synthetic fertilizers it was 49%, while for different types of plants, direct use received 23-55% and indirect use received 68-91% [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Yellow Water to Aid Food Security—Perceptions/Acceptance of Consumers toward Urine Based Fertilizer

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Yellow water is a segregated domestic wastewater stream resulting from Ecological Sanitation (ECOSAN). It is mainly source separated human urine which is rich in nutrients. The potential contribution of yellow water as fertilizer to food security is considerable. The use of this potential however is related to the acceptance of the consumers towards urine based fertilizers (UBF). This work aims to assess acceptance of consumers towards UBF and urine diverting toilets (UDT) for separation of urine, through questionnaires with 444 participants from Egypt, Iraq and Turkey with different age groups, genders, educational backgrounds and occupations. The overall acceptance for UDTs and UBF was 62% and 56%, respectively. All-in-all, public opinion regarding the use of UDT/UBF is promising.

show abstract

Survey of attitudes and perceptions of urine-diverting toilets and human waste recycling in Hawaii

Cited by 68 publications

References 23 publications

An assessment of university students and staff perceptions regarding the use of human urine as a valuable soil nutrient in South Africa

An assessment of university students and staff perceptions regarding the use of human urine as a valuable soil nutrient in South Africa

Farmers’ Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Urine in the Central Amazon

Yellow Water to Aid Food Security—Perceptions/Acceptance of Consumers toward Urine Based Fertilizer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About