As published in Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development 03.4 (2013) - doi: 10.2166/washdev.2013.036 Okem et al. 2013 – Assessing perceptions and willingness to use urine in agriculture 1 Assessing perceptions and willingness to use urine in agriculture: a case study from rural areas of eThekwini municipality, South Africa A. E. Okem, S. Xulu, E. Tilley, C. Buckley and E. Roma ABSTRACT In recent years there has been a growing body of knowledge exploring the benefts of using sanitation-derived nutrients. Such studies aim to uncover strategies that facilitate nutrient recovery from urine and faecal sludge for agricultural use. This paper presents the fndings of a study which assessed the willingness to handle and use urine in agriculture among people living in rural areas of eThekwini Municipality, South Africa. Results show that less than 5% of participants are using urine as a fertiliser. This could be attributed to limited awareness of the value of urine in agriculture since only 9.7% are aware that urine contains essential nutrients that can support plant growth. Fur- thermore, health concerns, smell and the opinions of others are identifed as barriers to the handling of urine. The study therefore recom- mends that participatory feld trials and promotional activities are conducted to improve users’ awareness and acceptance. The outcome of this research is of importance to help inform low- and middle-income countries’ governments as they address urban and environmental challenges such as access to adequate sanitation, poverty and food security. KEYWORDS South Africa, urine diversion toilets, urine re-use, user perceptions 1 INTRODUCTION Fast-paced population growth and increasing water stress con- ditions are critical factors affecting the provision of waterborne sanitation facilities and sewerage connections in developing countries (Moe & Rheingans 2006). Acknowledging these chal- lenges, a growing number of researchers and practitioners have been investigating the feasibility of dry sanitation options to ad- dress the sanitation backlog in challenging topographical and infrastructural conditions (Drangert et al. 2002). The concept of ecological or dry sanitation (sometimes called EcoSan) broad- ly encompasses technologies which aim to make use of waste (urine and faeces) as a resource. Sanitation technologies such as the urine diversion dehydration toilet (UDDT), which allows for the separation of urine from faeces at the source is one such ex- ample. A review of past EcoSan projects in developing countries (Jackson 2005) argues that the primary reasons for introducing such systems are to minimise the environmental and health risks related to inadequate and poor sanitation. Increasingly, however, applied research on dry sanitation has been linked to the idea of nutrient recovery through the re-use of urine and faeces in agri- culture (Lienert et al. 2003). Human urine contains nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K), in a ratio of 11:1:2, which can be used as a fertiliser. Urine application, after appropriate stor- age, has been reported to be a safe alternative to the application of mineral fertilisers in plant production (World Health Organiza- tion [WHO] 2006; Richert et al. 2010a, b). The use of urine in agriculture is particularly urgent in view of the increase in the demand for and use of phosphorus in fertiliser production, which is estimated to grow at a yearly rate of 3%, boosted by the economic growth of developing countries (Drang- ert 1998). Furthermore, the depletion of phosphate rock supply (Cordell & White 2006), combined with recent price increases of fertilisers by 350% have further exacerbated global food prices, impacting negatively on food security, particularly in developing countries (Cordell & White 2006). Establishing a sustainable phosphorus supply is fundamental for long-term food security for a booming world’s population, yet nutrient recovery from human waste remains largely unutilised due to the common perception of human urine and faeces as something that should be dis- posed of. While it has been scientifcally proven that urine and faeces can be safely used in agriculture (Schönning 2001; Phasha 2005; WHO 2006), users’ acceptance of such practices has been an increasing concern for policy makers and practitioners in the sanitation sector (Richert et al. 2010a). A recent meta-analysis of user perceptions of the practice of applying human urine in agri- culture (Roma et al. 2013) identifed common hurdles in the ac- ceptance of such practice. Poor awareness of the fertilising value of urine represents one obstacle in the uptake of such practice. In a study in Nigeria, Sridhar et al. (2005) found that just 7.7% of respondents were in favour of using urine as a fertiliser for vege- table production. Interestingly, after demonstrating the value and potential of urine in agriculture, the research identifed a sharp increase in acceptance, with 80% of the respondents showing willingness to use urine in agriculture. Similarly, concerns for the presence of pathogens in urine and health risks from using it have represented an important hurdle in reusing urine in agricul- ture (Roma et al. 2013). Studies from Ghana and Nigeria (Cofe et al. ) reported that quality assurance for the produce grown using urine is important in increasing acceptance. In the eThek- wini municipality of KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa), the eThekwini Water and Sanitation Unit (EWS) has installed 75,000 UDDTs in rural areas to address the sanitation backlog and a cholera outbreak in 2000 (Sustainable Sanitation Alliance 2011). The mu- nicipality has provided households with training on how to use and maintain UDDTs, and more recently has been exploring the potential for reusing urine in agriculture, thus transforming UD- DTs into ‘productive’ sanitation technologies, which allows for nutrient recovery from human waste. The implementation of dry sanitation requires a critical understanding of users’ awareness of human waste and how they relate to the process of applying and reusing it in agriculture (Roma et al. 2013). In South Africa, very few studies have explored the impact of social and cultural factors on the acceptability of urine-based fertiliser (Duncker et al. 2007; Water Research Commission 2007). Thus, our research provides an important contribution to the body of knowledge exploring the dynamics relating to the management of human waste, providing recommendations for appropriate interventions.