Perspectives
Successfulsanitationpromotionmustrecognizetheuseof
latrinewastesinagriculture—theexampleofVietNam
PeterKjærJensen,1PhamDucPhuc,2AndersDalsgaard,3&FlemmingKonradsen1
Introduction
ToachievetheaimsoftheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals,
significantinvestmentswillberequiredtoincreasesanitation
coverageandimprovethemanagementofhumanexcreta.The
UnitedNationsMillenniumTaskForceonWaterandSanitationputforward10crucialactionsthatwouldbeneeded,and
amongtheseisapledgeforgovernmentstosupportsanitation
solutions that are technically, socially, environmentally and
financiallyappropriate(1).
IneasternAsiaoneofthekeyaspectstobeconsidered
whenpromotingappropriatesanitationsolutionsanddesigninghealtheducationprogrammesistheuseofhumanexcreta
asanagriculturalfertilizer.Thecenturiesoldtraditionofusing
humanexcretaonfarmlandhasbeenabandonedinEurope,
butisstillwidespreadineastAsia,especiallyinChinaandViet
Nam.Althoughtheremaybenegativehealthconsequences
oftheuseofexcretaasfertilizer,itisarguedhere,inreference
tothecurrentsituationinVietNam,thatifthisisacommon practice among farmers, then sanitation programmes
andhygienecampaignsmustacknowledgeitsexistenceand
designsystemsthatallowforexcretatobeusedinthesafest
waypossible.
Excretareuseandhealth
Fromanagriculturalpointofviewtheuseofhumanexcretais
asoundpracticeforseveralreasons.
• Itprovidescheapfertilizerforcropsandthusreducesimportsofcommercialfertilizer.
• Itisagoodsoilconditioner.
• Itisanintegralpartofnutrientrecyclingindifferenttypes
ofintegratedfarmingsystems.
However,dependingonthestandardofhygieneduringthe
handling and composting of the faecal material, the use of
excretacanhaveseverenegativehealthconsequences.These
mayaffectfarmworkerswhoaredirectlyexposedtotheexcreta;
childrenplayinginornearfields;andconsumersoffertilized
produce.Inaddition,pathogensmaybetransmittedto,and
spreadby,wildanddomesticanimals,havingwidergeographical
healthandhygieneimplications.
Morethan75%ofthefarmersstudiedintheNgheAn
provinceincentralVietNamwerereportedtousefreshor
partlycompostedhumanexcretatofertilizetheirfarmlands
orgardens(2).Thiscontinuoususeofexcretainagriculture
islikelytocontributetotheveryhighrateofinfectionwith
intestinal parasites in Viet Nam. For example, it has been
estimatedthat22millionVietnamese,ornearly29%ofthe
entirepopulation,havehookworminfection.Insomefarming
communitiesinnorthandcentralVietNamreportedratesof
hookworminfectionwere70%ormoreoftheentirepopulation(3,4).Furthermore,itislikelythatthetransmissionof
otherimportantpathogenssuchasTrichurisspp.,Ascarisspp.
andTaeniaspp.isfavouredbythecontinueduseofexcreta.
SimilarproblemsareencounteredinChinawhereitisestimatedthatmorethan530millionpeopleareinfectedwith
Ascarisspp.(5).
TheauthoritiesinVietNamhaverecentlyrevisedthe
regulationsonsanitationandhygienepromotion,includingthe
practicesforthehandlingoflatrinewastes,withanemphasison
adheringtoaminimumdurationofcompostingofexcretabeforeitisusedasanagriculturalfertilizer.Thisrevisionispartly
aresponsetothecontinuedwidespreaduseofhumanexcreta
inagriculture.Itisclearthatexcretamanagementsystemswill
havetobeputinplacetotacklethesignificantpublichealth
problemsassociatedwithunhygienicmanagementofexcreta
intheregion.Thequestionis,whatsystemswillwork?
Implementationproblems
Evaluations from east Asia have shown that sanitation programmesoftenpromotelatrinesthatdonotaccommodatethe
practiceoffarminghouseholdscollectingandusingexcretain
agriculture(6,7).Thetypesoflatrinethathavebeenpromoted
includethepourflushandseptictankswhicharesuperiorfrom
ahygienicpointofviewtothetraditionalVietnamesedouble
vaultcompostinglatrine.However,itisimportanttobearin
mindthatthefarmersseeexcretaasavaluablefertilizerand,
therefore,favourlatrineswheretheycanstoreexcretaandhave
accesswhenneededforuseinagriculturalproduction(2,7).
Thereareinstancesoffarmersforcingopenthesealoflatrines
and/orseptictanksandbreakingthelatrines,togainaccess
totheexcreta.InasanitationprojectinXomHaprovincein
VietNam,30%ofthelatrineshadbeendestroyedwithintwo
yearsbecausethefarmerscouldnotgainaccessstotheexcreta
(7).Thus,itisclearthatforsanitationandhygienepromotion
programmestobesuccessful,legislationmustacknowledgethe
practiceofusingexcretaasfertilizer.
UniversityofCopenhagen,InstituteofPublicHealth,DepartmentofInternationalHealth,ØsterFarimagsgade5,Building16,EntranceI,POBox2099,1014
CopenhagenK,Denmark.CorrespondenceshouldbesenttoDrJensenatthisaddress(email:).
2
NationalInstituteofHygieneandEpidemiology,DivisionofEntericInfections,Hanoi,VietNam.
3
DepartmentofVeterinaryPathobiology,RoyalAgricultureandVeterinaryUniversity,Frederiksberg,Denmark.
Ref.No.05-025130
1
BulletinoftheWorldHealthOrganization|November2005,83(11)
873
Perspectives
Latrinesandagriculture
Legislationonexcretaanditsusein
agriculture
TheauthoritiesinVietNamdoallowtheuseofcomposted
hygienic safe human excreta as a fertilizer in horticulture.
However,untilveryrecentlythedefinitionof“hygienicsafe
humanexcreta”wasbasedoncompostingtimeonly,andthe
twomainresponsibleministries,theMinistryofHealthand
theMinistryofAgricultureandRuralDevelopment,applied
differentstandardsfortheminimumrequiredcomposting
time(threeandsixmonths,respectively).Thislackofcommon standards hindered the promotion of safe practices.
However,followingrecentrevisionstotheguidelinesboth
ministriesnowrecommendacompostingtimeofsixmonths
fortheproductionofhygienicsafeexcretathatcanbeused
asfertilizer(8).Thisdurationofcompostingforhumanexcretatobeusedascropfertilizersislikelytoprotecthuman
health,especiallyifthefarmerscontinuewiththecommon
practiceofaddingkitchenashandlime(calciumoxide)to
the latrines, a practice that has been found to reduce the
composting time needed to obtain hygienic compost (9).
EvenforAscariseggsadie-offof97%canbeexpectedafter
6–8 months of composting without increasing pH (10).
However,oneprobleminensuringasufficientcomposting
timerelatestotheagriculturalcalendar,astheclimaticbelt
ofnorthandcentralVietNamaccommodatesthreecropsper
year.Phuc(2)foundthatfarmersapplyinghumanexcreta
paidmoreattentiontothefertilizerneedsoftheplantsthan
tothepotentialhygienicproblems.Therefore,itislikelythat
farmers would remove the excreta from the latrines every
fourthmonthduringlandpreparation,regardlessofregulationsonthelengthofcomposting.
Futureresearchandimplementationneeds
Whenconsideringpreviousexperienceswithsanitationinthe
eastAsianregion,itseemsrelevantthatthenewguidelinesand
promotionalactivitiesaddresstheprioritiesoffarmersandthat
appliedresearchshouldfocusoncombiningthesanitationand
healthobjectiveswiththeneedsofthefarmersforagricultural
inputs.Importantissuestobeaddressedintheplanningand
implementationprocessarediscussedbelow.
PeterKjærJensenetal.
Focusonthefarmers’needs
In areas where use of human excreta in agriculture is common,farminghouseholdswouldprobablyacceptsanitation
technologiesandhygienepromotionalactivitiesiftheycould
beaccommodatedwithintheagriculturalproductionsystem
and be seen as offering an economic advantage.The focus
shouldbeonthedevelopmentofsanitationsystemsthatallow
fortheuseofexcretaasfertilizerratherthanonlyontheneed
forimprovementsinhygiene.
Processdevelopment
Onewayforwardmaybetofocusonmakingthecomposting
processmoreefficientandshorteningthecompostingtime.
Insteadoffocusingonaminimumsafecompostingtime,the
advantageofaddingasufficientquantityoflimetotheexcreta
toacceleratethecompostingprocesssothatittakeslessthan
four months would be a better option. Another possibility
wouldbetoaddcarbon-richmaterialtothelatrinewaste,such
asricehuskorstrawmaterials,whichmayincreasethetemperatureinthepit.
Interdisciplinarydecision-making
TheVietnameseexampleshowsthatlegislationshouldbebased
onmultidisciplinaryknow-how.Inthecaseofpromotionof
sanitation and hygiene, a single ministry will not have the
specificexpertiseorawarenessrequiredtodesignsustainable
programmes.Therefore,theemphasisshouldbeonforming
aninterdisciplinarytaskforcethatwouldsupportandaccommodatethedifferentprioritiesofthehealth,agricultureand
sanitationministries.
Adaptationoftechnology
Cautionisnecessarywhenpromotingaparticulartechnology,
suchastheeco-sanitarylatrines,alsoreferredtoascomposting
latrines,becausetheymaynotbesustainableandhygienically
soundifthetechnologyisnotinaccordancewiththelivelihoodsandprioritiesofthelocalcommunities.Thetechnology
needs to be adapted through community involvement and
people must see both the economic and health benefits of
usingthetechnology.O
Competinginterests:nonedeclared.
References
1. BartramJ,LewisK,LentonR,WrightA.Focusingonimprovedwaterand
sanitationforhealth.Lancet2005Feb26-Mar4;365(9461):810-12.
2. PhucDP.Studyofpeople’sperceptionandhandlingpracticesoftheuseof
latrinewastesasfertilizersinagricultureinPhucSoncommune,NgheAn
province,VietNam[MscThesis].Copenhagen:InstituteofPublicHealth,
DepartmentofInternationalHealth,UniversityofCopenhagen;2003
3. vanderHoekW,DeNV,KonradsenF,CamPD,HoaNT,ToanNDetal.
Currentstatusofsoil-transmittedhelminthsinVietnam.SoutheastAsianJ
TropMedPublicHealth2003;34Suppl1:1-11.
4. VerleP,KongsA,DeNV,ThieuNQ,DepraetereK,KimHTetal.Prevalenceof
intestinalparasiticinfectionsinnorthernVietnam.TropMedIntHealth2003
Oct;8(10):961-4.
5. PengW,ZhouX,CuiX.Comparisonsofthestructuresofnaturaland
re-establishedpopulationsofAscarisinhumansinaruralcommunityof
Jiangxi,China.Parasitology2002;124(Pt6):641-7.
874
6. GovernmentofVietnam.NationalRuralWaterSupply&SanitationStrategy
StudyNRWSS,Midtermreport,Socialandhygienicsituation.Hanoi:
GovernmentofVietnam;1997;3.
7. WaterandSanitationProgramme.SellingsanitationinVietnam,whatworks?
Jakarta:WaterandSanitationProgramme,EastAsiaandthePacific;2002.
8. MinistryofHealth.Regardingissuingthesectorstandards.Hygienestandards
forvarioustypesoflatrines.Hanoi:MinistryofHealth;2005.(Decisionof
theMinisterofHealthNo.08/2005/Q§-BYT.)
9. SchönningC,StenströmT.Guidelinesforthesafeuseofurineandfaeces
inecologicalsanitationsystems.StockholmEnvironmentalInstitute:
Stockholm;2004.
10.FeachemRG,BradleyDJ,DarelickH,MaraDD.Sanitationanddisease–health
aspectsofexcretaandwastewatermanagement.NewYork:JohnWiley&
SonsfortheWorldBank;1983.
BulletinoftheWorldHealthOrganization|November2005,83(11)