Next Article in Journal
Integrating a Health Literacy Lens into Nutrition Labelling Policy in Canada
Previous Article in Journal
Sense of Coherence, Burnout, and Work Engagement: The Moderating Effect of Coping in the Democratic Republic of Congo
Article

Community Faecal Management Strategies and Perceptions on Sludge Use in Agriculture

1
Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Soil, Crop and Climate Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa
2
Faculty of Social Science and Humanities, Department of Sociology, University of Fort Hare, Eastern Cape 5700, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(11), 4128; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17114128
Received: 20 April 2020 / Revised: 13 May 2020 / Accepted: 22 May 2020 / Published: 10 June 2020
Most people in rural areas in South Africa (SA) rely on untreated drinking groundwater sources and pit latrine sanitations. A minimum basic sanitation facility should enable safe and appropriate removal of human waste, and although pit latrines provide this, they are still contamination concerns. Pit latrine sludge in SA is mostly emptied and disposed off-site as waste or buried in-situ. Despite having knowledge of potential sludge benefits, most communities in SA are reluctant to use it. This research captured social perceptions regarding latrine sludge management in Monontsha village in the Free State Province of SA through key informant interviews and questionnaires. A key informant interview and questionnaire was done in Monontsha, SA. Eighty participants, representing 5% of all households, were selected. Water samples from four boreholes and four rivers were analyzed for faecal coliforms and E.coli bacteria. On average, five people in a household were sharing a pit latrine. Eighty-three percent disposed filled pit latrines while 17% resorted to closing the filled latrines. Outbreaks of diarrhoea (69%) and cholera (14%) were common. Sixty percent were willing to use treated faecal sludge in agriculture. The binary logistic regression model indicated that predictor variables significantly (p ˂ 0.05) described water quality, faecal sludge management, sludge application in agriculture and biochar adaption. Most drinking water sources in the study had detections ˂ 1 CFU/100 mL. It is therefore imperative to use both qualitative surveys and analytical data. Awareness can go a long way to motivate individuals to adopt to a new change. View Full-Text
Keywords: pit latrine; faecal sludge; bacteria pollution; biochar; water quality pit latrine; faecal sludge; bacteria pollution; biochar; water quality
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Mamera, M.; van Tol, J.J.; Aghoghovwia, M.P.; Mapetere, G.T. Community Faecal Management Strategies and Perceptions on Sludge Use in Agriculture. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4128. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17114128

AMA Style

Mamera M, van Tol JJ, Aghoghovwia MP, Mapetere GT. Community Faecal Management Strategies and Perceptions on Sludge Use in Agriculture. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(11):4128. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17114128

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mamera, Matthew, Johan J. van Tol, Makhosazana P. Aghoghovwia, and Gabriel T. Mapetere 2020. "Community Faecal Management Strategies and Perceptions on Sludge Use in Agriculture" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 11: 4128. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph17114128

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop