Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Productive Sanitation & the Link to Food Security

51 bytes removed, 21:41, 20 October 2016
no edit summary
[[File:Susana logo.png|right|90px|Susana logo.png]]This article is based on a [http://www.susana.org/en/resources/library/details/101 factsheet] that provides information on the link between sanitation and agriculture as well as related implications on health, economy and the environment. It presents examples of treating and using treated excreta and wastewater in a productive way and describes the potential for urban agriculture and resource recovery in rural areas. Institutional and legal aspects, business opportunities and management of associated health risks are also discussed.
=== 1. Summary ===
Productive sanitation is the term used for the variety of sanitation systems that make productive use of the nutrient, organic matter, water and energy content of human excreta and wastewater in agricultural production and aquaculture. These systems should enable the recovery of resources in household wastewater, minimise consumption and pollution of water resources, support the conservation of soil fertility as well as agricultural productivity and thereby contribute to food security and help to reduce malnutrition.
The implementation and scaling-up of productive sanitation systems is inhibited by weak, non-existing and sometimes prohibiting legislation. It is therefore necessary to develop relevant legislation along the sanitation chain taking into consideration the type of crops, occupational health, food hygiene and other preventive and risk management measures. This requires awareness raising, advocacy and behavioural change by all stakeholders. Further applied research is also needed to assess risk management options at the interface between agriculture and sanitation to support policy dialogue at the local and national level.
=== 2. Background ===
[[File:Urine crop.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Urine crop.jpg]]Food security and the access to safe water and sanitation are fundamental human rights that for many people remain a promise unfulfilled. Globally still some estimated 2.6 billion people do not use improved sanitation facilities (WHO, UNICEF, 2010) and around 925 million worldwide are chronically undernourished (FAO, 2010). A great deal of the population growth will take place in urban areas leading to a substantial increase in urban food demand and a corresponding increase in the amount of organic waste, human excreta and wastewater from cities to be managed in a safe and productive way. The safe recycling of sanitation products can contribute to improved resource management, reduce environmental impact and improved health and nutrition.
It is estimated that the underlying cause for around one third of all deaths of children under five years old is undernutrition. Children and adults who are suffering from diarrhoea and intestinal worm infections like ascaris, trichuris and hookworm obtain fewer calories from the food they eat (DFID, 2009) and (Humphrey, 2009). Productive sanitation could lead to higher crop yields, leading to less undernutrition and hence less susceptibility for disease, growth stunting in children and death. In addition, preventing diseases caused by lack of sanitation, such as diarrhoea and helminth infections, would lead to a more efficient use of available nutrients in food.
=== 3. The historical link between sanitation and agriculture ===
Food production is historically linked with using liquid and solid waste from human settlements in agriculture. Only after the introduction of phosphorus mining in the mid 19th century, and industrial ammonia production at the beginning of the 20th century, it became the prevailing practice to replace nutrients with synthetic fertilisers. In the same era water based sanitation systems with flush toilets and sewers were installed as a response to the acute health crisis in large cities at that time. The idea that human excreta is a waste product without a useful purpose is a modern misconception: pits, water bodies and landfills are used nowadays as sinks for nutrients, organic matter and pathogens.
=== 4. Economic implications ===
[[File:Food price.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Food price.jpg]]A high percentage of the population in areas affected by the sanitation crisis carry out subsistence farming (IAASTD, 2009) and struggle to maintain an income for feeding their families. Workdays and income won through improved water and sanitation services are thereby also a contribution to food security.
[[File:Fertiliser.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Fertiliser.jpg]]The average rural family of 9 in Niger excretes annually the nutrient equivalent of 100 kg (2 bags) of synthetic fertilisers (Dagerskog, 2009). The resource reuse in agriculture can boost yields considerably. Fertilising with urine can achieve comparable results to synthetic fertilisers (Gensch, Itchon, Miso, 2011). Within the poor population in developing countries an estimated 40-80% of all generated household income is used for food (Viljoen, 2005). Where there is space for gardens, productive use of sanitation products can reduce household expenditures for the purchase of food.
=== 5. The productive sanitation approach ===
Productive sanitation is a general term used for the variety of sanitation systems that make productive use of the nutrient, organic matter, water and energy content of human excreta and wastewater in agricultural production and aquaculture. These systems enable the recovery of nutrients and/or energy in household wastewater, minimise consumption and pollution of water resources and support the conservation of soil fertility as well as agricultural productivity and thereby contribute to food security. Productive sanitation systems can be considered sustainable if technical, institutional, environmental, social and economical aspects are appropriately addressed, according to the Vision Document of SuSanA.
*It can reduce health costs due to a better nutritional status of the population and less exposure to pathogens.
=== 6. Cities as hot spots for resource recovery ===
The current global urban population is expected to double by 2050 compared to 1990, with 90% of urban growth taking place in developing countries (Drechsel, Quansah, Penning, 1999). We need a transition to sustainable and resilient cities, which requires enhancing quality of life while minimising resource extraction, energy consumption, waste generation and safeguarding ecosystem services. This is directly related to city planning: to the development of city-based energy, waste, transportation, food, water and sanitation systems (Lüthi et al., 2011.
UPA contributes to local economic development, poverty alleviation, social inclusion of the urban poor – women in particular – and to reduced vulnerability of cities and their inhabitants. Nutrient loops can be closed and the environmental benefits of urban agriculture can be enhanced.
=== 7. Resource recovery in rural areas ===
{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="0" align="right" style="width: 500px"
|+ <span style="line-height: 20.7999992370605px; text-align: -webkit-center">Figure 5: Increased vegetable crop yields when using urine as fertiliser in “Productive Sanitation in Aguié Project”</span>
|-
| [[File:Vegwoman.jpg|thumb|center|200px]]| [[File:Vegman.jpg|thumb|center|200px]]<div><br/></div>
|}
This created demand for toilets and urinals that transformed dangerous raw excreta into safe fertilisers. There are examples of villagers selling and buying treated urine and faeces, as well as households in surrounding villages that construct toilets or urinals on their own initiative to obtain the safe fertiliser.
=== 8. Institutional and legal aspects ===
Weak, non-existing or sometimes prohibiting legislation on reuse of excreta and wastewater makes it difficult to implement and scale up productive sanitation systems. Ideally, a regulatory framework should facilitate the safe reuse of resources from sanitation systems. Resource reuse may require changes to existing sanitation, environmental and agricultural policies, or the development of new policies. Effective laws and regulations establish both incentives for complying as well as sanctions for not complying with the requirements. It is necessary to develop relevant legislation along the sanitation chain, from excreta treatment and transport to application of fertiliser, restrictions on the type of crops grown, occupational health, food hygiene and other preventive measures. The “Guidelines for safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater in agriculture and aquaculture” (WHO ,2006) can be used as a reference when national policies and legislation are developed. Allowing treated excreta as fertilisers and organic matter sources in organic and conventional agriculture would certainly boost recycling. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) restricts the use of human excreta on food crops, but exceptions may be made where detailed sanitation requirements are established by the standard setting organisation to prevent the transmission of pathogens (IFOAM, 2005). However, if the use of sanitised excreta in agriculture is prohibited in the food importing country, the exporting country will not use it except for own consumption. An example is the EU legislation on organic farming, which does not allow the use of sanitation products as fertilisers for organic crops to be sold in the EU (Richert et al., 2010).
=== 9. Management of health risk ===
[[File:Mb approachx.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Mb approachx.jpg]]Sanitation related health risks occur mainly through persistent pathogenic organisms in excreta such as bacteria, viruses, protozoa and helminths. If not collected, treated, transported and applied properly this can lead to transmission of infectious diseases such as diarrhoea and the proliferation of intestinal worms. The purpose of every sanitation system is therefore to protect human health and install effective barriers against possible exposure to pathogens.
However, these risks are small in comparison to the dangers of pathogens and diarrhoea which are the main challenges when sanitation is lacking, but also in comparison to pharmaceutical residues contained in animal manure, or risks resulting from pesticide use. Soil is considered a more suitable medium for natural degradation of pharmaceuticals than water. Pharmaceuticals can be degraded better in aerobic, biologically active soil layers with a high concentration of microorganisms and longer retention times than in the more sensitive ecosystems of water bodies (Richert et al., 2010). Contamination of wastewater with heavy metals from industrial wastewater should be avoided through introduction of cleaner production approaches which keep industrial wastewater apart from domestic wastewater and imposing proper treatment processes within industries.
=== 10. Business opportunities ===
The water, nutrients and energy recovered could enable cost reduction or recovery in the sanitation service chain and could offer market opportunities.<br/>Increasingly there is agreement on the need to move from “treatment for disposal” to “treatment for reuse” (Drechsel et al., 2011). Successful involvement of the private sector in providing sanitation services and recovering resources in waste materials will directly enhance the livelihoods of millions of households in rural and peri-urban areas of developing countries.
In low-income countries, sanitation and waste management traditionally have been either neglected or subsidised by public-sector agencies, with service quality varying across locations and income levels resulting in notable health and environmental problems. This reliance on public-sector provision has prevented development of markets in sanitation services that might be best provided by private companies. The market analysis and business planning needed to promote private sector or public private activities has not been conducted, although interest in developing viable business models is increasing among donors and international organisations.
=== 11. Challenges and way forward ===
Despite all known and convincing benefits of productive sanitation, a number of challenges and problems still need to be overcome which differ largely between countries and regions. These concern cultural barriers and perceptions, political will, missing knowledge on economics of waste management and reuse, development of appropriate regulations and legal frameworks, and technical aspects of making reuse profitable.
In most parts of the world, the productive sanitation concept has not been fully embedded in legislation. The cultural barriers, fear of health impacts, and the neglect of sanitation and wastewater management in general might explain the lack of clear policies in support of safe reuse options.<br/>Reversing current trends and patterns requires the adoption of holistic and integrated approaches. Multi-stakeholder consultation, joint planning and decision-making will be needed to adapt existing policies or develop new ones. More applied research is also needed to assess risk management options in the agriculture and sanitation interface in support of policy dialogue at the local and national level.
=== 12. Acknowledgements ===
SuSanA factsheet: Productive sanitation and the link to food security. April 2012. [http://www.susana.org/en/ susana.org]
[[File:Susana logo.png|none|150px|Susana logo.png]]<br/>
Akvopedia-spade, akvouser, bureaucrat, emailconfirmed, staff, susana-working-group-1, susana-working-group-10, susana-working-group-11, susana-working-group-12, susana-working-group-2, susana-working-group-3, susana-working-group-4, susana-working-group-5, susana-working-group-6, susana-working-group-7, susana-working-group-8, susana-working-group-9, susana-working-group-susana-member, administrator, widget editor
30,949
edits

Navigation menu