Re-structuring and re-naming is a good idea. But, first, you must, by way of an introduction, give what areas you intend to cover within the umbrella of "Sanitation."

For example, when it comes to me, I would suggest names like hygiene, wastewater reuse (if it is not there), sanitation as a business, innovations in sanitation, governance in sanitation and, as I have often said, "water."

Regards,

F H Mughal

Yes, that is better - Reuse in Agriculture, though a more complete term would be Wastewater Reuse in Agriculture. Sometimes, Wastewater Reuse in Irrigation, or, more often, Treated Municipal Reuse in Irrigation, is also used.

At times, the word "water" is used, e.g., that famous FAO publication: Water Quality for Agriculture by R.S. Ayers D.W. Westcot, 1989, 1994.

Two publications by my advisor at AIT, late Prof. M B Pescod, OBE, have the titles:

1. Health Guidelines for the Use of Wastewater in Agriculture and Aquaculture
2. Wastewater Treatment and Use in Agriculture - FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 47

So, Wastewater Reuse in Agriculture would be an appropriate caption.

Regards,

F H Mughal

Well, I am not a native English speaker either, but when I put "Agricultural reuse" into Google, it gives 20,000 hits, so it can't be too wrong. I saw also the wording "agricultural reuse of wastewater".
An alternative wording would be "Reuse in agriculture", would you find that clearer? It gives 47,000 hits in Google, so twice as much.

NB: we are anyway thinking of possibly re-structuring & re-naming some of the categories and sub-categories of the Forum. For that, we will very soon (probably 1 October) launch a large user survey. So everyone is invited to also say in the survey (or here on the Forum) if they would like to see a re-structuring & renaming of some of the categories...

Regards,
Elisabeth

I'm afraid, Agricultural Reuse does not convey any sensible meaning to me. Perhaps, you can use some other term.

F H Mughal

It's actually in the sub-category called "Irrigation, greywater or wastewater reuse" which we felt - when we set up the forum structure - that it is a sub-category within "Agricultural reuse".

See the other sub-categories here on this page:
forum.susana.org/forum/categories

Do you disagree with this structure? (it is not set in stone of course)

Dear Elisabeth,

This has been grouped under "Agricultural Reuse." Shouldn't it be "Wastewater Reuse?"

Regards,

F H Mughal

Yes, I prefer as it is now - let's see if we will have some discussions for an additional "Solid Waste" category or to broaden "constructed wetlands" to (semi-)centralized options....
Cheers Dorothee

I have now made some subtle changes to the categories' names, positions and descriptions, based on Dorothee's suggestions. I hope it is a bit better now. (and I have removed the addtional text that appeared on the categories page, as that was just doubling up and taking up space on the screen).

Thanks for raising this, I am keen to hear what others think.

My view is mainly to sit back and to see which topics are started under "miscellaneous or various" and then to re-arrange accordingly.
The beauty of this forum is that the administrator (e.g. myself) can move topics around if they need to be moved.

For example: Christian Rieck started a discussion on faecal sludge management first under "miscellanous" systems. After he received a number of replies, we moved it one level up to its own category of "faecal sludge management".

So as the postings roll in, our categories will develop.
But I am very open to suggestions and we can easily adjust the current titles and descriptions.
I agree this one is not worded very well, needs changing:
- Various technologies (to be categorised later) that are sustainable can be discussed here.

What do the other users think?

Dear all,

I remember that we have spent quite a bit of time developing a concept for the categorization of the SuSana forum.
Even though I have been involved in this process, I still don't feel that much happy about the

Sanitation systems categorization:
- UDDTs (Urine diversion dehydration toilets)
- Biogas sanitation and DEWATS
- Constructed wetlands
- Mobile solutions
- Fecal sludge management
- Various technologies (to be categorised later) that are sustainable can be discussed here.

My two main comments are:
- The system approach, mentioned in the title is not reflected by the subcategories
- There are so many technologies AND /Or systems (this is not the same thing) that are just to be dumbed in "Miscellaneous systems" and it is not only about "being sustainable" but also "being optimized to become more sustainable".

One suggestion could be to categorize the chapter similar to the functional groups of the compendium of sanitation systems (user interface, collection and storage/treatment, conveyance, (semi-)centralized treatment, use and/or disposal).
I am not that happy with this idea neither, because if we want to have discussions about the sustainability of systems: we cannot separate the different functional groups of it.
Another suggestion would be to structure it as follows:
Sanitation systems
- Systems with urine diversion (dry and wet)
- Biogas sanitation
- (Semi-)centralized solutions (e.g. constructed wetland)
- Fecal Sludge
- Solid Waste
- Portable solutions
- Reuse
- Others

Of course, you can have biogas sanitation systems with urine diversion, a (semi-)centralised treatment and reuse aspects - but we always will have some overlaps...

What do you think about the present categorization? Are you happy with it? Would you have any suggestions for improvement?

Best

Dorothee