Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37819045›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2023

Urban Sanitation: New Terminology for Globally Relevant Solutions?

Linda Strande, Barbara Evans, Marcos von Sperling, Jamie Bartram, Hidenori Harada, Anne Nakagiri, Viet-Anh Nguyen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science & technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Linda StrandeEawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Department of Sanitation, Water and Solid Waste for Development (Sandec), Überlandstrasse 133, Dübendorf 8600, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4477-6268
Barbara EvansSchool of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K.ORCID 0000-0001-9815-3141
Marcos von SperlingDepartment of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos 6627 - Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Jamie BartramSchool of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K.ORCID 0000-0002-6542-6315
Hidenori HaradaGraduate School of Asian and African Area Studies, Kyoto University, Yoshida-shimoadachi-cho 46, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7685-7751
Anne NakagiriDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kyambogo University, Kyambogo Road, Kampala, P.O. Box 1, Kyambogo, Uganda.
Viet-Anh NguyenInstitute of Environmental Science and Engineering (IESE), Hanoi University of Civil Engineering (HUCE), 55 Giai Phong Road, Hanoi 113068, Vietnam.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Progress toward Sustainable Development Goals for global access to safe sanitation is lagging significantly. In this Feature, we propose that misleading terminology leads to errors of categorization and hinders progress toward sanitation service provision in urban areas. Binary classifications such as "offsite/onsite" and "sewered/nonsewered" do not capture the need for "transport to treatment" or the complexity of urban sanitation and should be discarded. "Fecal sludge management" is used only in the development context of low- or middle-income countries, implying separate solutions for "poor" or "southern" contexts, which is unhelpful. Terminology alone does not solve problems, but rather than using outdated or "special" terminology, we argue that a robust terminology that is globally relevant across low-, middle-, and upper-income contexts is required to overcome increasingly unhelpful assumptions and stereotypes. The use of accurate, technically robust vocabulary and definitions can improve decisions about management and selection of treatment, promote a circular economy, provide a basis for evidence-based science and technology research, and lead to critical shifts and transformations to set policy goals around truly safely managed sanitation. In this Feature, the three current modes of sanitation are defined, examples of misconceptions based on existing terminology are presented, and a new terminology for collection and conveyance is proposed: (I) fully road transported, (II) source-separated mixed transport, (III) mixed transport, and (IV) fully pipe transported.

Indexed as

SanitationSewageFecesSewagecity-wide inclusive sanitationfecal sludgeonsitepit latrineseptic tanksewersustainable development goalswastewater

Identifiers

PMID37819045
PMCPMC10603773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.