Next Article in Journal
Efficacy of Heavy Use Area Protection (HUAP) Pads in Poultry Farm
Previous Article in Journal
Review of Macadamia Production in Malawi: Focusing on What, Where, How Much Is Produced and Major Constraints
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Attitudes and Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Excreta and Human Excreta Derived Materials: A Scoping Review

1
Discipline of Agricultural Economics, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg 3201, South Africa
2
Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa
3
Discipline of Crop Science, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg 3201, South Africa
4
Discipline of Chemical Engineering, Pollution Research Group, School of Engineering, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg 4001, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2021, 11(2), 153; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020153
Submission received: 30 December 2020 / Revised: 1 February 2021 / Accepted: 9 February 2021 / Published: 13 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Agricultural Technology)

Abstract

This study explicates the scope of published literature on the influence of attitudes and perceptions on the intention to use human excreta and human excreta derived materials in agriculture. Using a scoping review methodology, search results from Scopus and Web of Science were screened and synthesized using the DistillerSR web-based application. Out of the 1192 studies identified, 22 published articles met the inclusion criteria. Additional studies were identified by keyword enrichment, hand-searching, and snowballing in other electronic data bases. The benefit perception of the soil health, income, and yield was the main driver for positive attitudes. Perceived health risk and socio-cultural factors were reported as the main barriers to the use of human excreta derived materials in agriculture. Limited information, availability, collection, transport, and storage were the other reported perceived barriers. The influence of socioeconomic and demographic factors on farmers’ attitudes and perceptions was inconclusive, which is potentially attributed to contextual and methodological differences. Social and behavior change communication through community mass campaigns and targeting interventions segregated by socioeconomic and demographic contexts is recommended for development interventions. Future empirical studies could focus on the influence of crop types, treatment processes, food preparation and processing on attitudes and perceptions.
Keywords: recovery and reuse; human excreta; attitude and perception; risk perception; benefit perception; health risk; circular economy recovery and reuse; human excreta; attitude and perception; risk perception; benefit perception; health risk; circular economy

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gwara, S.; Wale, E.; Odindo, A.; Buckley, C. Attitudes and Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Excreta and Human Excreta Derived Materials: A Scoping Review. Agriculture 2021, 11, 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020153

AMA Style

Gwara S, Wale E, Odindo A, Buckley C. Attitudes and Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Excreta and Human Excreta Derived Materials: A Scoping Review. Agriculture. 2021; 11(2):153. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020153

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gwara, Simon, Edilegnaw Wale, Alfred Odindo, and Chris Buckley. 2021. "Attitudes and Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Excreta and Human Excreta Derived Materials: A Scoping Review" Agriculture 11, no. 2: 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020153

APA Style

Gwara, S., Wale, E., Odindo, A., & Buckley, C. (2021). Attitudes and Perceptions on the Agricultural Use of Human Excreta and Human Excreta Derived Materials: A Scoping Review. Agriculture, 11(2), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020153

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop