myNetWorks

ecosan - closing the loop in wastewatermanagement and sanitation

Cultural Aspect of ecosan

William S. Warner, Ph.D

Abstract

When planning an ecosan system, three cultural considerations mustbe addressed:

1. psychological deterrents associated with the handling humanwaste, which tend to be universal,

2. gender issues, which are both universal and local

3. the influence of religion, which varies regionally despiteuniversal doctrines associated with a particular faith.

Toilet psychology• Attitudes toward excrement are universal.• But behavior regarding the handling of

excreta varies from cultural to culture.• And motivations for using an ecosan

system are many:– hygiene– soil improvement– financial– aesthetics– comfort– status

When developing an alternativetoilet system, formulating apsychological contract with thepotential users is just as importantas designing the system itself. Asystem often fails, not because oftechnical reasons; rather, because itsimply is not used. Therefore, it isvital to understand the psychologicalprocesses of waste treatment asmuch as the biological, chemical andphysical processes of the system.

We can better understand thepsychology of waste treatment byexamining three basic elements.

Universal Attitude Exrement is sordid!

• What is attitude?– Perception = emotional impression

– Cognition = thoughts

– Behavioral tendency

People are naturally repelled byexcreta. Natural in the sense that itis an involuntary reaction. Thereason is as much evolutionary ascultural. In the course of humanevolution, those unfortunate to comein contact with excreta wereexposed to a plethora of pathogens,and consequently less likely tosurvive than those who did not comeinto contact with excreta. Therefore,some assume that this instinctiverepulsion is almost genetic in nature.

So, what is this universal attitude?An attitude consists of three basiccomponents:

Perceptionimage

• Excreta• dark

• defiled

• Evil - dangerous

• bad

• repulsion

• Water• clear - reflecting light

• pure

• God/heavenly - safe

• good

• attraction

To begin with, let’s examine perception.Essentially it is our emotional response(s). If youlike, it is the way we feel – as opposed to think –about something. Logic and rational thought havelittle if anything to do with perception.

Consider some common perceptions aboutexcreta. The emotionally charged associationsvary from culture to culture, but are essentiallynegative. Now, consider some universalperceptions about water, which also vary withculture; however, they tend to be positive innature.

The development of water-based toilet systemsmight – and probably do – have a deep-seatedpsychological link, with water providing a mentalbarrier of protection as much as a physical one.

Perception

Cognitionwhat we know

• Excreta cast away

• earthly

• decay - death

• soiling

• harmful– disease

– death

• Water received

• heavenly

• growth - life

• cleansing

• healthful– recovery

– necessary or life

The second element of attitude is cognition, whichdeals with our rational thoughts. Similar toperceptions, generally speaking, universal notionsabout excreta are threatening and harmful,whereas attributes about water are healthy andhelpful.

The apparent polarization between the qualitiesassociated with excreta and water does notnecessarily imply conflict. A rational mind mightlogically combine the two to neutralize the polarity.In the same way that primitive man realized thatfire can make one warm and thus survive hostileenvironments, early man might have reasonedthat water can cleanse remnants of excreta andfurther enhance survival.

Cognition

Behavioral tendency

• Natural reaction to senses– sight, sound, smell, touch, taste

•Threat response–fear…flight

–anger… fight (insult)

–disgust… face, but back away

–evolution: any other reaction leads to death

The third and last element of attitude is behavioraltendency. Although there is a link between howone feels and thinks about a subject, there is nodirect cause-effect relationship between theseelements and specific behavior. Rather, there is atendency, and merely a tendency, to behave in aspecific manner, which explains why somecultures are more disposed to handling excretathan others.

Our behavioral tendencies toward excreta areinstinctive. No one tells us that excreta smells bad,any more than others tell us that food with asavory aroma smells good. We intuitively trust ourinstinctive senses and behave accordingly.

Likewise, when threatened, we naturally reactaccording to the degree of danger. One of themost instinctive reactions to an instinctive threat isto remove oneself from the situation. Any othertendency would jeopardize survival.

Behavioral tendency

Disgusting Research!

• rank: dandruff, ear wax... to feces

• tolerance: – women

– health professionals

• don’t assume...

A fundamental point to understand is that ourattitude towards excreta is influenced byexperience, and that attitudes evolve and changeover time.

We all eliminate wastes: that is a basic fact of life.How we actually perform the elimination act, andwhat we do with the waste, is partly dependentupon one’s sex, religion, age, health, diet…, andmost importantly what facilities, if any, we areaccustomed to.

Although little research has been devoted to theseissues, studies do exist. For example, Prof.Alexander Kira, Cornell University (USA),conducted a study to determine peoples’tolerance towards offensive body waste. Notsurprising, those who are exposed to excreta –such as mothers of infants and health careprofessionals had a higher tolerance. Theimplications for ecological engineers are far-reaching. Don’t assume your level of tolerance,based upon conditioned experience, is the sameas potential users of your ecosan system.

Negation evolves with age

– Infant: miselading if not cute– Children: the horrid school toilet

• Ridiculed - Raise your hand (1 or 2)?• Place of shame, disgust, bullying, abused

– Adult: privacy is mandatory• Natural functions become unmentionable• Using the toilet, going to the bathroom, taking care

of necessities, relieving onself, answering the call of nature, taking care of business… see a manabout a horse?

– Public conveniences are rarely that

There is no right or wrong behavior orattitude, except within a given culturalcontext. But even within the same culture,our behavior can be influenced by a numberof factors – and these develop over time.

Consider the development of Westernattitudes towards toilet behavior and disposalof waste (generalized of course). Infantbehavior is cute and amusing, which mightexplain why many don’t take the threat offecal contamination serious. In fact, manyactually believe that infant feces areharmless. As we mature and become moresocial, attitudes and behavior change. Oftenour first social-excretal experience is thehorrid school toilet, which is often associatedwith deviant behavior: shame, disgust,bullying and abuse. This might explain why,as adults, privacy become a primary concern,and public conveniences are rarelyconvenient. It is not surprising that one of ourmost natural functions becomesunmentionable, and consequently becomesmasked in aphorisms.

Gender

• Physical differences– urinate more frequently - especially pregnant

– more time - (un)dressing and physically

– use public facilities for more reasons• breast feeding

• changing diapers

• escape men...

– use public facilities more often• shopping

• care of realtives

Another consideration is gender. Genderplays a universal role in privacy, but equallyimportant are the physical differencesbetween men and women. Women urinatemore frequently (especially when pregnant),and use more time to eliminate wastes andget (un)dressed, than men do.

For public toilets, there are even greaterconcerns. Women use public facilities formore reasons, such as breast feeding,changing diapers and, yes, escaping men.And they use public facilities more often thanmen, because they’re in public places moreoften, such as shopping.

But studies have shown, that in many regionsof the world there are far fewer facilities forwomen than men. In the U.K, for instance,until recently men had twice as many publicfacilities as women.

Public toilets

• Fewer facilities for women (sports & offices)

• Fewer units (female urinals?)

• Designed by men (too small)

• Cultural variation– Japan unisex (sound conscious)

– Islamic (expose feet)

– Nepal (meeting place)

Ecological engineers should be acutely awareof gender issues associated with public toilets,because many ecosan systems are publicfacilities. The success or failure of analternative treatment system might well hingenot on system performance, but on system use– or lack of.

System design should not necessarily bebased upon existing cultural conditions,because, in fact, the current cultural contextmight well be flawed from the point of hygiene.This is especially critical if the number of publicfacilities are (unjustifiably) disproportional.Keep in mind, most toilet systems have beendesigned by men, who often are not aware offemale needs, much less desires.

Lastly, note that times are changing – for thebetter. Until recently corrected, there were nono women’s toilets in the U.S. Senate or theBritish House of Parliament simply becausethere were no female legislators to use them.

Toilet management

• Women are at home

• cooking - disposal of food waste

• housekeeping - toilet maintenance

• family hygiene - cleaning– Who decides to get a compost toilet?

– Who takes care of it?

Gross generalizations are dangerous, and toooften misleading. However, for an economy oftime and space, they are necessary. Having saidthat, we have noted that women tend to have agreater tolerance towards handling waste; usepublic toilets more often, longer and for morepurposes, yet have fewer facilities than men.

Another generalization is that women tend tomanage the home toilet more than men. Incultures where women stay at home, the toiletbecomes a primary management issue, becausetheir primary responsibilities of cooking,housekeeping, family hygiene, and care giving toinfants and the elderly are toilet dependent.

For ecosan projects involving compost ordehydration toilets, this is a vital concern,because these systems require at some time –and usually often – the handling of excreta.

Cleanliness

• myth not molecule

• clean vs cleansed

•religion–promotion of health

–observation of rituals

•science–transmission of fecal-related disease

–conservation of water and nutrients

Before we begin with the final cultural concern, theinfluence of religion, let us note that until the 19th century,cleanliness was not a scientific concern. Ourunderstanding of water and excreta was not associatedwith molecules but myths, and the terms hygiene andsanitation were not part of the popular vocabulary.Nevertheless, many cultures did – and some still do –make a distinction between clean water and cleansedwater. (The former being perceived as pure and potable,the latter being neither.)

Also, let’s dispel the common assumption that scienceand religion are always in conflict. Both share a commonconcern about human excreta – namely, human health.Science’s interests in wastewater treatment stems fromtwo issues: the transmission of faecal related diseasesand the conservation of water and nutrients in the waste.Religion's interest in wastewater is also two-fold: thepromotion of health (although most religious doctrineslack medical explanation for disease), and theobservation of rituals associated with purification (in thebroadest sense of the word).

Relgion

• 80% of world - substandard housing

• 70% non-Christian

• major religions– Judeo/Christian

– Islam

– Hindu

– Buddhism

The interests of science and religion areneither incompatible nor contradictory. Theheart of the conflict is that science andreligion deal with human behavior differently.Science tends to introduce new conceptsand modifies behavior, whereas religiongenerally preserves old beliefs andmaintains traditions. Thus, conflict ariseswhen science tries to alter religious behavior,including behavior that is related to healthand hygiene. ecosan mitigates potentialconflict by integrating science and religioninto a system that is as sensitive to socialconcerns as the physical environment .

The heart of ecosan is a holistic approachtowards treating human waste, which impliessustaining the human ecology as well as thebiota. Consequently, the key to a successfulecosan system is its adoption to specificcultural requirements. In the same way thatlocal geographical issues must be taken intoaccount (e.g. weather, soil, vegetation, etc.),so must cultural considerations, not the leastbeing religion.

Judeo-Christian

• Water used for purification– baptism, kosher, Pilate...

• Deuteronomy 23:12-13

• Monasteries (Middle-Ages)

• Hygiene Virtue (1800s)– cholera claims 30,000 souls

• Rev. Henry Moule’s Earth Closet

Water has always had a special significance inreligious purification rituals. But the use of water forsanitation – in the broadest sense of the word –generally has less to do with physical hygiene thanspiritual cleaning, i.e. ablution. Spiritual cleansing isnot limited to the Judeo-Christian heritage. One hasonly to see and smell the Ganges to know that themass immersions in that holy river have noconnection with hygiene.

Although Judeo-Christian rituals frequently requirewater for purification purposes, it ’s apparentlyabsent in reference to toilet behavior. Deuteronomy23:12-13: Thou shalt have a place also without campand it shall be when thou wilt ease thyself, thou shaltdig therewith, and thous shalt turn back and coverthat which cometh from thee. Nowhere does it say towash after easing thyself.

Cleanliness did not become a Christian virtue untilthe 19th cholera epidemic of London. It was at thistime that Rev. Moule invented the Earth Closet,which is claimed by some to be the first (indoor)compost toilet.

Islam• Koran

– feces are najassa - impure

– anal cleaning

– no use of blackwater, except…

– different interpretations

• Malaysian public toilets

• Yemen’s waterless toilets

• Afghans kneel

Moslem doctrine, however, prescribes strictprocedures to limit contact with faecal material,because – by Koran edict – it is consideredimpure (najassa). A Muslim must use water tocleanse parts of the body through which najassapass.

The hygiene behavior of Muslims varies becausethe Koranic edicts are interpreted differentlyamong different movements. In Iran’s Shiitesociety, for example, the use of excreta inagriculture and aquaculture is not condoned. InWest Java, however, direct application ofexcrement for aquaculture is an ancient practicethat has altered little under Islamic rule.

Theocratic rule may have implications for non-believers as well. For example, the MalaysianCabinet has directed local authorities toincorporate the water requirements of Muslims inthe design of public toilets.

Also note, although Islamic law requires the useof water for anal cleansing, waterless toilets area tradition in Yemen and Zanzibar.

Hindu

• Artha Veda (500-200 BC)– ritual washing (hands?)

• Caste away the problem?– Brahamins

• observe hygiene rituals

• more suited to alternative

– Untouchables• handle the night soil

• less like to afford alternatives

Waterless ecosan systems (i.e. dehydrationtoilets) have been successfully introduced inwater-based Hindu cultures.

The principal Hindu text that details the code ofconduct for rituals, the Artha Veda (500-200BC), clearly specifies the use of water forsanitation. The feet are to be washed beforeelimination and the anal region is cleansed withwater afterwards. The end of the ritual issymbolized by rinsing the mouth eight timeswith water. But note: there is no obligation towash one’s hands after defecation.

Although it is difficult to imagine entire urbanpopulations following these rituals, one can seethe impact of religion on water usages andwaste treatment – as well as class distinction.Followers of the Artha Veda are primarily upper-caste Brahmins; those who carry the nightsoil,are lower-caste Untouchables, who do not haveprevalent religious attitudes about handlingexcrement.

Buddhism

• 2/3 fish farms use excreta• Asia

– Ecologically minded– Food scarcity– Frugal economy

• Reincarnation • composting excreta 3000 yrs before Buddha• Philosophy

– absence of religious doctrine– not good or bad, but how it is used

Unlike the West, the Far East evolved culturespredisposed towards using excreta. Unlike therich Mediterranean landscape that cultivatedthe principal religions of the West, the foodbaskets of the Far East were never envisagedas lands of ”milk and honey”. Intensivecultivation practices evolved to feed largepopulations, and this necessitated the carefuluse of all resources – including excreta.

Nowhere do we find excrement included morein a social context than in Buddhist cultures.An integral dimension of Buddhism isreincarnation, which preaches the naturalprocess of recycling human energy – birth,growth, decay, death, and re-birth. Sincereincarnation promotes the harmoniousconcept of recycling life’s treasures, it is notsurprising that Buddhist cultures treat earthlyresources similarly. But bear in mind that theunenlightened had been applying excreta tocrops 3000 years before Buddha first beganpreaching about spiritual composting.

… and others

• Japan - toilet design leader

•Vietnam - compost & eco-eng

•Africa - no crop-fert. tradition

•Americas/Australia/Pacific –superstitions not salvation

–taboos

Aside from the noted major religions, thereare many others that address the treatmentand use of excrement. Some culturespractice the burial of feces to ward off evilspirits. Other cultures use urine forpurification and healing. Others still, like theMaoris, forbid the practice of allowing humanwaste to enter rivers: do not defile that whichis pure.

Taboos and superstitions are so variedworldwide that is misleading to makegeneralizations. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, there is no tradition at all ofusing human excreta in agriculture. But it isdifficult, if not impossible, to determine if thisbehavior is the cause or the result ofreligious beliefs.

The one thing we can say with certainty isthat some (perhaps much) of faithfulbehavior is contrary to logic. This has directimplications to ecosan engineers whoprescribe recycling excreta for logicalreasons.

Apparent influences of religion

• Islamic & Hindu edicts – tend to…

– influence wastewater practices

• Judeo-Christian and Buddhist doctrines– appear to be the…

– result more than the cause of cultural practices

Comparing the major religions, one mightconclude the following: The edicts of Islam andHindu tend to influence the treatment ofwastewater; whereas Judeo-Christian andBuddhist doctrines appear to be the resultmore than the cause of how followers of thefaith should treat or handle excreta.

Of course, this conclusion can be debated.Some might argue that the Far East considersexcreta a resource rather than a wastebecause of the historic need for fertilizer.Others might argue Eastern cultures tend to befaecophillic because there is a noticeableabsence of religious doctrine regarding thehandling of excreta. Still others might claim folkbeliefs of the Far East are not concerned withsalvation or the supernatural, but are sustainedby earthly fears and rewards. In other words,Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism are moreoriented towards philosophy than theology; andmost philosophies find a thing in itself neithergood nor bad. How one uses the thing –whether it is enlightenment or excrement – isthe rudimentary question.

Conclusions• Psychology - There is a universal negative attitude towards excreta. But behavioral acts of

elimination and treatment, including handling and use, vary worldwide. Motivations for use are asdiverse as the systems that treat the waste, which might explain a logical link between why andhow we handle excreta

• Gender – The physical and social demands for toilet uses varies not only between men andwomen, but also between women themselves, from culture to culture. This is especially true whenit comes to public toilet provision and private toilet management. Generally speaking, women usepublic toilets more often for more purposes than men, however they have fewer facilities, whichtend to be inadequately designed.

• Religion – Religion tends to influence toilet behavior and wastewater treatment more in Easterncultures and developing countries than Western industrialized lands. The reverence for water, andits spiritual association with purification, appears more universal than the varied doctrinesassociated with elimination and disposal (or use) of excreta.

• A final comment for “ecosan engineers”: Cultural norms about waste treatment are universallysimilar to those on diet. The norms toward both are both inherent and learned, and deeply rootedin psychology, gender and religion, which might explain why modifying a tradition of wastetreatment is often as difficult as modifying a traditional diet. But to modify another's diet is onething; to replace it it is quite another.

Cross, P. and Strauss, M. 1985. Health aspects of nightsoil and sludge use in agricultureand aquaculture. IRCWD Report No 04/85, International Reference Center for Wastedisposal: Duebendorf, Switzerland.

Franceys, R. Pickford, J., and R. Reed.1992. A Guide to the Development of On-siteSanitation. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp. 237

Haidt, J., Rozin, P., McCauley, C., and S. Imada. 1997. Body, psyche, and culture: therelationship between disgust and morality. Psychology and Developing Societies, vol. 9, p.107-131.

Kira, A. 1995. Culture and behaviors of public toilet users. Proceedings of the InternationalSymposium on Public Toilets. Hong Kong May 25-27, 1995, p. 9-12.

Mara, D. And Cairncross, S. 1986. Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater and Excretain Agriculture and Aquaculture. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp. 187.

Van der Ryan, S. 1978. The Toilet Papers, Capra Press, Santa Barbara, CA, pp. 124.

Warner, W.S. 2000. The influence of religion on wastewater treatment. Water – Magazine ofthe International Water Association. August, 2000, p. 11-14.

Winblad, U. (ed) Ecological Sanitation, SIDA. Stockholm, pp. 92.

REFERENCES