Early testing of new sanitation technology for urban slums: The case of the Blue Diversion Toilet

The toilets used most in informal urban settlements have detrimental consequences for the environment and human health due to the lack of proper collection and treatment of toilet waste. Concepts for safe, sustainable and affordable sanitation systems exist, but their feasibility and acceptance have to be investigated at an early stage of development, which is difficult due to the high costs of building working models. In this paper, we present an approach to estimate acceptance in a valid and representative form with only one working model, and apply it to test an innovative zero-emission toilet with recycling of wash water. Four basic principles were specified for investigation and nine hypotheses formulated to test the feasibility and acceptance of these principles: source separation of urine and feces with subsequent collection for resource recovery; provision of wash water in a separate cycle with on-site recovery through a membrane bioreactor; a convenient and attractive overall design; and a financially sustainable business plan. In Kampala (Uganda), in 2013, data was collected from 22 regular users, 308 one-time users and a representative sample of 1538 participants. Qualitative data was collected from the users, who evaluated their likes, perceived benefits, social norms and expected ease of use based on verbal and visual information. Most of the hypotheses were confirmed, indicating the feasibility and acceptance of the basic principles. Source separation and on-site water recovery were found to be feasible and accepted, provided users can be convinced that the emptying service and water recovery process work reliably. In the survey, the toilet was evaluated favorably and 51% of the participants agreed to be placed on a bogus waiting list. However, some design challenges were revealed, such as the size of the toilet, hiding feces from view and improving the separation of urine and water.

[1]  Frederik Hammes,et al.  Stabilization of flux during dead-end ultra-low pressure ultrafiltration. , 2010, Water research.

[2]  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh,et al.  Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[3]  G Zeeman,et al.  A new approach to nationwide sanitation planning for developing countries: Case study of Indonesia. , 2016, The Science of the total environment.

[4]  C. Dolea,et al.  World Health Organization , 1949, International Organization.

[5]  James F. Doyle,et al.  Radical Innovation: how mature companies can outsmart upstarts , 2001, UBIQ.

[6]  Steven J. Breckler,et al.  Affect versus evaluation in the structure of attitudes , 1989 .

[7]  O. Toure,et al.  Hygiene: new hopes, new horizons , 2011, The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

[8]  Judit Lienert,et al.  High acceptance of urine source separation in seven European countries: a review. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[9]  Robert Tobias,et al.  Slum inhabitants’ perceptions and decision-making processes related to an innovative sanitation service: evaluating the Blue Diversion Toilet in Kampala (Uganda) , 2015, International journal of environmental health research.

[10]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[11]  H. J. Smith,et al.  The power of business models , 2005 .

[12]  Eran Friedler,et al.  A study of WC derived sewer solids , 1996 .

[13]  A. Y. Katukiza,et al.  Decentralized options for faecal sludge management in urban slum areas of Sub-Saharan Africa: A review of technologies, practices and end-uses , 2015 .

[14]  S Uhlenbrook,et al.  Eutrophication and nutrient release in urban areas of sub-Saharan Africa--a review. , 2010, The Science of the total environment.

[15]  Tove A. Larsen,et al.  An energy-efficient membrane bioreactor for on-site treatment and recovery of wastewater , 2015 .

[16]  B. Knuth,et al.  Barriers and strategies for dry sanitation in large-scale and urban settings , 2005 .

[17]  Abdullah Al Mamun,et al.  Socio-cultural acceptance of appropriate technology: Identifying and prioritizing barriers for widespread use of the urine diversion toilets in rural Muslim communities of Bangladesh , 2014 .

[18]  R. B.,et al.  The United Nations , 1947, Nature.

[19]  I. Ajzen The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[20]  G. Lynn,et al.  Marketing and Discontinuous Innovation: The Probe and Learn Process , 1996 .

[21]  Alexandria B Boehm,et al.  Hands and water as vectors of diarrheal pathogens in Bagamoyo, Tanzania. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  G. O'Connor,et al.  The human side of radical innovation , 2004 .

[23]  Louise Emilia Dellström Rosenquist A psychosocial analysis of the human-sanitation nexus , 2005 .

[24]  Andreas Scheidegger,et al.  Predation influences the structure of biofilm developed on ultrafiltration membranes. , 2012, Water research.

[25]  Sandy Cairncross,et al.  Editorial: Can we afford to overlook hand hygiene again? , 2013, Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH.

[26]  Contributions from M. Walpole The Millennium Development Goals Report , 2008 .

[27]  Michael Berg,et al.  Sustainable use of arsenic-removing sand filters in Vietnam: psychological and social factors. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[28]  Robert W. Veryzer Discontinuous innovation and the new product development process , 1998 .

[29]  P. Scott,et al.  Tenure security and household investment decisions for urban sanitation: the case of Dakar, Senegal , 2013 .

[30]  Thomas P. Curtis,et al.  Pro-poor sanitation technologies , 2007 .

[31]  Tove A. Larsen,et al.  Blue Diversion: a new approach to sanitation in informal settlements , 2015 .

[32]  B. Truffer,et al.  Emerging solutions to the water challenges of an urbanizing world , 2016, Science.

[33]  Banco Mundial Review of EcoSan experience in eastern and southern Africa , 2006 .

[34]  Jay P. Graham,et al.  Pit Latrines and Their Impacts on Groundwater Quality: A Systematic Review , 2013, Environmental health perspectives.

[35]  Barbara Evans,et al.  Challenges for the future of urban sanitation planning: critical analysis of John Kalbermatten’s influence. , 2014 .

[36]  G Zeeman,et al.  Feasibility analysis of wastewater and solid waste systems for application in Indonesia. , 2015, The Science of the total environment.

[37]  Tove A. Larsen,et al.  Source separation and decentralization for wastewater management. , 2013 .

[38]  Christopher Lettl,et al.  User involvement competence for radical innovation , 2007 .

[39]  Heiko Gebauer,et al.  Business model innovation in the water sector in developing countries. , 2014, The Science of the total environment.

[40]  Sandy Cairncross,et al.  Pit Latrine Emptying Behavior and Demand for Sanitation Services in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania , 2015, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[41]  J. Isunju,et al.  Socio-economic aspects of improved sanitation in slums: a review. , 2011, Public health.

[42]  Tove A. Larsen,et al.  Robust planning of sanitation services in urban informal settlements: An analytical framework. , 2017, Water research.

[43]  Fabian Wagner,et al.  Global methane emissions from pit latrines. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[44]  Rahel Künzle,et al.  Decision support for redesigning wastewater treatment technologies. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[45]  Sara Dolnicar,et al.  Desalinated versus recycled water: public perceptions and profiles of the accepters. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[46]  C B Niwagaba,et al.  Selection of sustainable sanitation technologies for urban slums--a case of Bwaise III in Kampala, Uganda. , 2010, The Science of the total environment.

[47]  P. Arlien‐Søborg,et al.  Science of the Total Environment , 2018 .

[48]  Markus Starkl,et al.  Why do water and sanitation systems for the poor still fail? Policy analysis in economically advanced developing countries. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.