Human Excreta: Hazardous Waste or Valuable Resource? Shifting Views of Modernity

IF 0.7 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Journal of World History Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.1353/jwh.2021.0035
Iris Borowy
{"title":"Human Excreta: Hazardous Waste or Valuable Resource? Shifting Views of Modernity","authors":"Iris Borowy","doi":"10.1353/jwh.2021.0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In the late nineteenth century, a water-carried system of flush toilets and sewage pipes came to be regarded as \"modern\" and \"Western\" and became part of the package of transformations conceived as \"development,\" which international organizations endorsed after 1945.However, in promoting sanitation, the World Health Organization and other organizations faced contradictory demands: protecting populations from fecalborne diseases, providing affordable and culturally acceptable forms of excrement disposal, maintaining valuable fertilizer for agricultural use, and establishing sustainable structures and methods were difficult to reconcile. Over time, as officers from different organizations grappled with question of advantages and disadvantages of solutions for different regions, it became increasingly doubtful whether the flush toilet/water-carried disposal could be the model for the entire world, andwhether it even should.Gradually, as scientific information and public attitudes changed, international recommendations shifted from viewing excreta reuse as a temporarily necessary evil to—partially—embracing it as an ecologically desirable long-term development goal.The importance of modernity as a principal driver of sanitation reform remained intact, but the concept ofwhat constitutedmodernity changed from one whose main criteria was efficient hazard removal to one geared toward comprehensive health protection and resource conservation.Over several decades, international organizations acted as catalysts for the conceptual developments regarding human waste disposal and the ideological underpinnings they stood for.","PeriodicalId":17466,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World History","volume":"32 1","pages":"517 - 545"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jwh.2021.0035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:In the late nineteenth century, a water-carried system of flush toilets and sewage pipes came to be regarded as "modern" and "Western" and became part of the package of transformations conceived as "development," which international organizations endorsed after 1945.However, in promoting sanitation, the World Health Organization and other organizations faced contradictory demands: protecting populations from fecalborne diseases, providing affordable and culturally acceptable forms of excrement disposal, maintaining valuable fertilizer for agricultural use, and establishing sustainable structures and methods were difficult to reconcile. Over time, as officers from different organizations grappled with question of advantages and disadvantages of solutions for different regions, it became increasingly doubtful whether the flush toilet/water-carried disposal could be the model for the entire world, andwhether it even should.Gradually, as scientific information and public attitudes changed, international recommendations shifted from viewing excreta reuse as a temporarily necessary evil to—partially—embracing it as an ecologically desirable long-term development goal.The importance of modernity as a principal driver of sanitation reform remained intact, but the concept ofwhat constitutedmodernity changed from one whose main criteria was efficient hazard removal to one geared toward comprehensive health protection and resource conservation.Over several decades, international organizations acted as catalysts for the conceptual developments regarding human waste disposal and the ideological underpinnings they stood for.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人类排泄物:危险废物还是宝贵资源?现代性观念的转变
摘要:在19世纪末,由抽水马桶和污水管道组成的输水系统被视为“现代”和“西方”,并成为1945年后国际组织认可的“发展”转型计划的一部分,世界卫生组织和其他组织面临着相互矛盾的要求:保护人口免受粪传播疾病的影响,提供负担得起的、文化上可接受的排泄物处理方式,维持宝贵的农业肥料,以及建立可持续的结构和方法,这些都很难调和。随着时间的推移,随着来自不同组织的官员们努力解决不同地区解决方案的优缺点问题,人们越来越怀疑抽水马桶/水处理是否能成为整个世界的模式,甚至是否应该成为。渐渐地,随着科学信息和公众态度的改变,国际建议从将排泄物再利用视为一种暂时必要的邪恶,转变为——部分地——将其视为一个生态上可取的长期发展目标。现代性作为卫生改革的主要驱动力的重要性保持不变,但构成现代性的概念从以有效消除危害为主要标准转变为以全面保护健康和节约资源为目标。几十年来,国际组织为人类废物处理的概念发展及其所代表的意识形态基础发挥了催化剂的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Devoted to historical analysis from a global point of view, the Journal of World History features a range of comparative and cross-cultural scholarship and encourages research on forces that work their influences across cultures and civilizations. Themes examined include large-scale population movements and economic fluctuations; cross-cultural transfers of technology; the spread of infectious diseases; long-distance trade; and the spread of religious faiths, ideas, and ideals. Individual subscription is by membership in the World History Association.
期刊最新文献
Between World-Imagining and World-Making: Politics of Fin-de-Siècle Universalism and Transimperial Indo-U.S. Brotherhood Colonial City, Global Entanglements: Intra-and Trans-Imperial Networks in George Town, 1786–1937 Empire, Kinship and Violence: Family Histories, Indigenous Rights and the Making of Settler Colonialism, 1770–1842 by Elizabeth Elbourne (review) Many Black Women of this Fortress: Graça, Mónica, and Adwoa, Three Enslaved Women of Portugal's African Empire by Kwasi Konadu (review) Inter-Imperial Entanglement: The British Claim to Portuguese Delagoa Bay in the Nineteenth Century
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1