Source-separating sanitation systems offer the possibility of recycling nutrients present in wastewater as crop fertilisers. Thereby, they can reduce agriculture's impacts on global sources, sinks, and cycles for nitrogen and phosphorous, as well as their associated environmental costs. However, it has been broadly assumed that people would be reluctant to perform the new sanitation behaviours that are necessary for implementing such systems in practice. Yet, few studies have tried to systematically gather evidence in support of this assumption. To address this gap, we surveyed 3763 people at 20 universities in 16 countries using a standardised questionnaire. We identified and systematically assessed cross-cultural and country-level explanatory factors that were strongly associated with people's willingness to consume food grown using human urine as fertiliser. Overall, 68% of the respondents favoured recycling human urine, 59% stated a willingness to eat urine-fertilised food, and only 11% believed that urine posed health risks that could not be mitigated by treatment. Most people did not expect to pay less for urine-fertilised food, but only 15% were willing to pay a price premium. Consumer perceptions were found to differ greatly by country and the strongest predictive factors for acceptance overall were cognitive factors (perceptions of risks and benefits) and social norms. Increasing awareness and building trust among consumers about the effectiveness of new sanitation systems via cognitive and normative messaging can help increase acceptance. Based on our findings, we believe that in many countries, acceptance by food consumers will not be the major social barrier to closing the loop on human urine. That a potential market exists for urine-fertilised food, however, needs to be communicated to other stakeholders in the sanitation service chain.
We present here a data set generated from a multinational survey on opinions of university community members on the prospect of consuming food grown with human urine as fertiliser and about their urine recycling perceptions in general. The data set comprises answers from 3,763 university community members (students, faculty/researchers, and staff) from 20 universities in 16 countries and includes demographic variables (age bracket, gender, type of settlement of origin, academic discipline, and role in the university). Questions were designed based on Ajzen's theory of planned behaviour to elicit information about three components of behavioural intention-attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control. Survey questions covered perceived risks and benefits (attitudes), perceptions of colleagues (injunctive social norm) and willingness to consume food grown with cow urine/faeces (descriptive social norm), and willingness to pay a price premium for food grown with human urine as fertiliser (perceived behavioural control). We also included a question about acceptable urine recycling and disposal options and assessed general environmental outlook via the 15-item revised New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale. Data were collected through a standardised survey instrument translated into the relevant languages and then administered via an online form. Invitations to the survey were sent by email to university mailing lists or to a systematic sample of the university directory. Only a few studies on attitudes towards using human urine as fertiliser have been conducted previously. The data described here, which we analysed in "Willingness among food consumers at universities to recycle human urine as crop fertiliser: Evidence from a multinational survey" [1], may be used to further understand potential barriers to acceptance of new sanitation systems based on wastewater source separation and urine recycling and can help inform the design of future sociological studies.