Investigating consumer attitudes towards the new technology of urine separation

Transcription

1 Invstigating consumr attituds towards th nw tchnology of urin sparation C. Pahl-Wostl*, A. Schönborn***, N. Willi**, J. Munck** and T.A. Larsn** * Institut of Environmntal Systms Rsarch, Univrsity of Osnabrück, Albrchtstrass 28, D Osnabrück ** Swiss Fdral Institut of Environmntal Scinc and Tchnology (EAWAG), Übrlandstrass 133, CH-8600 Dübndorf *** Armadillo Wbworks, Lucrn, Switzrland Corrsponding author ( pahl@usf.uni-osnabruck.d) Abstract Th tchnology of urin sparation and th rcycling of anthropognic nutrints as frtilizr in agricultur ar considrd as major innovations to improv th sustainability of today s urban wastwatr managmnt. Th accptanc of consumrs will b ky for th introduction of th nw tchnology. Citizns will hav to mak important dcisions in thir rol as tnants and ownrs of houss and as consumrs buying products frtilizd with urin. Consumr attituds towards th nw tchnology wr xplord in a numbr of citizn focus groups in Switzrland. Focus groups ar dlibrat, modratd group discussions with informd citizns on a crtain topic. Th information was providd by a computr basd information systm spcifically dsignd for this purpos. Th accptanc of individual citizns for th nw tchnology provd to b quit high. Th majority of th citizns xprssd thir willingnss to mov into an apartmnt with NoMix toilts and to buy food frtilizd with urin. Howvr, thy wr not willing to accpt additional financial costs or fforts. Argumnts rlatd to long-trm sustainability (closing nutrint cycls) wr of lss importanc than argumnts that rlat dirctly to th ffcts of micropollutants on human and cosystm halth. For th introduction of th nw tchnology on a wid scal it will thus b crucial to xplor th fat and ffcts of micropollutants. Kywords Citizn focus groups; consumr attituds; micropollutants; sustainabl nutrint rcycling; urin sparation tchnology Introduction Historically, wastwatr tratmnt tchnology has bn dvlopd xclusivly by nginrs. Th public was not involvd in th whol procss of planning and implmntation. Today s situation is charactrizd by a quit complx cntrally controlld systm about which most popl hav only littl knowldg. Howvr, with th introduction of dcntralizd tchnologis at th houshold scal (s.g. Larsn and Gujr, 2001) citizns ar incrasingly taking an important rol. Citizns will hav to mak dcisions as votrs, as hous-ownrs, as tnants, and as consumrs. It is thrfor ssntial to invok citizns at an arly stag in th procss of tchnology dvlopmnt and application, whn thr is still ampl room for taking into account thir wishs and concrns. This corrsponds to an ovrall incrasing awarnss of th importanc of public participation in nvironmntal dcision making and th assssmnt of nvironmntal risks (Rnn t al., 199; Connor, 1999; Glickn, 2000). An xampl of a tchnological innovation at th houshold scal is givn by urin sparation and th rcycling of anthropognic nutrints (nitrogn, phosphorus, and potassium) as frtilizr in agricultur (Larsn t al., 2001). Th two main argumnts for introducing urin sparation ar th improvmnt and at th sam tim simplification of watr pollution control (bcaus most nutrints and an important fraction of th micropollutants ar containd in urin) and th possibility of closing th nutrint cycl spcially for phosphorus, Watr Scinc and Tchnology Vol 48 No 1 pp 7 6 IWA Publishing

2 a limitd, ssntial rsourc. In th contxt of th intrdisciplinary projct NOVAQUATIS (at EAWAG, Switzrland, consumr attituds towards NoMix (urin sparating) toilts and th ida of anthropognic nutrint rcycling wr invstigatd using th IA-focus group mthodology. This papr introducs th mthodology, which is a novlty for tchnology assssmnt, spcially for urban watr managmnt, and rports th rsults. C. Pahl-Wostl t al. 8 Matrials and mthods Th mthod mployd was citizn focus groups. Focus groups ar dlibrat, modratd group discussions with informd citizns on a crtain topic. Th focus group mthod for intgratd assssmnt (IA-focus groups) is a participatory mthod that draws on lmnts of both public opinion rsarch and markting studis (Dürrnbrgr t al., 1999; Jagr t al., 1999; Schlumpf t al., 2001). Thy diffr from both filds in thir xplicit goal of providing ordinary citizns as wll as various othr stakholdrs with an opportunity to articulat thir voic in a dbat. Citizns ar providd with information that draws on th stat-of-th-art in scintific rsarch and th assssmnts aim at rciving from citizns information that is suitabl for shaping actual dcision making. With IA-focus groups, th following qustions may b clarifid (Schlumpf t al., 2001): How do citizns prciv and translat scintific input into shaping thir opinion and assssmnts? How do thy cop with uncrtaintis? How do informd citizns judg th risk of an nvironmntal issu? What policy options do thy prfr? What ar thir policy rcommndations? Typically, IA focus groups ar usd for a comprhnsiv assssmnt of an nvironmntal problm such as climat chang or sustainabl dvlopmnt of a rgion. This implis giving rcommndations for a rang of possibl options. This study, howvr, focusd on a tchnology assssmnt. Th intntion was to involv rlvant stakholdrs in an arly phas into a rsarch procss, whr thy could still hav som influnc on th othr, mor tchnical-scintific rsarch projcts of NOVAQUATIS (s also Linrt t al., 2002 on a survy amongst Swiss farmrs). Th main issus that wr addrssd in th study ar: Assssmnt of citizns prcption of nutrint rcycling, production of urin-basd frtilizr, and its us in organic farming as wll as its contribution to sustainabl dvlopmnt. Assssmnt of citizns prcption of risks arising from pharmacuticals in urin for th nvironmnt today. Furthrmor, w also assssd prcption of potntial risks in th nw systm, for instanc of micropollutants containd in urin-basd frtilizr products. Elicitation of consumr prfrncs rgarding product attributs such as us, maintnanc or dsign of NoMix toilts in comparison to currnt tchnology. In gnral IA focus groups consist of ight to tn participants. Th input is providd by spcifically dsignd computr tools, fact shts that summariz in on or two pags th most important facts on on issu, or xprt statmnts. Mtings with tn gndr spcific groups of citizns with ight to tn participants wr conductd during 2000/2001. Th focus group participants wr rcruitd both by phon and by a nwspapr advrtismnt in th local prss. Thy wr chosn to b a rprsntativ sampl of th population rgarding ag, profssion, political attitud, and nvironmntal awarnss. Th groups mt twic for two hours in two succssiv wks. Information about th NoMix tchnology was providd by a spcifically dsignd intractiv computrbasd information systm, th NoMix Tool ( s blow). Th

3 focus group participants had th opportunity to visit a NoMix toilt (Dubblttn, from BB Innovation, Swdn). Th stat of knowldg and citizn attituds was assssd using qustionnairs. Th stat of knowldg was assssd at th bginning of th mtings, and attituds at th nd. During ach mting th most important statmnts wr rcordd on a protocol. In addition, ach sssion was rcordd on a tap rcordr and partly transcribd to chck individual statmnts. Th focus group mthodology allows xploration of th rang of argumnts and prcptions that could aris about an nvironmntal issu in a wll-dfind stting. Idally, it consists of a rprsntativ sampl of th informd public. Howvr, sinc th numbr of popl that can b addrssd in such dtaild studis is limitd, sampl-groups ar oftn not rprsntativ for th ntir population, and th data gnratd ar qualitativ, rathr than quantitativ. An intractiv computr-basd citizn information tool (ICIT) was dvlopd for th focus group discussions. Th purpos of ICITs is to mak dcision orintd xprt knowldg on complx problms accssibl and utilizabl for citizns (Schlumpf t al., 2001). To fulfill thir task of informing citizns about scintific rsults and making th procss of rsarch visibl, ICITs nd to match th following critria: scintific rsults must b dscribd comprhnsibly and clarly th prsntation ought to b trustworthy and balancd th information nds to b up-to-dat ICITs hav to nabl and support indpndnt study and thy should b fun to work with. Th scintific information in th NoMix Tool is basd on litratur survys and on subjctiv xprt judgmnts, which wr gaind by an itrativ xchang with scintists. This scintific information rprsnts th stat of th art of knowldg in th fild of urin sparation, and is rlvant for a lay public. Figur 1 shows th intrfac of th NoMix Tool, whr th main ida of closing nutrint cycls and of prvnting rmnants from hormons and drugs to ntr th aquatic nvironmnt is visualizd. Th usrs can choos any on of th diffrnt issus simply by scrolling ovr it with th computr mous to rciv mor in C. Pahl-Wostl t al. Drugs Hormons Nutrints Figur 1 Graphical usr intrfac of th intractiv citizn information tool (ICIT). Th flows of drugs (rd) hormons (blu), and nutrints (grn) ar symbolizd by animation. Th usr can gt accss to additional information from this information tool ( Tool). Th symbols within th circl dnoting th nw systm rfr to urin collction (Urin sammln), transport and procssing (Transport und Aufbritung), agricultur (Landwirtschaft), human bings and xcrtions (Mnsch und Ausschidung). Th symbols in th path laving th cycl rfr to wast watr tratmnt plant (Kläranlag) and aquatic nvironmnt (Gwässr). Additionally, highr-lvl information is givn undr th symbol systm (Systm) 9

4 C. Pahl-Wostl t al. dpth information. In th tool, information on th following topics is givn: th contnt of nutrints and micropollutants (pharmacuticals and hormons) in urin, th problms of collcting and storing urin in housholds, th possibl tchnologis for transport and tratmnt of urin, and th concrns of agricultur. Morovr, th important rol of phosphorus as a limiting and ssntial nutrint was discussd as wll as th advantags for tratmnt plants and rciving watrs which can b xpctd from th introduction of NoMix tchnology. Tabls 1 and 2 summariz th qustions of th qustionnairs. Th rsults ar givn in th nxt sction. Tabl 1 Qustionnair 1 gnral information (prior to group discussions) 1. How do you judg th quality of th drinking watr in Switzrland today? 2. Has th quality of drinking watr incrasd or dcrasd ovr th past yars? 3. Which typ of substancs ar rmovd in wastwatr tratmnt? Plas indicat for ach substanc in th list to which xtnt thy ar rmovd (a list of substancs followd). 4. Plas indicat if th following statmnts ar appropriat (a list with statmnts about th fat and ffcts of hormons and drugs, thir rmoval in wast watr tratmnt).. A numbr of qustions to judg nvironmntally frindly bhavior. 6. To which xtnt do you considr yourslf to b nvironmntally frindly? 7. How oftn do you buy food producd in organic farming? 8. Gndr, Ag, Education 9. Siz of th houshold and numbr of childrn. 10. Ar you tnant or ownr? Tabl 2 Qustionnair 2 about th NoMix toilt (aftr group discussions) 1. What do you think in gnral about th NoMix toilt? 2. What do you find particularly good and what do you find particularly bad rgarding th NoMix toilts? 3. How would you xplain your nighbor th ida of th NoMix toilt? 4. Plas judg th following proprtis of th NoMix toilt (handling, asthtics, cological aspcts, smll, wast managmnt, claning, and suitability for childrn).. Do you hav suggstions for improvmnt? 6. Could you imagin purchasing a NoMix toilt? 7. Could you imagin moving into an apartmnt with a NoMix toilt? 8. Could you imagin collcting th usd toilt papr in a sparat bag? 9. NoMix toilts imply that both mn and womn always sit whn thy us th toilt. Could you imagin to always sitting down whn using th toilt to urinat? 10. What do you prfr vgtabl frtilizd with urin or vgtabl grown with artificial frtilizr? 11. Could you imagin to purchas rgularly vgtabl frtilizd with urin? 12. Should all farmrs us urin frtilizr? 13. Who is claning th toilt in your houshold? 14. Could you imagin that all of Switzrland would hav NoMix toilts? 1. What could b th socital bnfits of a Switzrland with NoMix toilts only? 60 Rsults Stat of knowldg and rprsntativity of th groups Whn askd to classify thir own nvironmntal awarnss on a scal btwn 1 (no nvironmntal awarnss) and 10 (vry high nvironmntal awarnss) th focus group

5 participants classifid thmslvs on avrag at 7.4. Th answrs to th mor spcific qustions about thir bhavior in daily lif showd as wll that th participants had a high nvironmntal awarnss and wr prpard to translat this into nvironmntally frindly bhaviour. Most citizns ar not awar of th complxity of th urban watr systm, but in gnral th confidnc in th tchnical systm is high. To assss th ovrall knowldg about th currnt systm a numbr of qustions wr askd bfor th focus groups startd. Most participants wr convincd that th quality of th drinking watr in Switzrland today was good and had improvd ovr th past yars. If mor spcific qustions wr askd.g. rgarding th fficincy of wastwatr tratmnt plants it was vidnt that citizns wr quit uncrtain. W conclud that thr is a high public confidnc in th quality of drinking watr supply and wast watr tratmnt, which is howvr basd on littl dtaild knowldg. Th avrag citizn is not intrstd in a tchnology that is invisibl and outsid of th ralm of dcisions mad in daily lif. Th confidnc in th rliability of th tchnical systm is high givn th fact that failurs ar rarly ralizd by th public. C. Pahl-Wostl t al. Gnral valuation of accptanc Th ovrall accptanc for th nw tchnology was high. Eighty pr cnt of th focus group participants mad a positiv judgmnt of th ida of th NoMix toilt (Figur 2), and mor than 60% xprssd a willingnss to introduc th nw tchnology in thir housholds and to purchas urin-frtilizd products from organic farming. Th focus group participants wr also askd what thy rgardd as particularly positiv or ngativ about th NoMix tchnology. For womn, th main argumnts in favor of th nw tchnology wr nvironmntal frindlinss and th ida of watr saving. For mn, th main argumnts in favor of th nw tchnology wr th rmoval of hormons and drugs. Th main argumnts against th nw tchnology for womn wr th considrabl additional ffort rquird for maintnanc, urin collction and transport, and for mn th unsolvd tchnical problms. Participants xprssd a high willingnss to dcid in favor of th nw tchnology as far as thir own dcisions wr concrnd (Figurs 3A, B). Th rsults showd a clar gndr diffrnc. Whras 47% of th womn wr clarly willing to purchas a NoMix toilt, only 17% of th mal participants wr rady to do so. Th willingnss to mov into an apartmnt with a NoMix toilt was highr for both mn and womn. 71% of th mal participants xprssd thir clar willingnss to mov into an apartmnt with a NoMix toilt, whras 8% of th womn wr clarly willing to do so. Th highr ovrall accptanc for qustion 3B can partly b xplaind by th fact that most popl in Switzrland ar tnants P r c n t Vry good good 8 bad Gndr 17 Mal 11 4 Fmal No opinion vry bad Figur 2 Distribution of answrs to th qustion What do you think in gnral about th NoMix toilt? Th prcntags ar givn on th top of ach bar 61

6 C. Pahl-Wostl t al. P r c n t Ys 47 2 Rathr ys Rathr no No (A) 4 No opinion Gndr Mal Fmal P r c n t Ys Rathr ys 8 Rathr no (B) 11 4 No No opinion Gndr Mal Fmal Figur 3 Answrs to th qustion (A) Could you imagin purchasing a NoMix toilt? (B) Could you imagin moving into an apartmnt with a NoMix toilt? Th prcntags ar givn on th top of ach bar and not ownrs of thir hous or apartmnt. Hnc, thy ar not abl to mak th dcision to purchas a NoMix toilt. Furthr, citizns hold th subjctiv prcption that th purchas and installation of th NoMix tchnology is associatd with considrabl additional fforts. In particular th mal participants justifid thir ngativ attitud to buying a NoMix toilt with th prmatur stat of th whol tchnology. If additional costs and fforts ar carrid by th landlord th willingnss to mov into an apartmnt with NoMix toilt is high. Focus group participants wr lss optimistic rgarding th larg-scal introduction of th NoMix tchnology in a country such as Switzrland. Mor than 0% of th participants could not imagin Switzrland having only NoMix toilts. This may b attributd to th fact that th whol ida is still quit rmot for most popl. A typical statmnt mad during discussions in th plnary supports this: Ovrall I think that th sparation tchnology is a good thing. But I hav difficultis to imagin how to put th nw philosophy into practic. I am intrstd to find out how to communicat th ida and how to translat it into action. How many gnrations will b rquird th whol thing is vry rmot. To b honst, I do not giv th whol nw philosophy a ral chanc. Human bings ar comfortabl and complacnt. Oftn a mssag is not communicatd in th right fashion and to th right audinc at th right momnt (dsignr, ag 6). Idas for improvmnt of th NoMix tchnology and gnral rcommndations Participants mad quit a fw practical rcommndations for improvmnts. Most suggstions from womn wr rlatd to an improvd and mor sthtic dsign. Th suggstions from mn wr mainly rlatd to tchnical improvmnts. Ovrall, th suggstion was rpatdly mad to introduc th NoMix tchnology into public buildings, hospitals and hom for th rtird whr th input of drugs via urin is particularly high. This shows th importanc attributd to th rmoval of pharmacuticals. 62 Urin as frtilizr in agricultur Participants wr askd if thy could imagin ating vgtabls frtilizd with urin. Figur 4 shows that a majority (72%) answrd positivly. Also 80% statd that thy would prfr vgtabl frtilizd with urin to artificial frtilizr. Argumnts in favor wr rlatd to th fact that urin frtilizr is mor natural. Schmidtbaur (1996) rportd similar rsults from a survy in a Swdish municipality. Popl pointd out th nd to find an attractiv nam and dvlop good markting to ovrcom th possibl bias towards urin as a basis for frtilizr production. Dspit

7 P r c n t Ys 28 Rathr ys 8 16 Rathr no No No opinion Gndr Mal Fmal Figur 4 Answrs to th qustion Could you imagin buying rgularly urin-frtilizd vgtabls. Th prcntags ar givn on top of ach bar 16 4 C. Pahl-Wostl t al. this ovrall positiv attitud participants mphasizd that any halth risks should b xcludd: As long as potntial sourcs for disas and thrats to human halth cannot b xcludd, I would not wlcom th application of human urin vn whn artificial frtilizr is not a vry attractiv altrnativ (Environmntal consultant, ag 3). Discussion Finding focus group participants provd to b rathr difficult. This rsultd in a biasd composition of th focus groups, with a larg lvl of nvironmntally frindly attituds. A largr numbr of citizns could b addrssd with a survy. This would allow putting th quantitativ rsults on a strongr statistical basis. Howvr, it can b xpctd that th bias towards nvironmntally frindly citizns would b at last as high or vn highr unlss th focus of th qustionnair wr shiftd towards human halth. Th issu of urban watr managmnt and wastwatr tratmnt dos not rank high on th agnda of th avrag Swiss citizn. Th systm sms to function prfctly and thr is not much awarnss for a nd for chang. This was also th mssag that was convyd to th public for yars. Th complxity of th ovrall systm is not anticipatd by th broad public, who has only a littl rsponsibility for th wll-functioning of th systm. It provd to b quit difficult to convy th complx ida of nutrint rcycling dspit th fforts dvotd to producing a comprhnsiv and asy to undrstand citizn information tool. Citizns wr mainly intrstd in th practical aspcts of houshold/bathroom tchnology and in th whol issu of drug rmoval. This supports th xprinc with citizn focus groups on climat chang (Schlumpf t al., 2001; Pahl-Wostl t al., 2000; Kasmir t al., 2000). In particular th whol aspct of uncrtaintis is difficult to convy to a lay public. This was spcially prvalnt for climat chang, but bcam also vidnt in th discussion of th focus groups on NoMix tchnology. Citizns nd furthr a clar link to topics of rlvanc in thir daily livs (s.g. Schlumpf t al., 1999). In particular dirct thrats to nvironmntal and human halth provd to b th main focus of intrst. Hr citizns rqustd absolut crtainty that potntial thrats to human halth could b xcludd for using urin-basd frtilizr in organic farming. Considrabl fforts hav thus to b dvotd to rsarch into dvloping th tchnological basis of rmoving drugs and antibiotics in th procss of frtilizr production and to xplor mthodologis to assss th cotoxicological ffcts of drugs. Ths ar important topics of th NOVAQUATIS projct. Givn th fact that absolut crtainty cannot b obtaind, much mphasis will 63

8 C. Pahl-Wostl t al. 64 hav to b dvotd to th communication of risks and possibl uncrtaintis. On has furthr to kp in mind that th focus groups wr run just aftr th BSE crisis, which was particularly strong in Switzrland. Popl wr quit snsitiv to potntial halth thrats. Th whol ida of closing cycls in th human chain was partly linkd to ngativ associations givn th xprinc with BSE. Givn this fact th high gnral positiv attitud is vry ncouraging. Howvr, on has also to tak into account that citizns ar hardly prpard to carry additional costs and fforts. If this attitud prvails alrady in groups whr th nvironmntal awarnss is high, on has to xpct that th avrag citizn will b vn lss prpard to invst tim and mony. This implis that in particular in th initial stat th nw tchnology will hav to b financially supportd and that tchnological dvlopmnt has to focus as wll on comfort and th as of handling. Th high individual willingnss of citizns to accpt a NoMix toilt in thir own housholds and to buy urin-frtilizd vgtabl corrsponds to th rsults from a survy amongst Swiss farmrs prsntd by Linrt t al. (2002). 7% of th farmrs thought th ida of using urin-basd frtilizr was good or vry good, and 42% wr willing to purchas such a product. Farmrs, howvr, raisd similar concrns rgarding micropollutants as found in this study: 30% indicatd concrns rgarding micropollutants, without bing spcifically askd to answr any qustion on this subjct. Dspit th individual willingnss to accpt th NoMix tchnology, thr was a gnral skpticism rgarding th willingnss of th majority in socity or anothr stakholdr group to do th sam. In informal discussions with diffrnt stakholdrs, w oftn ncountr th sam phnomnon. Many popl find th ida of urin sparation convincing, but think that farmrs will not accpt or apply th frtilizr. Exprts on sanitary dvics accpt radily that NoMix tchnology would b bnficial for th nvironmnt, but thy ar qually convincd that popl will not want to buy thm. It would b an intrsting issu to xplor furthr th rasons for th discrpancy btwn individual willingnss and th skpticism rgarding th willingnss for th majority in socity or anothr stakholdr group to accpt th nw tchnology. It would mak also much sns to fostr an xchang among th diffrnt stakholdr groups. A futur projct could involv an actors platform with rprsntativs from th major stakholdr groups (.g. farmr association, consumr association, manufacturrs of sanitary tchnology, tc.). Th study rportd hr is focusd on a tchnology assssmnt. It provids a good bas for a mor comprhnsiv invstigation of nw scnarios for urban watr managmnt and socio-tchnical transformations, of a nw rol for citizns and housholds in a systm with changd dcision-making structurs and institutional sttings. Conclusions In summary, th tchnology or urin sparation is wll accptd as long as it offrs th sam lvl of comfort and is not mor xpnsiv for individuals than convntional tchnologis. For th participants in th focus groups, th topic of micropollutants provd to b th most important argumnt for introducing NoMix tchnology. Thr was a high accptanc of urin as frtilizr, undr th condition that risks connctd to hygin and micropollutants could b xcludd. Howvr, this smd to b basd on mor intuitiv argumnts such as urin bing mor natural than artificial frtilizrs. Argumnts rlatd to long-trm sustainability (closing nutrint cycls) ar still of lss importanc than argumnts that rlat dirctly to th ffcts of micropollutants on human and cosystm halth. For a succssful introduction of NoMix tchnology in Switzrland, rmoval of micropollutants and a high hyginic standard ar ssntial lmnts. Howvr, dvlopmnt will

9 also hav to focus on sthtic aspcts and practical vryday handling as wll as providing sound tchnical solutions for storag, transport, and procss nginring. Th attitud towards th nw tchnology is in gnral positiv. Howvr, mor fforts nd to b dvotd to inform th public and to gt th diffrnt stakholdr groups involvd in a mor in dpth discussion. Rfrncs Connor, D.M. (1999). Constructiv Citizn Participation; A Rsourc Book. 7th dition. Dürrnbrgr, G., Kastnholz, H. and Bhringr, J. (1999). Intgratd Assssmnt Focus Groups: Bridging th gap btwn scinc and policy? Scinc and Public Policy,, Glickn, J. (2000). Gtting stakholdr participation right : a discusion of participatory procsss and possibl pitfalls. Env. Sci. and Policy, 3, Jagr, C., Schül, R. and Kasmir, B. (1999). Focus Groups in Intgratd Assssmnt: A Micro-Cosmos for Rflxiv Modrnization. Europ. J. Social Sci., 3, Kasmir, B., Schibli, D., Stoll, S. and Jagr, C.C. (2000). Involving th Public in Climat and Enrgy Dcisions. Environmnt, 42, Larsn, T.A., Ptrs, I., Aldr, A., Eggn, R.I., Maurr, M. and Munck, J. (2001). Rnginring th toilt for sustainabl wastwatr managmnt. Environ. Sci. & Tchnol., May 1, 192A 197A. Linrt, J., Hallr, M., Brnr, F., Stauffachr, M. and Larsn, T.A. (2002). How farmrs in Switzrland prciv frtilizrs from rcycld anthropognic nutrints (urin). Watr Scinc and Tchnology, 48(1) 47 6 (this issu). Pahl-Wostl, C., Schlumpf, C., Schönborn, A., Büssnschütt, M. and Burs, J. (2000). In Intgratd Assssmnt. Modls at th intrfac btwn scinc and socity: Impacts and Options. Intgratd Assssmnt, 1, Rnn, O., Wblr, T. and Widmann, P. (Eds). (199). Fairnss and Comptnc in Citizn Participation: Evaluating Modls for Environmntal Discours. Dordrcht, Kluwr. Schlumpf, C., Bhringr, J., Dürrnbrgr, G. and Pahl-Wostl, C. (1999). Th prsonal CO 2 calculator: A modling tool for Participatory Intgratd Assssmnt mthods. Environmntal Modling and Assssmnt, 4, Schlumpf, C., Pahl-Wostl, C., Schönborn, A., Jagr, C.J. and Imbodn, D. (2001). IMPACTS An Information Tool for Citizns to Assss Impacts of Climat Chang from a Rgional Prspctiv. Climat Chang, 1, Schmidtbaur, P. (1996). Hindr och möjlightr för källsortring av humanurin intrvjuuntrsökning bland lantbrukar, fastightsförvaltar och bond i Al kommun. Tchnical Rport no., Swdish Univrsity of Agricultural Scincs, Division of Soil Managmnt. ISSN (In Swdish). C. Pahl-Wostl t al. 6