Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little? A Scoping Review of Willingness to Pay for Human Excreta Derived Material in Agriculture
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Research Question
2.2. Identification of Relevant Studies, Data Sources, and Search Strategy’
2.3. Study Selection
2.4. Screening and Eligibility Criteria
2.5. Data Extraction
2.6. Synthesizing and Reporting
3. Results
3.1. Search and Article Screening Results
3.2. Characteristics of Articles Included
3.3. Factors Influencing WTP for HEDM
4. Discussion
4.1. Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little about the Market Demand for HEDM?
4.2. Product Attributes
4.3. Best Practice for Conducting Stated Preference Studies
4.4. Implications for Policy-Making and Development Practice
5. Limitations and Future Research Directions
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Adamowicz, W.; Boxall, P.; Williams, M.; Williams, M. Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments versus Contingent Valuation (No. Staff Paper 95-03); University of Alberta: Edmonton, AB, Canada, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Adamtey, N.; Cofie, O.; Ofosu-budu, G.K.; Danso, S.K.A.; Forster, D. Production and storage of N-enriched co-compost. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 2429–2436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Agyekum, E.O.; Ohene-yankyera, K.; Keraita, B.; Fialor, S.C.; Abaidoo, R.C.; Health, D.; Dd, P.O.B. Willingness to Pay for Faecal Compost by Farmers in Southern Ghana. J. Econ. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 5, 18–25. [Google Scholar]
- Allen, P.M. A Complex Systems Approach to Learning in Adaptive Networks. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2001, 5, 149–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Appiah-Effah, E.; Nyarko, K.B.; Adum, L.; Antwi, E.O.; Awuah, E. Perception of peri-urban farmers on fecal sludge compost and its utilization: A case study of three peri-urban communities in ashanti region of Ghana. Compost Sci. Util. 2015, 23, 267–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arksey, H.; O’Malley, L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework Scoping Studies: Towards a methodological framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2007, 1, 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arrow, K.; Solow, R.; Portney, P.; Leamer, E.; Radner, R.; Schuman, H. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Regist. 1993, 58, 4601–4614. [Google Scholar]
- Avellán, T.; Roidt, M.; Emmer, A.; von Koerber, J.; Schneider, P.; Raber, W. Making the Water–Soil–Waste Nexus Work: Framing the Boundaries of Resource Flows. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bateman, I.J.; Carson, R.T.; Day, B.; Dupont, D.; Louviere, J.J.; Morimoto, S.; Scarpa, R.; Wang, P. Choice set awareness and ordering effects in discrete choice experiments. Work. Pap. Cent. Soc. Econ. Res. Glob. Environ. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Bliemer, M.C.J.; Collins, A.T. On determining priors for the generation of efficient stated choice experimental designs. J. Choice Model. 2016, 21, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bockstael, N.E.; McConnell, K.E. Calculating Equivalent and Compensating Variation for Natural Resource Facilities. Land. Econ. 1980, 56, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buit, G.; Jansen, K. Acceptance of human feces-based fertilizers in fecophobic Ghana. Hum. Organ. 2016, 75, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burlakovs, J.; Kriipsalu, M.; Klavins, M.; Bhatnagar, A.; Vincevica-Gaile, Z.; Stenis, J.; Jani, Y.; Mykhaylenko, V.; Denafas, G.; Turkadze, T.; et al. Paradigms on landfill mining: From dump site scavenging to ecosystem services revitalization. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 123, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Byrd, E.S.; Widmar, N.J.O.; Ricker-Gilbert, J.E. The effects of attribute non-attendance, simple validation questions, and their interactions on willingness to pay estimates for meat choice experiments. Cogent Food Agric. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caplan, K. Thematic Discussion: Private Sector Engagement in Sanitation and Hygiene: Exploring Roles across the Sanitation Chain. Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WSSCC) Sustainable Sanitation Alliance (SuSanA). 2016. Available online: https://www.susana.org/_resources/documents/default/3-2405-7-1452694597.pdf (accessed on 20 June 2019).
- Castro, I.A.; Majmundar, A.; Williams, C.B.; Baquero, B. Customer Purchase Intentions and Choice in Food Retail Environments: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chapeyama, B.; Wale, E.; Odindo, A. The cost-effectiveness of using latrine dehydrated and pasteurization pellets and struvite: Experimental evidence from South Africa. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2018, 10, 451–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chikafu, H.; Chimbari, M. Cardiovascular Disease Healthcare Utilization in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clough, T.J.; Condron, L.M.; Kammann, C.; Müller, C.; Dynamics, S.N. A Review of Biochar and Soil Nitrogen Dynamics. Agronomy 2013, 3, 275–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Como, D.; Stein Duker, L.; Polido, J.; Cermak, S. The Persistence of Oral Health Disparities for African American Children: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cosgrave, C.; Malatzky, C.; Gillespie, J. Social Determinants of Rural Health Workforce Retention: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- DAFF. Fertilizers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies and Stock Remedies Act, 1947 (Act No. 36 of 1947); Government Gazette: Gazette, South Africa, 2010.
- Danso, G.; Drechsel, P.; Fialor, S.; Giordano, M. Estimating the demand for municipal waste compost via farmers’ willingness-to-pay in Ghana. Waste Manag. 2006, 26, 1400–1409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danso, G.K.; Otoo, M.; Ekere, W.; Ddungu, S.; Madurangi, G. Market feasibility of faecal sludge and municipal solid waste-based compost as measured by farmers’ willingness-to-pay for product attributes: Evidence from Kampala, Uganda. Resources 2017, 6, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Day, B.; Bateman, I.J.; Carson, R.T.; Dupont, D.; Louviere, J.J.; Morimoto, S.; Scarpa, R.; Wang, P. Ordering effects and choice set awareness in repeat-response stated preference studies. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2012, 63, 73–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Bekker-Grob, E.W.; Donkers, B.; Jonker, M.F.; Stolk, E.A. Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: A Practical Guide. Patient Patient Cent. Outcomes Res. 2015, 8, 373–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Deng, Y.; Zhao, R. Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs) in Wastewater Treatment. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 2015, 1, 167–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Diener, S.; Semiyaga, S.; Niwagaba, C.B.; Muspratt, A.M.; Gning, J.B.; Mbéguéré, M.; Ennin, J.E.; Zurbrugg, C.; Strande, L. A value proposition: Resource recovery from faecal sludge—Can it be the driver for improved sanitation? Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 88, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Drechsel, P.; Otoo Miriam Rao, K.C.; Hanjra, M.A. Business models for a circular economy: Linking waste management and sanitation with agriculture. In Resource Recovery from Waste: Business Models for Energy, Nutrient and Water Reuse in Low- and Middle-Income Countries; Otoo, M., Drechse, P., Eds.; Routledge: Oxon, UK, 2018; p. 816. [Google Scholar]
- Drewnowski, A.; Popkin, B.M. The Nutrition Transition: New Trends in the Global Diet. Nutr. Rev. 2009, 55, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duncker, L.C.; Matsegebe, G.N.; Moilwa, N. The Social/Cultural Acceptability of using Human Excreta (Faeces and Urine) for Food Production in Rural Settlements in South Africa; WRC Report No. TT310/07; Water Research Commission: Pretoria, South Africa, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Muchiri, E.; Mutua, B.; Muellegger, E. Private sector involvement in operating a sanitation system with urine diversion dry toilets in Nakuru, Kenya. Sustain. Sanit. Pract. 2010, 2, 21–25. [Google Scholar]
- Eastman, B.R.; Kane, P.N.; Edwards, C.A.; Trytek, L.; Gunadi, B.; Stermer, A.L.; Mobley, J.R. The Effectiveness of Vermiculture in Human Pathogen Reduction for USEPA Biosolids Stabilization. Compost Sci. Util. 2001, 9, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egle, L.; Rechberger, H.; Krampe, J.; Zessner, M. Phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater: An integrated comparative technological, environmental and economic assessment of P recovery technologies. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 571, 522–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Egle, L.; Rechberger, H.; Zessner, M. Overview and description of technologies for recovering phosphorus from municipal wastewater. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 105, 325–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Growth within: A Circular Economy Vision for a Competitive Europe; Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Cowes, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- EPA. EPA Guide to Part 503 Rule. In EPA Guide to Part 503 Rule; EPA: Washington, DC, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Etter, B.; Udert, K.M.; Gounden, T. Valorisation of Urine Nutrients Promoting Sanitation & Nutrient Recovery through Urine Separation; VUNA Final Report; ETH Zurich: Dübendorf, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007. Off. J. Eur. Union. 2007, 8, 139–161. [Google Scholar]
- European Parliament. (EC) No 1069/2009 laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 (Animal by-products Regulation). Off. J. Eur. Union. 2009, 16, 425–457. [Google Scholar]
- European Union. Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008. Off. J. Eur. Union 2008, 8, 173–256. [Google Scholar]
- Forsyth, T. Community-based adaptation: A review of past and future challenges. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 2013, 4, 439–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glæsner, N.; van der Bom, F.; Bruun, S.; McLaren, T.; Larsen, F.H.; Magid, J. Phosphorus characterization and plant availability in soil profiles after long-term urban waste application. Geoderma 2019, 338, 136–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GLOBALG.A.P. Integrated Farm Assurance; All Farm Base–Crops Base-Fruits and Vegetables. Control Points and Complian; GLOBALG.A.P.: Cologne, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Gulbrandsen, K.E. Bridging the Valley of Death: The Rhetoric of Technology Transfer. Master’s Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gurwick, N.P.; Moore, L.A.; Kelly, C.; Elias, P. A Systematic Review of Biochar Research, with a Focus on Its Stability in situ and Its Promise as a Climate Mitigation Strategy. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e75932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hallowell, B.; Peterson, J.; Hallowell, J. Carbon Neutral Electrical Generation from Human Solid Waste: Developing the Energy Balance and Identifying Suitable Electrical Generation Solutions Capable of Harnessing Thermal Energy. In Technologies for the Collection, Transport, Treatment, Disposal and Use of Faecal Sludge; FSM4 Conference: Chennai, India, 2017; pp. 26–27. [Google Scholar]
- Halvorsen, B.; Soelensminde, K. Differences between Willingness-to-Pay Estimates from Open-Ended and Discrete-Choice Contingent Valuation Methods: The Effects of Heteroscedasticity. Land Econ. 1998, 74, 262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanley, N. Environmental Cost–Benefit Analysis. In Encyclopedia of Energy, Natural Resource, and Environmental Economics; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanley, N.; Mourato, S.; Wright, R.E. Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin? J. Econ. Surv. 2002, 15, 435–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harder, R.; Wielemaker, R.; Larsen, T.A.; Zeeman, G.; Öberg, G. Recycling nutrients contained in human excreta to agriculture: Pathways, processes, and products. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 49, 695–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Harrison, J.; Wilson, D. Towards sustainable pit latrine management through LaDePa. Sustain. Sanit. Pract. 2012, 13, 25–32. [Google Scholar]
- Henrik, P.M.; Olivier, A.; Romain, B.; Wolff, C.F. Is Choice Experiment Becoming More Popular than Contingent Valuation? A Systematic Review in Agriculture, Environment and Health (No. 2014.12); FAERE Working Paper; FAERE: Paris, French, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Heshmati, A. A review of the circular economy and its implementation. Int. J. Green Econ. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hess, S.; Train, K. Correlation and scale in mixed logit models. J. Choice Model. 2017, 23, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hoff, H.; Alrahaife, S.A.; El Hajj, R.; Lohr, K.; Mengoub, F.E.; Farajalla, N.; Fritzsche, K.; Jobbins, G.; Özerol, G.; Schultz, R.; et al. A Nexus Approach for the MENA Region—From Concept to Knowledge to Action. Front. Environ. Sci. 2019, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, B.; Takahashi, Y.; Yabe, M. Determinants of Marketability for Organic Biomass Liquid Fertilizer from Human Waste in Da Nang City, Vietnam. J. Environ. Prot. 2017, 8, 1354–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hosking, J.; Campbell-Lendrum, D. How Well Does Climate Change and Human Health Research Match the Demands of Policymakers? A Scoping Review. Environ. Health Perspect. 2012, 120, 1076–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hukari, S.; Hermann, L.; Nättorp, A. From wastewater to fertilisers—Technical overview and critical review of European legislation governing phosphorus recycling. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 542, 1127–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hynes, S.; Campbell, D.; Howley, P. A Choice Experiment Versus a Contingent Valuation Approach to Agri-environmental Policy Valuation. 2011. Available online: https://aran.library.nuigalway.ie/bitstream/handle/10379/2311/paper_0173.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 20 June 2019).
- Iacovidou, E.; Millward-Hopkins, J.; Busch, J.; Purnell, P.; Velis, C.A.; Hahladakis, J.N.; Zwirner, O.; Brown, A. A pathway to circular economy: Developing a conceptual framework for complex value assessment of resources recovered from waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 1279–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ignacio, J.; Alvin Malenab, R.; Pausta, C.; Beltran, A.; Belo, L.; Tanhueco, R.; Era, M.; Eusebio, R.; Promentilla, M.; Orbecido, A. Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Eco-Toilet Systems in Rural Areas: A Case Study in the Philippines. Sustainability 2018, 10, 521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jenkins, M.W.; Cumming, O.; Cairncross, S. Pit latrine emptying behavior and demand for sanitation services in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 2588–2611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, R.; Orme, B. Getting the Most from CBC. Sequim: Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series; Sawtooth Software: Provo, UT, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Johnston, R.J.; Boyle, K.J.; Adamowicz, W.; Bennett, J.; Brouwer, R.; Cameron, T.A.; Hanemann, W.M.; Hanley, N.; Ryan, M.; Scarpa, R.; et al. Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2017, 4, 319–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Joly, G. Valorising Organic Waste using the Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens). In Ghana. KTH Royal Institute of Technology; Stockholm, Sweden, 2018; Available online: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1196375/FULLTEXT01.pdf (accessed on 20 June 2019).
- Jönsson, H.; Vinnerås, B. Adapting the nutrient content of urine and faeces in different countries using FAO and Swedish data. Ecosan–Closing the Loop. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Ecological Sanitation, incorporating the 1st IWA specialist group conference on sustainable sanitation, Lübeck, Germany, 7–11 April 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Kassie, G.T.; Abdulai, A.; Greene, W.H.; Shiferaw, B.; Abate, T.; Tarekegne, A.; Sutcliffe, C. Modeling Preference and Willingness to Pay for Drought Tolerance (DT) in Maize in Rural Zimbabwe. World Dev. 2017, 94, 465–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kessels, R.; Goos, P.; Vandebroek, M. A Comparison of Criteria to Design Efficient Choice Experiments. J. Mark. Res. 2006, 43, 409–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kessels, R.; Jones, B.; Goos, P. Bayesian optimal designs for discrete choice experiments with partial profiles. J. Choice Model. 2011, 4, 52–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Khalid, A. Human excreta: A resource or a taboo? Assessing the socio-cultural barriers, acceptability, and reuse of human excreta as a resource in Kakul Village District Abbottabad, Northwestern Pakistan. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2018, 8, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kharrazi, S.M.; Younesi, H.; Abedini-Torghabeh, J. Heavy metals concentration changes during vermicomposting of organic wastesq. J. Environ. Stud. 2014, 40, 199–210. [Google Scholar]
- Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knudsen, L.G.; Phuc, P.D.; Hiep, N.T.; Samuelsen, H.; Jensen, P.K.; Dalsgaard, A.; Raschid-Sally, L.; Konradsen, F. The fear of awful smell: Risk perceptions among farmers in Vietnam using wastewater and human excreta in agriculture. Southeast Asian. J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2008, 39, 341–352. [Google Scholar]
- Kopittke, R.; Dalal, R.; Damien, F.; Menzies, N. Global changes in soil stocks of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulphur as influenced by long-term agricultural production. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2017, 23, 2509–2519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korhonen, J.; Honkasalo, A.; Seppälä, J. Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 143, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kragt, M.E.; Bennetta, J.W. The Impacts of Attribute Level Framing and Changing Cost Levels on Choice Experiments Value Estimates. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Conference Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Adelaide, Canbera, Australia, 8–12 February 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Kuwornu, J.K.M.; Narh JNR, A.B.; Egyir, I.S.; Onumah, E.E.; Gebrezgabher, S. Willingness to pay for excreta pellet fertilizer: Empirical evidence from Ghana. Acta Agric. Slov. 2017, 109, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lam, S.; Nguyen-Viet, H.; Tuyet-Hanh, T.T.; Nguyen-Mai, H.; Harper, S. Evidence for public health risks of wastewater and excreta management practices in Southeast Asia: A scoping review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 12863–12885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lancsar, E.; Louviere, J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: A user’s guide. Pharmacoeconomics 2008, 26, 1–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lancsar, E.; Louviere, J. Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiments: A case of investigating or imposing preferences? Health Econ. 2006, 15, 797–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lehmann, S. Implementing the Urban Nexus approach for improved resource-efficiency of developing cities in Southeast-Asia. City Cult. Soc. 2018, 13, 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lemming, C.; Oberson, A.; Magid, J.; Bruun, S.; Scheutz, C.; Frossard, E.; Jensen, L.S. Residual phosphorus availability after long-term soil application of organic waste. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2019, 270–271, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- León, C.J.; Araña, J.E.; de León, J.; González, M.M. The Economic Benefits of Reducing the Environmental Effects of Landfills: Heterogeneous Distance Decay Effects. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2016, 63, 193–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lew, D.K.; Wallmo, K. External Tests of Scope and Embedding in Stated Preference Choice Experiments: An Application to Endangered Species Valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2011, 48, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lewandowski, M. Designing the business models for circular economy-towards the conceptual framework. Sustainability 2016, 8, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Libralato, G.; Ghirardini, A.V.; Avezzù, F. To centralise or to decentralise: An overview of the most recent trends in wastewater treatment management. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 94, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Louviere, J.J.; Pihlens, D.; Carson, R. Design of discrete choice experiments: A discussion of issues that matter in future applied research. J. Choice Model. 2011, 4, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lusk, J.L.; Schroeder, T.C. Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2004, 86, 467–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mabhaudhi, T.; Nhamo, L.; Mpandeli, S.; Nhemachena, C.; Senzanje, A.; Sobratee, N.; Chivenge, P.P.; Slotow, R.; Naidoo, D.; Liphadzi, S.; et al. The Water–Energy–Food Nexus as a Tool to Transform Rural Livelihoods and Well-Being in Southern Africa. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mackie Jensen, P.K.; Phuc, P.D.; Knudsen, L.G.; Dalsgaard, A.; Konradsen, F. Hygiene versus fertiliser: The use of human excreta in agriculture-A Vietnamese example. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2008, 211, 432–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maleba, V.; Barnard, P.; Rodda, N. Using Black Soldier Fly Larvae to Treat Faecal Sludge from Urine Diversion Toilets; University of KwaZulu-Natal: Durban, South Africa, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Malele, V.; Mpofu, K.; Muchie, M. Bridging the innovation chasm: Measuring awareness of entrepreneurship and innovation policies and platforms at the universities of technology in South Africa. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2019, 11, 783–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Mario, L.; Rao, K.C.; Drechsel, P. The Enabling Environment and Finance of Resource Recovery and Reuse. In Resource Recovery from Waste: Business Models for Energy, Nutrient and Water Reuse in Low-and Middle-Income Countries; Otoo, M., Drechsel, P., Eds.; Routledge–Earthscan: New York, NY, USA, 2018; p. 816. [Google Scholar]
- Maurya, N.S. Is human excreta a waste? Int. J. Environ. Technol. Manag. 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McFadden, D. Measuring Willingness-to-Pay for Transportation Improvements. In Theoretical Foundations of Travel Choice Modeling; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1998; pp. 339–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mengistu, T.; Gebrekidan, H.; Kibret, K.; Woldetsadik, K.; Shimelis, B.; Yadav, H. The integrated use of excreta-based vermicompost and inorganic NP fertilizer on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit yield, quality and soil fertility. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2017, 6, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A.; Group, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015, 4, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mojid, M.A.; Wyseure, G.C.L.; Biswas, S.K.; Hossain, A.B.M.Z. Farmers’ perceptions and knowledge in using wastewater for irrigation at twelve peri-urban areas and two sugar mill areas in Bangladesh. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 98, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monfet, E.; Aubry, G.; Ramirez, A.A. Nutrient removal and recovery from digestate: A review of the technology. Biofuels 2018, 9, 247–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moomaw, W.; Griffin, T.; Kurczak, K.; Lomax, J. The Critical Role of Global Food Consumption Patterns in Achieving Sustainable Food Systems and Food for All, A UNEP Discussion Paper; United Nations Environment Programme: Paris, France, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Moya, B.; Parker, A.; Sakrabani, R. Challenges to the use of fertilisers derived from human excreta: The case of vegetable exports from Kenya to Europe and influence of certification systems. Food Policy 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moya, B.; Parker, A.; Sakrabani, R.; Mesa, B. Evaluating the Efficacy of Fertilisers Derived from Human Excreta in Agriculture and Their Perception in Antananarivo, Madagascar. Waste Biomass Valorization 2019, 10, 941–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mugivhisa, L.L.; Olowoyo, J.O. An assessment of university students and staff perceptions regarding the use of human urine as a valuable soil nutrient in South Africa. Afr. Health Sci. 2015, 15, 999–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mugivhisa, L.L.; Olowoyo, J.O.; Mzimba, D. Perceptions on organic farming and selected organic fertilizers by subsistence farmers in Ga-Rankuwa, Pretoria, South Africa. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2017, 9, 85–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nájera, S.; Gil-Martínez, M.; Rico-Azagra, J. Dual-Control of Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion Using Aeration and Solid Retention Time. Water 2017, 9, 426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nguyen, T.C.; Robinson, J.; Whitty, J.A.; Kaneko, S.; The Chinh, N. Attribute non-attendance in discrete choice experiments: A case study in a developing country. Econ. Anal. Policy 2015, 47, 22–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nhamo, L.; Mpandeli, T.M.S.; Nhemachena, C.; Senzanje, A.; Naidoo, D.; Liphadzi, S.; Modi, A.T. Sustainability indicators and indices for the waterenergy-food nexus for performance assessment: WEF nexus in practice–South Africa case study. Environ. Sci. Policy 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikiema, J.; Cofie, O.; Impraim, R.; Adamtey, N. Processing of Fecal Sludge to Fertilizer Pellets Using a Low-Cost Technology in Ghana. Environ. Pollut. 2013, 2, 70–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nimoh, F.; Ohene-Yankyera, K.; Poku, K.; Konradsen, F.; Abaidoo, R.C. Farmers perception on excreta reuse for peri-urban agriculture in southern Ghana. J. Dev. Agric. Econ. 2014, 6, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Niroomand, N.; Jenkins, G.P. A comparison of stated preference methods for the valuation of improvement in road safety. Econ. Anal. Policy 2018, 59, 138–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noble, A. The Slumering Giant: Land and Water degradation. The Scramble for Natural Resources: More Food, Less Land? 9–10 October 2012, pp. 39–51. Available online: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cfcp12/152413.html (accessed on 20 June 2019). [CrossRef]
- NRC. Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and Practices; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Nutrient Platform. Nutrient Platform: Realising the Circular Economy. 2019. Available online: https://www.nutrientplatform.org/en/ (accessed on 20 June 2019).
- Odindo, A.O.; Bame, I.B.; Musazura, W.; Hughes, J.C.; Buckley, C.A. Integrating Agriculture in Designing on-Site Low Cost Sanitation Technologies in Social Housing Schemes; WRC Project No K5/2220; Water Research Commission: Pretoria, South Afica, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Ogendo, A.; Obonyo, M.; Wasswa, P.; Bitek, A.; Mbugua, A.; Thumbi, S.M. Cryptosporidium infection in calves and the environment in Asembo, Western Kenya: 2015. Pan Afr. Med. J. 2017, 28, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Okem, A.E.; Xulu, S.; Tilley, E.; Buckley, C.; Roma, E. Assessing perceptions and willingness to use urine in agriculture: A case study from rural areas of eThekwini municipality, South Africa. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2013, 3, 582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Okumu, B.; Muchapondwa, E. Economic Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services in Kenya: Implication for Design of PES Schemes and Participatory Forest Management (No. 693); ERSA Working Paper; Economic Research Southern Africa (ERSA): Cape Town, South Africa, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Orme, B. Sample Size Issues for Conjoint Analysis Studies; Sawtooth Software Technical Paper; Sawtooth Software: Sequim, WA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Otoo, M.; Gebrezgabher, S.; Drechsel, P.; Rao, K.C.; Fernando, S.; Pradhan, S.K.; Hanjra, M.A.; Qadir, M.; Winkler, M. Business Models for a Circular Economy: Defining and Analyzing RRR Business Cases and Models. In Resource Recovery from Waste: Business Models for Energy, Nutrient and Water Reuse in Low-and Middle-Income Countries; Otoo, M., Drechsel, P., Eds.; Routledge–Earthscan: Oxon, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Otoo, M. Nutrient and Organic Matter Recovery. In Resource Recovery from Waste: Business Models for Energy, Nutrient and Water Reuse in Low-and Middle-Income Countries; Otoo, M., Drechsel, P., Eds.; Routledge–Earthscan: Oxon, UK, 2018; p. 816. [Google Scholar]
- Pampuro, N.; Caffaro, F.; Cavallo, E. Reuse of animal manure: A case study on stakeholders’ perceptions about pelletized compost in Northwestern Italy. Sustainbility 2018, 10, 2028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Panchang, S.V. Demand for improved sanitation in an urban informal settlement in India: Role of the local built environment. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 2019, 29, 194–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pastor, J.; Hernández, A.J. Heavy metals, salts and organic residues in old solid urban waste landfills and surface waters in their discharge areas: Determinants for restoring their impact. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 95, S42–S49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pearmain, D.; Swanson, J.; Kroes, E.; Bradley, M. Stated Preference Techniques: A Guide to Practice, 2nd ed.; Steer Davies Gleave and Hague Consulting Group: London, UK, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Pelch, K.E.; Bolden, A.L.; Kwiatkowski, C.F. Environmental Chemicals and Autism: A Scoping Review of the Human and Animal Research. Environ. Health Perspect. 2019, 127, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Phuc, P.D.; Konradsen, F.; Phuong, P.T.; Cam, P.D.; Dalsgaards, A. Practice of using human exceta as fertilizer and implications for health in Nghean Province, Vietnam. Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2006, 37, 222–229. [Google Scholar]
- Purkayastha, D.; Sudipta, S.; Kazmi, A.; Dutta, A.; Sandeep, S. FSM4: Effect of Environmental Parameters on the Treatment of Human Fecal Waste by Black Soldier Fly Larvae. In Technologies for the Collection, Transport, Treatment, Disposal and Use of Faecal Sludge; FSM4 Conference: Chennai, India, 2017; pp. 73–74. [Google Scholar]
- Rahman, N.; Bruun, T.B.; Giller, K.E.; Magid, J.; Ven, G.W.J.; Neergaard, A. Soil greenhouse gas emissions from inorganic fertilizers and recycled oil palm waste products from Indonesian oil palm plantations. GCB Bioenergy 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rahmani, M.; Hodges, A.W.; Kiker, C.F. Compost Users’ Attitudes Toward Compost Application In Florida. Compost Sci. Util. 2004, 12, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, K.C.; Otoo, M.; Drechsel, P.; Hanjra, M.A. Resource Recovery and Reuse as an Incentive for a More Viable Sanitation Service Chain. Water Altern. 2017, 10, 493–512. [Google Scholar]
- Rodríguez-Canché, L.G.; Cardoso-Vigueros, L.; Carvajal-León, J.; Dzib, S.D.L.C.P. Production of Habanero Pepper Seedlings With Vermicompost Generated From Sewage Sludge. Compost Sci. Util. 2010, 18, 42–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rose, J.M.; Bliemer, M.C.J. Constructing Efficient Stated Choice Experimental Designs. Transp. Rev. 2009, 29, 587–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saidani, M.; Yannou, B.; Leroy, Y.; Cluzel, F.; Kendall, A. A taxonomy of circular economy indicators. J. Clean. Prod. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Saliba, R.; Callieris, R.; Agostino, D.D.; Roma, R.; Scardigno, A. Stakeholders’ attitude towards the reuse of treated wastewater for irrigation in Mediterranean agriculture. Agric. Water Manag. 2018, 204, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sartorius, C.; von Horn, J.; Tettenborn, F. Phosphorus Recovery from Wastewater—State-of-the-Art and Future Potential. Proc. Water Environ. Fed. 2011, 299–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sasmal, J. The Adoption of Modern Technology in Agriculture a Micro Level Study in West Bengal; University of Calcutta: Kolkata, India, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Semiyaga, S.; Okure, M.A.E.; Niwagaba, C.B.; Katukiza, A.Y.; Kansiime, F. Decentralized options for faecal sludge management in urban slum areas of Sub-Saharan Africa: A review of technologies, practices and end-uses. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 104, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Septien, S.; Singh, A.; Mirara, S.W.; Teba, L.; Velkushanova, K.; Buckley, C.A. ‘LaDePa’ process for the drying and pasteurization of faecal sludge from VIP latrines using infrared radiation. South Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 2018, 25, 147–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simha, P.; Ganesapillai, M. Ecological Sanitation and nutrient recovery from human urine: How far have we come? A review. Sustain. Environ. Res. 2017, 27, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simha, P.; Lalander, C.; Ramanathan, A.; Vijayalakshmi, C.; McConville, J.R.; Vinnerås, B.; Ganesapillai, M. What do consumers think about recycling human urine as fertiliser? Perceptions and attitudes of a university community in South India. Water Res. 2018, 143, 527–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simha, P.; Lalander, C.; Vinnerås, B.; Ganesapillai, M. Farmer attitudes and perceptions to the re–use of fertiliser products from resource–oriented sanitation systems—The case of Vellore, South India. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 581, 885–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simpson, G.B.; Jewitt, G.P.W. The Development of the Water-Energy-Food Nexus as a Framework for Achieving Resource Security: A Review. Front. Environ. Sci. 2019, 7, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Snyman, H.; Herselman, J. Guidelines for the Utilisation and Disposal of Wastewater Sludge—Requirements for the Agricultural Use of Wastewater Sludge (No. TT262/06); Water Research Commission: Pretoria, South Africa, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Sogari, G.; Amato, M.; Biasato, I.; Chiesa, S.; Gasco, L. The Potential Role of Insects as Feed: A Multi-Perspective Review. Animals 2019, 9, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Song, X.; Liu, M.; Wu, D.; Qi, L.; Ye, C.; Jiao, J.; Hu, F. Heavy metal and nutrient changes during vermicomposting animal manure spiked with mushroom residues. Waste Manag. 2014, 34, 1977–1983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Taherdoost, H. Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument; How to Test the Validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a Research. Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag. 2016, 5, 28–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, L.; Luo, X.; Cheng, Y.; Yang, F.; Ran, B. Comparing the state-of-the-art efficient stated choice designs based on empirical analysis. Math. Probl. Eng. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tilley, E.; Günther, I. The Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer on Toilet Use in eThekwini, South Africa. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tully, K.; Sullivan, C.; Weil, R.; Sanchez, P. The State of Soil Degradation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Baselines, Trajectories, and Solutions. Sustainability 2015, 7, 6523–6552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- UN-Habitat. The State of African Cities 2018. Design 2018, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- UNDP. Creating Value for All: Strategies for Doing Business with the Poor. Report of the Growing Inclusive Markets Initiative. New York. 2018. Available online: http://www.undp.org/ (accessed on 20 June 2019).
- UNFPA. Population Dynamics in the Post-2015 Development Agenda 56; UNFPA: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Commission; United Nations Development Program; United Nations Commission. Sustainable Development Goals United Nations. 2015. Available online: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/ (accessed on 18 August 2018).
- United Nations Development Programme UNDP. Building Inclusive Businesses for Shared Prosperity; United Nations Development Programme UNDP: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Van den Born, G.; de Haan, B.; Pearce, D.; Howarth, A. Technical Report on Soil Degradation; BA Bilthoven. 2000. Available online: https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/481505018.pdf (accessed on 20 June 2019).
- Viaene, J.; Van Lancker, J.; Vandecasteele, B.; Willekens, K.; Bijttebier, J.; Ruysschaert, G.; De Neve, S.; Reubens, B. Opportunities and barriers to on-farm composting and compost application: A case study from northwestern Europe. Waste Manag. 2016, 48, 181–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Wijk, A. Welcome to the Green Village; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Witjes, S.; Lozano, R. Towards a more Circular Economy: Proposing a framework linking sustainable public procurement and sustainable business models. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xue, B.; Chen, X.P.; Geng, Y.; Guo, X.J.; Lu, C.P.; Zhang, Z.L.; Lu, C.Y. Survey of officials’ awareness on circular economy development in China: Based on municipal and county level. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zawojska, E.; Czajkowski, M. Re-examining empirical evidence on stated preferences: Importance of incentive compatibility. J. Environ. Econ. Policy 2017, 6, 374–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, J.; Kling, C.L. Willingness to Pay, Compensating Variation, and the Cost of Commitment. Econ. Inq. 2004, 42, 503–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhou, X.; Li, Z.; Zheng, T.; Yan, Y.; Li, P.; Odey, E.A.; Peter, H.; Mohammad, S.; Uddin, N. Review of global sanitation development. Environ. Int. 2019, 120, 246–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Database | Search Strategy | Search Results |
---|---|---|
Scopus | TITLE-ABS-KEY (“human manure” OR “fecal sludge” OR “human waste” OR “humanure” OR “solid waste” OR fec * OR fec * OR “human excreta” OR “human excreta derived material”) AND (“Willingness to pay” OR “Contingent valuation” OR “Discrete choice Experiment” OR “Choice experiment”) | 325 document results |
Web of Science | TOPIC (“human manure” OR “fecal sludge” OR “human waste” OR “humanure” OR “solid waste” OR fec * OR fec * OR “human excreta” OR “human excreta derived material”) AND (“Willingness to pay” OR “Contingent valuation” OR “Discrete choice Experiment” OR “Choice experiment”) | 321 document results |
Top of Form |
Article Inclusion Criterion | Article Exclusion Criterion |
---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author (Year) | Country of Study | Target Group | Study Design | Sample Size | Human Excreta-Derived Fertilizer | Validity Reported? | Reliability Reported? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Danso et al., 2017) | Uganda | Farmers | Choice Experiment | 300 | Fortified Pelletized Municipality Solid Waste and Human Excreta | No | No |
(Kuwornu et al., 2017) | Ghana | Farmers | Contingent Valuation | 461 | Pelletized feces | No | No |
(Danso et al., 2006) | Ghana | Farmers | Contingent Valuation | 700 | Co-compost | No | No |
(Agyekum et al., 2014) | Ghana | Farmers | Choice Experiment | 200 | Composted feces | No | No |
(Hong et al., 2017) | Vietnam | Farmers | Contingent Valuation | 530 | Organic Biomass Liquid Fertilizer | No | No |
Author (Year) | Econometric Model | Log Likelihood | Attributes | Mean WTP Estimate USD/kg |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Danso et al., 2017) | Conditional Logit Model | −2134.551 | Fortification | 0.09 |
Random Parameters Logit Model | −1910.586 | Pelletization | 0.13 | |
Latent Class Model | −2245.083 | Certification | 0.40 | |
(Kuwornu et al., 2017) | Tobit Model | −1770.300 | - | 0.19 (Pelletized feces) |
(Danso et al., 2006) | Probit Model | (8.9; 645.7; 745.13) † | - | 0.03 ‡ (Co-compost) |
(Agyekum et al., 2014) | Basic and Hybrid Conditional Logit Model | −305.827 | Packaging | 0.01 |
-296.676 | Labeling | 0.01 | ||
(Hong et al., 2017) | Log-logistic Model | −293.400 | - | 0.004 (Organic Biomass Liquid Fertilizer) |
Danso et al., 2017 | Kurwonu et al., 2017 | Danso et al., 2006 | Agyekum et al., 2014 | Hong et al., 2017 |
---|---|---|---|---|
† Price (−) | † Unit cost of current fertilizer (+) | † Price (+) | † Bid coefficient (−) | |
† Fortification (−) | † Household head (+) | † Packaging (+) | ||
† Certification (+) | Own land | Labeling | ||
† Pelletization (+) | No of 50 kg | † Location (+) | Farm size | |
† Gender (+/−) | Gender | Gender | † Gender (+) | Gender |
Age (years) | † Age (years) (+/−) | † Age (years) (−) | Age (years) | |
† Household size (+) | † Household size (+) | HH dependency | † Household size (+) | Household size |
† Education (−) | Education | † Education (+/−) | † Education (−) | Education |
† Experience (+/−) | Experience | † Experience (+) | Experience | † Experience (+) |
Farm income | † Farm income (-) | † Disposable income (+) | † Household income (+) | |
† Religion (+/−) | Awareness | † Awareness (+) | † Awareness (+) | |
Farm size | Farm size† | † Training (+) | ||
† Product quality (+/−) perception | † Used Organic (-) | † Soil input (+/−) | ||
† Water holding capacity (+/−) | FBO member | |||
† Product reservation perception (+/−) | † Perception (+/−) | |||
† Product use perception (+) |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gwara, S.; Wale, E.; Odindo, A.; Buckley, C. Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little? A Scoping Review of Willingness to Pay for Human Excreta Derived Material in Agriculture. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6490. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166490
Gwara S, Wale E, Odindo A, Buckley C. Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little? A Scoping Review of Willingness to Pay for Human Excreta Derived Material in Agriculture. Sustainability. 2020; 12(16):6490. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166490
Chicago/Turabian StyleGwara, Simon, Edilegnaw Wale, Alfred Odindo, and Chris Buckley. 2020. "Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little? A Scoping Review of Willingness to Pay for Human Excreta Derived Material in Agriculture" Sustainability 12, no. 16: 6490. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166490
APA StyleGwara, S., Wale, E., Odindo, A., & Buckley, C. (2020). Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little? A Scoping Review of Willingness to Pay for Human Excreta Derived Material in Agriculture. Sustainability, 12(16), 6490. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166490