Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy, Central European University, Nádor utca 9, 1051 Budapest, Hungary; School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences (SEAES), The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Energy and Technology, Box 7032, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden.
Sci Total Environ. 2017 Mar 1;581-582:885-896. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.044. Epub 2017 Jan 12.
Relatively little research has been conducted to date on farmer attitudes towards the use of fertilisers from resource-oriented sanitation systems. This study employed a psycho-sociological approach to identify factors that encourage, or discourage, negative and positive attitudes to human waste recycling among farmers in southern India. A survey involving face-to-face interviews was performed with 120 randomly sampled farmers, taking into account the following factors: gender, age, religion, caste, type of farming, farm size, annual income and farming history. Variations in variables (χ and ANOVA) were considered statistically significant if p-value was <0.05. When asked whether they thought human wastes could be used as fertiliser, of the farmers who expressed an opinion 59% were positive to re-use of urine and 46% to re-use of human faeces. Farmers in Vellore appeared to display what we term, a 'not-in-my-circle' syndrome, as they would prefer their neighbours to use human urine rather than their friends, family and colleagues. The main factors that motivated farmers to respond positively to re-use of urine were improved soil quality and potential cost savings from reduced use of chemical fertilisers. Fear of crop die-off, fear of being ridiculed and uncertainty over consumer marketplace behaviour were significant factors among farmers with a negative attitude. Furthermore, the survey responses indicated that besides socio-demographic factors, other factors such as 'trust' might have to be taken into consideration when planning and implementing nutrient recycling programmes. Early dialogue, continuous interaction and integration of user stakeholders (producers and consumers) in conceptualisation, design and implementation of nutrient recycling programmes are essential to ensure future success and wider adoption.
迄今为止，针对农民对资源导向型卫生系统肥料使用的态度，相关研究相对较少。本研究采用心理社会学方法，旨在确定鼓励或阻碍印度南部农民对人类粪便再利用持消极或积极态度的因素。对 120 名随机抽样的农民进行了面对面访谈调查，考虑了以下因素：性别、年龄、宗教、种姓、农业类型、农场规模、年收入和农业历史。如果 p 值 < 0.05，则认为变量（χ 和 ANOVA）存在显著差异。在被问及是否认为人类粪便可以用作肥料时，有意见的农民中 59%对再利用尿液持肯定态度，46%对再利用人类粪便持肯定态度。维洛尔的农民似乎表现出了我们所说的“不在我的圈子里”的综合征，因为他们宁愿让邻居使用人类尿液，也不愿让朋友、家人和同事使用。农民对再利用尿液持积极态度的主要原因是土壤质量得到改善，以及减少使用化肥可能带来的成本节约。对作物死亡的恐惧、对被嘲笑的恐惧以及对消费者市场行为的不确定性，是持消极态度的农民的重要因素。此外，调查结果表明，除了社会人口因素外，在规划和实施养分回收计划时，还需要考虑其他因素，如“信任”。早期对话、持续互动以及将用户利益相关者（生产者和消费者）整合到概念化、设计和实施养分回收计划中，对于确保未来的成功和更广泛的采用至关重要。
