Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy

Abstract

Technical report on wastewater treatment and best practices in Morocco

Full text

Water Reuse
Within a Circular
Economy Context
Water Reuse Within a Circular Economy Context
GLOBAL WATER
SECURITY ISSUES
SERIES
2
2
Providing clean and secure water resources is key to achieving SDG 6,
"Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation
for all”. Water is essential for human activities and is critical to many sectors
of the economy, therefore its sustainable use is fundamental in a circular
economy model.
In accordance with the United Nations’ World Water Development Report
2019, global water demand is expected to increase by 20-30% by 2050 and
this increased demand will exacerbate water security issues generally.
Rapid urbanization and population growth are creating even more
challenges to supplying safe water. Climate Change is also resulting in more
frequent occurrences of oods and severe droughts, which in turn also
aect the availability of secure water supply and sanitation. In this context,
it is now more important than ever to look for non-conventional water
resources to ensure sucient water resources for all basic human needs.
According to UN-Water, 80% of wastewater ows back into the ecosystem
without being reused or treated, and 1.8 billion people are exposed to
contaminated drinking water sources as a result. Wastewater is a potential
resource that can ll this supply gap in industry and agriculture. Reused
water is not just an alternative source of water, it is an opportunity to
provide benets for many human activities.
This second GWSI series examines the critical role of water reuse in the
circular economy, demonstrating that wastewater and other marginal
water sources should be seen as resources that are too valuable to simply
ignore or discard. The case studies within this report explore how water
reuse can be a major tool and part of a strategy to achieve the SDGs. Water
reuse also presents an opportunity to develop sustainable water resources
that protect our communities and ecosystems.
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Intergovernmental
Hydrological
Programme
Intergovernmental
Hydrological
Programme
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
9789231 004131

Water Security and
the Sustainable
Development Goals
Water Reuse
within
a Circular Economy Context

Publishe d by the United Nations Edu cational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO), 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 S P, France,
and UNESCO In ternational Centre f or Water Security a nd Sustainable
Managemen t (i-WSSM), 125, Yuseon g-daero 1689 Beo n-gil, Yuseong-gu,
Daejeon, Republic of Korea
© UNESCO / UN ESCO i-WSSM 2020
ISBN UNESCO 978-92-3-100413-1
This public ation is available in Op en Access under t he Attributio n-Share
Alike 3.0 IGO (CC-B Y-SA 3.0 IGO) license (ht tp:// creativecommons .org/
licenses /by-sa/3.0/igo/ ) from the UNESCO Op en Access Reposi tory
(http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesdoc-open-access) and i-WSSM web
page (http://unesco-iwssm.org).
The pres ent license applie s exclusively to the te xt content of the pu blication.
For the use of a ny material not clearl y identified as b elonging to UNESCO
or UNESCO i- WSSM, prior per mission shall be r equested from: p ublication.
copyrigh t@unesco.org or UN ESCO Publishing, 7, place de Fo ntenoy, 75352
Paris 07 SP Fran ce, or iwssm@une sco-iwssm .org, 125, Yuseo ng-daero 1689
Beon-gil, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
The desig nations employed an d the presentat ion of material throug hout
this public ation do not imply th e expression of a ny opinion whatsoe ver
on the par t of UNESCO or UNESCO i -WSSM concerning t he legal status of
any countr y, territory, cit y or area or of its aut horities, or con cerning the
delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
The ideas an d opinions expres sed in this public ation are those of t he
author s and do not necessa rily reflec t the views of UNESCO o r UNESCO
i-WSSM an d do not commit thes e organizations .
Sugges ted citation: UNE SCO and UNESCO i-WS SM. 2020. Water Reuse wit hin
a Circular Econ omy Context (Ser ies II). Global Water Secu rity Issues (GW SI)
Serie s – No.2, UNESCO Publis hing, Paris.
Editors
Eunher Shin, UNESCO i-WS SM, Republic of Korea.
Seo Hyun g Choi, UNESCO i-WSS M, Republic of Korea.
Alexandros K. Makarigakis, UNESCO, France.
Okjoo Sohn, UNESCO, France.
Callum Clench, Internat ional Water Resource s Associatio n (IWRA), Portug al.
Mary Trudeau, Envirings I nc. and Internation al Water Resources
Asso ciation (IWRA), Cana da.
Peer Reviewers
Hassan Tolba Aboelnga, Unive rsity of Kass el and TH Köln, Germany.
Emmanuel Akpabio, Universit y of Dundee, United Kin gdom.
Amali Abraham Amali, TH Köln, Ger many.
Ximing Cai, University of Illinois, United State s.
Amgad Elmahdi, International Water Management Institute-MENA , Egypt.
Jan Hofman, Universit y of Bath, United Kingdo m.
Muhammad Wajid Ijaz, Go vernment of the Punjab -Lahore, Pakis tan.
Wendy Jepson, Texas A&M Univer sity, United States.
William R . Jones, U.S. Food an d Drug Administration Center fo r Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition, United States.
Kanokphan Jongjarb, Instit ute for Environment and H uman Security
and Univer sity of Bonn, Ger many.
Olivia Molden, Earth Econo mics, United State s.
James Nickum, University of London, United Kingdom.
Amrisha Pandey, International Law Scholar, India.
Charalampos Skoulikaris, Democritus University of Thra ce and Aristotle
University of Thes saloniki, Greece .
Maya Velis, Wo rld Bank, United Stat es.
Authors
Oriana Romano, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), France.
Luis Cecchi, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), France .
Diego J. Rod riguez, World Bank Group, Mexico.
Hector A. Serrano, World Bank Group, M exico.
Anna Delgado, World Bank G roup, Mexico.
Daniel Nolasco, World Bank Group, Me xico.
Gustavo Saltiel, World Bank Gro up, Mexico.
Cecilia Tortajada, National University of Sin gapore, Singapore .
Ishaan Bindal, National University of Singa pore, Singapore.
Elisa Stefan, Federal University of Paraná, Brazil.
Cristóvão Vicente Scapulatempo Fernandes, Federal Univer sity of
Paraná, Brazil.
Keng Han Tng, Unive rsity of New Sout h Wales Sydney, Australia.
Conna Leslie-Keefe, Unive rsity of New Sout h Wales Sydney, Australia.
Greg Leslie, University of N ew South Wales Sydney, Aus tralia.
Anas Tallou, Sultan Moulay Slimane U niversity of Ben i Mellal, Morocco.
Afaf Belabhir, University C adi Ayyad, Morocco.
Francisco Pedrero Salcedo, Campus Universitario de Espinardo, Spain.
Ayoub El Ghad raoui, Universit y Cadi Ayyad, Mo rocco.
Faissal Aziz, University Cadi Ay yad, Morocco.
Mohammad Al-Saidi, Qatar Universit y, Qatar.
Suddeh Dehnavi, TH-Köln—U niversity of App lied Sciences, G ermany.
Enrique Mesa-Pérez, University of Cordoba, Spain.
Alfonso Expósito, University of Seville, Spain.
Rafael Casielles, Bioazul, S.L., Spain.
Julio Berbel, University of Cordoba, Spain.
Emmanuel M. Akpabio, Universit y of Uyo, Nigeria.
Chaya Ravishankar, Xylem Wate r Solutions India Pv t Ltd., India.
Manasi Seshaiah, Insti tute for Social and Econ omic Change, India.
Lesley Rotich, Universi ty of Waterloo, Canada .
Larr y A. Swatuk, Univer sity of Waterloo, Ca nada.
Am Jang, Sung kyunkwan University, Republic of Korea.
Sung-Ju Im, Sungkyunkwan Univer sity, Republic of Korea.
Nguyen Du c Viet, Sungkyunkwan Unive rsity, Republic of Korea.
Nosheen Asghar, Sungkyunkwan Univer sity, Republic of Korea.
Acknowledgement
We acknowle dge with gratitude t he support prov ided by the
Internati onal Water Resources A ssociation (IWR A).
Cover and ins ide design: ©Junghwan K im, Pieona Book s & UNESCO i-WSSM
Cover photo (fr ont): ©juan hung-yen/Sh utterstoc k. Ikegami, Japan
Cover photo (back): ©Mariusz Szcz ygiel/Shutterstock . Wroclaw, Poland
Printed in Se oul, Republic of Kore a by Pieona Books

United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Water Reuse
within a Circular
Economy Context 2
GLOBAL WATER
SECURITY ISSUES
SERIES

Improved water resources management to access safe and clean water for
all is essential for basic human livelihood. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development emphasizes the critical role of water by addressing
the Goal 6 “Ensure access to water and sanitation for all” of the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs).
We are experiencing a global pandemic that is leading us to a new normal.
COVID-19 gave a significant adverse impact on our lives. Providing safe
and clean water for all is a critical key to fight this crisis. Still, one third of
people do not have access to safe drinking water, two out of five people
do not have a basic hand hygiene facility globally, which places the already
vulnerable in a higher risk.
The figures on access makes evident that the current system is not able
to meet the increasing demand of water due to climate change and rapid
urbanization. Lack of water availability will reduce crop production,
augment environmental degradation and social conflict. In this context,
unconventional water resources can play a critical role to achieve water
security. The availability of safe and clean water supplies, depends on how
this water is managed aer its use. Worldwide, 80% of wastewater flows
untreated back into the environment and 1.8 million people are exposed to
contaminated water for their drinking water source. Water reuse is
an opportunity. It provides new approaches to meet the increasing urban
demand. According to UN-Water, water reuse can further be a solution
to our response to the lack of water availability for crop production and
industrial development.
The Intergovernmental Hydrological Programme (IHP), as the only
intergovernmental programme of the United Nations system in water
sciences and education, aims at enhancing the scientific base through
research for sound decision making and related education and capacity
development. Currently, the eighth phase of the Programme focused on
water security. In line with UNESCO IHP’s strategy, the GWSI series provide
case studies to achieve water security.
Foreword
Abou Amani
Director, UNESCO Division of Water Sciences a.i.

Although there is a plethora of evidence related to the positive benefits from
water reuse, still not enough is being done. A comprehensive approach based on
scientifically driven solutions, appropriate legislation steps and regulations,
as well as institutional setting (governance), is essential to water being reused.
I wish to express our gratitude to i-WSSM, all authors, editors, and sta
involved in publishing this series, which I believe can become a stepping stone
to the path of Member States in achieving water security through water reuse.
Abou Amani
Director, UNESCO Division of Water Sciences a.i.
Abou Amani
Director, UNESCO Division of Water Sciences a.i.

Climate change, rapid urbanization, and population growth are threatening
the basic human rights to use sustainable water resources.
The United Nations emphasizes the importance of providing clean and safe
water resources as stated in the Goal 6 of the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs), “Ensure access to water and sanitation for all”.
Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the critical importance
of water security for preventing diseases. Hand hygiene is a very important
way to save lives and combat COVID-19, according to the World Health
Organization. The COVID-19 crisis has highlighted again the critical
importance of securing access to safe and clean water to help prevent
the spread of disease.
The UNESCO International Centre for Water Security and Sustainable
Management (i-WSSM) was established to contribute water security
strategies through research, education, and global networks. In line
with UNESCO’s eorts, the Centre publishes the Global Water Security
Issues (GWSI) Series to highlight the importance of knowledge-sharing to
enhance capacity building to support water security. Following the first
series, “Water Security and the Sustainable Development Goals”,
this series is entitled “Water Reuse within a Circular Economy Context”.
This second publication has been produced in collaboration with
the International Water Resources Association (IWRA). Water reuse is one
of the most important practices for water security and can be a solution
to meet the lack of availability of water resources.
Ensuring an adequate amount and acceptable quality of water is
fundamental for sustainable water resources. A lack of water availability
resulting from climate change and an increase in demand from
urbanization, population growth, and economic development, require
new solutions to reduce the gap between availability and demand.
The circular economy model aims to optimize resource use and reuse in
the economy and minimize the generation of waste. In this context,
the circular economy model for water resources primarily focuses on
more sustainable practices of using wastewater and other marginal water
sources.
Foreword
Yang Su Kim
Director of UNESCO i-WSSM

Even though water reuse has benefits that include improved agricultural
production, reduced energy consumption, and environmental benefits,
water reuse is not widely exploited due to a number of barriers, including
the conventional approach of seeking new freshwater sources rather than
reusing available water.
Non-traditional water resource use supports sustainable resource use and
oers options to face water crises. Water reuse has the potential to fill the gap
between availability and demand for agricultural, industrial and domestic
purposes, while also providing financial benefits. Appropriate water reuse
should be based on the state-of-the-art technology, standards, legislation and
sound knowledge. We sincerely hope that this GWSI series can support decision-
makers to include water reuse in their basket of solutions to achieve the SDGs.
Yang Su Kim
Director of UNESCO International Centre for Water Security and Sustainable Management
Yang Su Kim
Director of UNESCO i-WSSM

I. WATER REUSE AND PRINCIPLES
1
Water and the Circular Economy in Cities: Observations and Ways Forward 27
01 Megatrends in Cities 28
02 Circular Economy and Water: Technical and Governance Approaches 29
03 Water in Circular Economy Strategies in Cities 30
04 Ways Forward: A Governance Approach for The Circular Economy in the Water Sector 32
2
From Waste to Resource:
Shifting Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 37
01 Context 38
02 The Opportunities Presented by Circular Economy 40
03 Existing Challenges 42
04 Framework to Promote the Paradigm Shift 43
05 Conclusions and the Way forward for the Region 48
Contents
INTRODUCTION 20

3
Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 55
01 Introduction 56
02 Water Resources Management 57
03 Institutional and Legal Frameworks 57
04 NEWater 60
05 Final Remarks 61
Part I
Water Reuse and
Principles

II. DECISION-MAKING FOR WATER REUSE
4
Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 71
01 Introduction 72
02 The Current Paradigm of Urban Water Resources Management 72
03 Water Availability: The Decision-making Key 73
04 Case-study on Urbanized Brazilian River: Iguazu River at MRC 75
05 Results 78
06 Conclusions and Recommendations 82
5
Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 85
01 Introduction 86
02 Features of Industrial Water Recycling 89
03 Performance and System Evaluation 95
04 Discussion 99
05 Conclusions 101

6
Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 105
01 Introduction 106
02 Water Scarcity and Climate Change Impact on Africa 107
03 Reuse of Treated Wastewater as an Alternative, Moroccan Situation 109
04 Impact of Wastewater Reuse on the Soil, on Plants on the Water Ressources and Consumer Health 111
05 Wastewater Reuse and Acceptance Challenges from Moroccan Society 114
06 Wastewater Reuse Policy in Morocco 117
07 Conclusion 120
Part Il
Decision
Making for Water Reuse

III. UNDERSTANDING CHALLENGES OF WATER REUSE
7
Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 127
01 Introduction 128
02 Marginal Water Resources, Circular Economy and Degrowth – Conceptual Remarks 129
03 Benecial (Re)Use of Marginal Water in Iran and the GCC Region - Wastewater Reuse as a Case 131
04 Directions and Common Challenges for Urban Food Production 135
05 Conclusions 137
8
SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 141
01 Introduction 142
02 Background and Case Study Description 143
03 Material and Methods 144
04 Results 145
05 Discussion and Concluding Remarks 151

9
Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 155
01 Introduction 156
02 Nigeria’s Water Resources Availability and Utilization Practices 157
03 Methods 159
04 Urban settlements and wastewater 159
05 Wastewater and Irrigation Agriculture 160
06 Wastewater and Industries 160
07 Practical and Institutional Challenges of Wastewater Reuse in Nigeria 161
08 Discussion and Concluding remarks 163
Part Ill
Understanding
Challenges of Water Reuse

IV. WATER REUSE AND KEY STAKEHOLDERS
10
Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers
– Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 169
01 Introduction 170
02 Research Objectives 174
03 Methodology 175
04 Findings 178
05 Recommendations 183
11
Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reuse in Nairobi, Kenya 191
01 Introduction 192
01 Methodology 193
02 Results 194
03 Discussion 197
04 Conclusion and Recommendation for Future Research 199
Part lV
Water Reuse and
Key Stakeholders

V. TECHNOLOGY FOR WATER REUSE
12
The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation
to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 207
01 Introduction 208
02 Water Security and Sustainable Development 208
03 Advanced Solutions for Water-Related Issues 209
04 Application of Advanced Water Treatment Technology to Adapt to Water Scarcity 211
05 Case Studies 213
06 Future Perspectives 216
07 Conclusion 216
Part V
Technology
for Water Reuse

Figures
Figure 2-1 Access to sanitation services in selected countries of Latin America and the Caribbean region, 2017 38
Figure 2-2 Potential revenue streams and savings from implementing resource recovery projects 40
Figure 3-1 Water cycle in Singapore 60
Figure 4-1 Water Availability Concept 73
Figure 4-2 Ilustrated water pathways possibilities 74
Figure 4-3 Iguazu River Location 75
Figure 4-4 Current framework of the waterways at the study point 76
Figure 4-5 Strategy for obtaining BOD concentration serie by regression 76
Figure 4-6 Strategy for obtaining BOD concentration serie simulating the upstream released loads 77
Figure 4-7 Closing Loop with water reuse in the study case 77
Figure 4-8 River Water Availability (95% frequency monthly flow serie) 79
Figure 5-1 Changes in decade average rainfall patterns and location of water intensive industries in Australia 86
Figure 5-2 Percentage of water recycling in Australia with projection to 2030 88
Figure 5-3A Water Recycling Processes Utilised in the Beer Brewing Industry 91
Figure 5-3B Water Recycling Processes Utilised in the Pulp and Paper Industry 91
Figure 5-3C Internal and external water recycling in Poultry processing. 91
Figure 5-4 Membrane Filter Permeate Turbidity for Scald Tank and Spin Chiller in Poultry Abattoir
over 30-Day Performance Test 95
Figure 5-5
Sankey Diagram Comparison of Energy Consumption for End-of-Pipe and Internal Recycling in Poultry Abattoir
96
Figure 5-6 Dissolved Organic Removal Eiciency in Paper Mill Recycling by Ion Exchange, Activated Carbon and
Nanofiltration 96
Figure 5-7 Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis of Water and Energy Recovery Technology Implementation 97
Figure 5-8 Life Cycle Assessment Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Emission for End-of-Pipe and Internal Recycling
in Poultry Abattoir 98
Figure 6-1 Land use and population growth in North Africa 107
Figure 6-2 Trend of urban wastewater volume produced in Morocco 109
Figure 6-3 Distribution of dierent kinds of wastewater treatment technologies existing in Morocco 110
Figure 8-1 Strengths relevance 146
Figure 8-2 Weaknesses relevance 147
Figure 8-3 Opportunities relevance 148
Figure 8-4 Threats relevance 150
Figure 10-1 Cauvery Water Supply services in the BBMP area (in MLD) 171
Figure 10-2 Figure 10-2 Capacity of Private Sewage Treatment Plants installed from 2009 to 2015 172
Figure 10-3 Source BWSSB portal 173
Figure 10-4 Schematic representation of a Ward with localities of varying demands 174
Figure 10-5 Stages and Processes for attaining blue circular economy 174
Figure 10-6 Sample distribution based on the mode of supply of water 175
Figure 10-7 BWSSB Advertisement for selling reclaimed water 177
Figure 10-8 Every day, mud streets are washed to suppress dust using a hosepipe from own borewell 179
Figure 10-9 To the extreme le of the image, we see a lady drawing Rangoli 179
Figure 12-1 Water-Food-Energy Nexus 208
Figure 12-2 Forward osmosis process 210
Figure 12-3 Applications of forward osmosis 211
Figure 12-4 Applications and advantages of FO hybrid systems 212
Figure 12-5 The world’s first commercial FO plant in Oman 213
Figure 12-6 FO-RO hybrid system in Korea 213
Figure 12-7 Water cost according to the particular system 213
Figure 12-8 Pilot-scale of FDFO-NF hybrid system in Australia 214

Tables
Table 2-1 SDG 6 targets and indicators 41
Tab le 4 -1 Global Water Availability Analysis 80
Tab le 5 -1 Market size, employment and water demand of selected water intensive manufacturing industries 87
Table 5-2 Modality of recycling and typical characteristics wastewater for selected water intensive manufacturing
industries 90
Table 5-3 Summary of features of legislation governing internal industrial water recycling in food and beverage
applications at national and state level 94
Tab le 6 -1 Comparison of the yield obtained by irrigation using treated wastewater and that obtained
by using fresh water 112
Table 6-2 Physical and geometrical characteristics of the wastewater treatment process of the M’Zar WWTP 116
Table 6-3 Principal Authorities and oices managing water sector and resources in Morocco 117
Tab le 7-1 Water reuse sources for dierent reuse purposes in the Gulf region 130
Table 7-2 Key water use and reuse statistics for Iran, in million cubic meters (MCM) 131
Table 7-3 Key water use and reuse statistics for GCC countries for the year 2016, in million cubic meters (MCM) 133
Tab le 8 -1 Percentage of wastewater according to the point of discharge 143
Table 8-2 Strength aspects 146
Table 8-3 Weaknesses aspects 147
Table 8-4 Opportunities aspects 148
Table 8-5 Threats items 150
Tab le 9-1 Wastewater reuse categories 156
Table 9-2 Wastewater sources and possible contaminating elements 162
Table 9-3 Institutional authorities for wastewater management 162
Tab le 10-1 Water related challenges (Author’s compilation) 170
Table 10-2 Water supply and groundwater withdrawal (as of year 2013) by Water Supply Zone 172
Table 10-3 Sewage Treatment infrastructure gaps for domestic sector 172
Table 10-4 Quantity of reclaimed water sold 173
Table 10-5 Percentage distribution of dierent water users within the Survey Sample 176
Table 10-6 Water demand and wastewater generated by dierent end users 178
Tabl e 10-7 Total water demand in the sampled commercial units 178
Table 10-8 Challenges for estimating demand of non-consumptive uses 179
Table 10-9 Classification of tankers catering to dierent consumers 180
Table 10-10 Classification of tankers based on source of water supply 180
Tab le 10-11 Classification based on years of starting the business 180
Tab le 10-12 Classification based on type of capacities or volume of water 180
Tab le 10-13 Cost per tanker load supplied to dierent land use types 180
Tab le 10-14 Willingness of Tanker vendors to buy reclaimed water 181
Tab le 10-15 Reasons for not buying reclaimed water by Tanker vendors 181
Tab le 10-16 Feasibility of public private partnership for formalizing reclaimed water supply through tankers 183
Tab le 10-17 Challenges for Reclaimed water usage for non-consumptive uses 184
Tab le 11-1 Average Grey/Wastewater Household System Cost in The First Year 195
Tab le 12-1 Conventional technologies for water treatment and reuse 210

Abbreviations & Acronyms
ADB Asian Development Bank
ANA National Water Agency (Brazil)
AQIS Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service
AQUASTAT FAO Global Information System on Water
Resources and Agricultural Water Management
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
ASP Activated Sludge Process
ATD Association Tissilte pour le Développement
AWTP Advanced Water Treatment Plant
BBMP Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (India)
BOD Biological Oxygen Demand
BOM Bureau of Meteorology (Australia)
BWSSB Bengaluru Water Supply and Sewerage Board
(India)
CCP Critical Control Point
CFE Federal Electricity Commission (Mexico)
CMF Ceramic Microfiltration
CNEREE Centre National d’Etudes et de Recherche sur
l’Eau et l’Energi (Morocco)
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
CONAGUA National Water Commission (Mexico)
CTA Cellulose Triacetate
CTLSP Local Technical Committee of the Project
Supervision (Morocco)
CWSS Cauvery Water Supply Scheme (India)
DEA Oice of Water and Wastewater Network
(Morocco)
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DOC Dissolved Organic Carbon
DOM Dissolved Organic Matter
DPA Provincial Technical Department (Morocco)
DPR Department of Petroleum Resources (Nigeria)
DS Draw Solution
DSRM Direction Régionale de Souss-Massa (Morocco)
DTSS Deep Tunnel Sewerage System
eGHG Equivalent Greenhouse Gas Emission
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United
Nations
FDFO Fertilizer Drawn Forward Osmosis
FGN Federal Government ofNigeria
FO Forward Osmosis
FOMBR Forward Osmosis Membrane Bioreactor
GAC Granular Activated Carbon
GCC Gulf Cooperation Council
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHG Greenhouse Gas Emission
GLA Giga Litres per Annum
GRI Global Reporting Initiative
GWP Global Water Par tnership
HACCP Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points
HLPW High-Level Panel on Water
HRI Health Risk Index
IBGE Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics
IEA International Energ y Agency
IER Ion Exchange Resin
IHP Intergovernmental Hydrological Programme
(UNESCO)
IMF International Monetary Fund
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística (Spain)
IWA International Water Association
IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management
i-WSSM International Centre for Water Security and
Sustainable Management (South Korea)
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KNBS Kenya National Bureau of Statistics
KSPCB Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (India)
LAC Latin America and the Caribbean
LCA Life Cycle Assessment
LCI Life Cycle Inventory
LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
MEWR Ministry of Environment and Water Resources
(Singapore)
MF Microfiltration
MoUD Ministry of Urban Development (India)
NEA National Environment Agency (Singapore)
NEMA National Environmental Management Authority
(Kenya)
NESREA National Environmental Standards and
Regulations Enforcement Agency (Nigeria)
NF Nanofiltration
NWS National Water Strategy (Morocco)
O&M Operations and Maintenance
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development
OHT Ove rhea d Tan k

ONEE National Oice of Electricity and Water (Morocco)
PIR Policy, Institutional, and Regulatory
PNA National Liquid Sanitation and Wastewater
Treatment Program (Morocco)
PPCP Pharmaceuticals, Personal Care Product
PPP Public-Private Partnership
PREM Sustainability of Water Resources (Morocco)
PUB Public Utilities Board (Singapore)
R&D Research and Development
RADEEMA Autonomous Agency of Distribution of Water and
Electricity of Marrakech (Morocco)
RCF Recycled Fibre Content
RFC Recycled Fibre Content
RO Reverse Osmosis
RWMP Recycled Water Management Plan
SAP Structural Adjustment Programme
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SEEA System of Environmental and Economic
Accounting
SFA Singapore Food Authority
SS Suspended Solids
STP Sewage Treatment Plant
SUWANU Sustainable water treatment and nutrient reuse
options (Europe)
SWOT Strengths-Weakness-Opportunities-Threats
TBL Triple Bottom Line
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
TMP Thermomechanical Process
TSS Total Suspended Solids
UF Ultrafiltration
UN United Nations
UNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and
Social Aairs
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
UNICEF United Nations Internationals Children’s Fund
UN-Water United Nations-Water
USAID United States Agency for International
Development
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
WARMA Water Resources Management Authority (Kenya)
WDI World Development Indicators
WEF World Economic Forum
WFE Water, Food and Energy Nexus
WHO World Health Organization
WRT Wastewater Treatment/Reuse System
WTP Water Purification
WWAP World Water Assessment Programme
WWT Wastewater Treatment
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

The theme for this second publication of the UNESCO i-WSSM Global Water
Security Issues is water reuse within a circular economy context. The circular
economy concept challenges the accepted paradigm of waste generation
from resource use. Instead of a linear trajectory from product-to-use-to-
disposal, a circular economy is careful to use resources in a way that allows
for their reuse, while also benefiting from other products or consequences
that result from those processes, such as using the heat generated during
processing a resource. Making a transition from the traditional linear model
to implementation of a circular economy model for water reuse will require
technologies, facilitating policy and governance environments, and public
engagement in all connected sectors and domains.
Water reuse is central to implementation of a circular economy model
because water plays innumerable roles throughout the economy. Moreover,
the importance of water cannot be overstated since it is a pillar of
development, provides essential services for human health and safety, and
supports life on this planet. Water reuse is a key strategy for water security.
As discussed in several of the chapters in this publication, water reuse is
necessary to meet the challenge of increasing water demands at a time
when the changing climate is forcing changes to the water cycle.
As such, water reuse is also essential to achieve the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), in particular SDG 6, Ensure availability and
sustainable management of water and sanitation for all, SDG 11, Make cities
and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, and SDG
12, Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
UNESCO Intergovernmental Hydrological Programme (IHP) recognizes
water security is a key challenge for the 21st century during its 8th phase.
The IHP works to build a scientific knowledge base for water resources
management and governance, and facilitates education and capacity
building. To develop tools to adapt to changing water availability, the IHP
engages in, and supports, hydrological and socioeconomic research.
The current phase of the IHP focuses on thematic areas that include:
addressing water scarcity and quality; water and human settlements of
the future; and, water education as a water security strategy.
This UNESCO i-WSSM Global Water Security Issues is one initiative to
translate science into action for a sustainable future.
The circular economy concept is discussed through a range of lenses in this
publication. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Introduction

(OECD) conceives of the circular economy as a guiding framework, comprised
of people, policies and places, that can provide a systemic and transformative
approach to making eicient use of natural resources and optimizing their reuse
(Chapter 1, Romano and Cecchi). The advantages of resource recovery and reuse
can leverage the environmental and health benefits of wastewater treatment
while also oering economic and financial opportunities from recovered energy,
water, biosolids, and other resources to help sustain the operating costs of
the systems (Chapter 2, Rodriguez et al.). Coupled with the circular economy
concept can be the idea that economic growth is not an ultimate and absolute
objective. Instead, material flows are narrowed and slowed through reduction,
and greater importance is placed on increasing the recirculation of materials,
including marginal water resources such as wastewater and stormwater (Chapter
7, Al-Saidi and Dehnavi). A System of Environmental and Economic Accounting can
be applied to account for water and wastewater flows within a system boundary,
for example a municipal ward of a populous city (Chapter 10, Ravishankar and
Manasi). Water resource use extends into the waterbodies themselves since waste
disposal to water takes up assimilative capacity that would otherwise be available
to downstream users (Chapter 4, Stefan). One of the goals of the circular economy
and water reuse identified in several Chapters is to reduce pressure on freshwater
resources.
The water sector has long applied circular economy principles to both technical
and institutional aspects of water resources, as stated by Romano and Cecchi
(Chapter 1), but there remain many challenges. Each of the Chapters in this
publication addresses multiple challenges of governance, social and/or technical
aspects of water reuse, while also profiling international best practices.
Wastewater can be treated to dierent qualities to meet specific needs but,
to close the funding gap, it may be necessary to engage the private sector
in a revised value proposition that shis from waste production to resource
recovery (Chapter 2, Rodriguez et al.). Strategic spending to improve wastewater
performance and resource recovery, while considering the full life cycle of
the infrastructure, is one step within an array of institutional, economic,
regulatory, social, and technological challenges that must be overcome to
achieve the needed paradigm shi. This challenge sounds daunting but it is not
impossible. The success of Singapore’s water reuse from municipal sources for
potable and non-potable uses since 2003 is attributable to a comprehensive
approach to water security that includes institutional and legal frameworks,
which have evolved over time (Chapter 3, Tortajada and Bindal). Singapore
provides a benchmark for successful water reuse from municipal sources.

Decision-making for water reuse must take into account many variables.
For instance, to understand water availability, it is not suicient to know
only the volume of water available. A case study in Brazil highlights the
importance of integrating quantity, quality and purpose in decision-
making to assess water availability and for decision-making on water reuse
investments by municipal and industrial stakeholders (Chapter 4, Stefan).
This case study also raises the issue of closing the loop on soluble materials
carried in water, some of which have their own cycles in nature (e.g. nitrogen
and phosphorus). An analysis of water reuse by water-intensive industries
in Australia profiles the utility of assessment tools, including triple bottom
line and Life Cycle Assessment, to make decisions on investments in water
recycling capacity in lieu of traditional waste treatment and disposal
(Chapter 5, Han et al.). This holistic analysis for several water-intensive
industries in Australia highlights the importance of considering energy,
wastewater quality and other aspects in a circular economy approach.
In Morocco, wastewater can provide a much needed source of water for
crop irrigation, but mitigation of the potential risks of soil contamination
and compromised human health require collaboration among scientists
and policy makers to build capacity and elaborate policies and laws
pertaining to wastewater treatment and reuse (Chapter 6, Tallou et al.).
Public education, acceptance and engagement in water reuse activities
are key to fully deploying reuse and recovery strategies. A comparative
review of the potential for marginal water to support sustainable local food
production in Iran and Gulf Cooperation Council countries identifies
the requirement to appropriately identify, analyze, treat and deliver water
that must then be accepted by end-users and society (Chapter 7, Al-Saidi
and Dehnavi). A Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT)
analysis undertaken to define a regional strategic plan to promote urban
reclaimed water for irrigation in the region of Andalusia in Southern
Spain, where reuse practices lag other parts of the country, identified
challenges and barriers, including acceptance among food-chain agents
and the general public, and the higher cost of reclaimed water for irrigators
(Chapter 8, Mesa-Pérez et al.). In Nigeria, wastewater reuse has sustained
urban farming and many other activities but, as a literature review reveals,
Nigerians in the low income category are exposed to environmental
and public health risks from wastewater reuse and there is an urgent
need for organizational and regulatory frameworks to ensure appropriate
treatment for the reuse practices already established in the country
(Chapter 9, Akpabio).

Surveys of stakeholder groups with particular interests can provide insights to
attitudes and barriers, thereby informing policy development that can address
specific needs of key influencers. Primary data collection through surveys of water
tanker suppliers to a peri-urban ward in India indicates there is some potential for
tankers to supply reused water to meet non-potable water needs of end-users,
who were also surveyed (Chapter 10, Ravishankar and Manasi).
A next step in the process is to more broadly understand public acceptance and to
use the peri-urban pilot testing model to scale up to a city wide practice. A survey
of government oicials, technical experts and greywater users in a municipal
suburb in Kenya indicates there is promising potential for grey and wastewater
recycling to reduce freshwater demands and to improve ecological conditions
by reducing the volume of untreated wastewater released to the environment
(Chapter 11, Rotich and Swatuk). While there has been significant progress
over the past years with regards to water reuse policy in Kenya, the survey also
revealed a need for government regulation and standardization of the industry,
and highlighted some barriers due to knowledge and attitudes towards recycled
water and the associated technologies.
As the requirement for holistic decision-making is expanded, the need for
treatment technologies that can meet the challenges of water quality and eicient
energy use become more apparent. Membrane technologies have been in use for
some time where superior water quality is required for reuse, but forward osmosis
technology in hybrid combination with other processes is an emerging option for
lower energy consumption that oers higher water quality production (Chapter
12, Jang et al.).
This edition of the Global Water Security Issues provides examples, through case
studies, of policy and technical innovations for water reuse, wastewater recycling
and reduced water consumption that recognize the true value of water and close
production loops. Biofuels, energy, fertilizers and high-grade reclaimed water
are some of the recovered products that provide inputs to other processes.
Institutional and governance regimes that are rising to the challenge to update
regulations, create markets for recovered products, and address potential quality,
health and safety issues are profiled. Rather than being a burden,
with the necessary planning on a water basin or aquifer basis, marginal water
resources can provide socio-economic opportunities that close the resource use
loop while providing essential resources on local and regional scales.
Successful pilot projects may be scaled up if the social and economic conditions
exist within a governance framework amenable to a circular economy.

©723100948/Shutterstock.
I
Water Reuse and Principles

©Juliengrondin/Dreamstime.

1 Water and the Circular Economy in Cities: Observations and Ways Forward 27
1
Water and the Circular Economy in Cities:
Observations and Ways Forward
Oriana Romano and Luis Cecchi
Oriana Romano, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), France.
e-mail: oriana.romano@oecd.org
Luis Cecchi, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), France.
e-mail: luis.cecchi@oecd.org
Abstract
By 2050, the global population will reach 9 billion people, 55% of which will be living in cities. Water demand will increase by
55% worldwide, in addition to the demand for energy and food. As such, wasteful use of water should be avoided. Instead,
water should be reused or transformed into energy and secondary materials, following circular economy principles.
The paper explores the connection between water and the circular economy in cities and their surroundings. In par ticular,
it provides a literature review on how the water sector is included in circular economy strategies in cities, metropolitan areas
and regions. Based on the preliminar y findings of the OECD report “The circular economy in cities and regions: Synthesis report”
(forthcoming), the paper argues that beyond technical solutions, governance conditions are key for the water sector to apply
circular economy principles, eiciently and eectively.
Keywords
Circular economy, water management, governance, cities, water reuse

28 Water Reuse and Principles
01
Megatrends in Cities
Eicient and eective water management in cities, aiming
to provide quality services to people and ecosystems, can
be jeopardised by megatrends such as demographic growth
and climate change, requiring a rethinking of how water as
a resource is used, reused and transformed. In addition,
investment needs and global frameworks calling for greater
environmental sustainability and inclusiveness make the case
for innovative practices in the water sector.
By 2050, the global population will reach 9 billion people,
55% of which will be living in cities (OECD/European
Commission, 2020). Water demand will raise by 55%
worldwide, in addition to the demand for energy and food.
Cities consume almost
two-thirds of global energy
(IEA, 2016a), while 70%
more food will be required
in the coming decades, to
feed a growing and richer
population (FAO, 2009).
As such, according to
circular economy principles,
wasteful use of water should
be avoided. Instead water
reuse and recycling practices
should contribute to make
the most of water resources
once used.
Due to climate change, the number of cities at risk of droughts
and floods is likely to increase in the coming decades.
By 2050, four billion people will be living in water-stressed
areas (OECD, 2012). Recently, the City of Cape Town (South
Africa) has been close to the “Day Zero”, the risk of running out
of water, due to persistent drought and external factors such
as climate change and rapid population growth.
In 2016, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo (Brazil) were hit by
the worst drought in 84 years (OECD, 2015a). According to the
Greater London Authority (United Kingdom), the city is likely
to face worrisome water shortages by 2040 (Water UK, 2016).
Similarly, by 2050 more people will be at risk from floods:
from 1.2 billion today to 1.6 billion (OECD, 2012). In 2019,
the City of Venice (Italy) suered from the worse flood since
1966 (Tide Forecasting and Reporting Centre, 2019).
Water risks originate from multiple causes and cannot be
solved through one-size fits all approach. The complexity of
the challenges requires a systemic approach that would take
into account water policies in relation to other ones, such
as land use and spatial planning.
Significant investment is required to renovate and improve
water infrastructure, such as water supply networks.
According to OECD (2016), a total of 92% of surveyed cities
(48 cities from OECD and non-OECD countries) reported
significant challenges in terms of updating and renewing
water infrastructure. Due to obsolete infrastructure and
leakages in water supply systems, an average of 21% of water
is lost before distribution. Globally, by 2050, the required
investment for water supply and sanitation is estimated
at 6.7 trillion dollars. This bill can triple by 2030 taking
into account a wider range of water-related infrastructure
(OECD, 2016a). As the future water infrastructure still has to
be constructed, there is an opportunity to develop them
avoiding linear lock-ins based on the “take, make, waste”
logic.
The urgency of the challenges in cities calls for innovative
practices and a long-term vision that makes the best
use (and re-use) of available resources. The Sustainable
Development Goal (SDG) 11 calls for inclusive, safe, resilient
and sustainable cities. This is not achievable without
acceptable levels of water security (Romano & Akhmouch,
2019). The circular economy can provide a systemic and
transformative approach to achieve this vision (OECD,
forthcoming).
By 2050,
the global
population will
reach 9 billion
people, 55% of
which will be living
in cities.

1 Water and the Circular Economy in Cities: Observations and Ways Forward 29
02
Circular Economy and Water: Technical and
Governance Approaches
The water sector has been applying circular principles for
long. According to the literature review two main approaches
can be identified in relation to the water and sanitation sector
and the circular economy: a technical approach and
a governance one.
The technical approach focuses on technical innovations
for water reuse, wastewater recycling and reduced water
consumption, aiming to keep the value of water at its highest
for as long as possible, generate new inputs and material,
while optimising production costs (e.g. at industry level)
and closing loops. For example, these activities consist of
generating biofuels from sewage sludge to provide energy
(Nghiem et al., 2017; Tyagi & Lo, 2013; Venkatesh & Elmi, 2013);
using wastewater bio solids as an organic fertiliser, able to
preserve the soil, while improving water quality through
the recovery of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) from
wastewater eluents (Arup, 2018; Wielemaker et al., 2018;
Wolsterdorf, et al., 2018; Norse, 2012); or using wastewater
sludge for the manufacture of construction materials forming
part of aggregates, bricks, cement, mor tars or concrete (Smol
et al., 2015; Eliche-Quesada et al., 2011; Asakura et al., 2009;
Maddison et al., 2009). Water can be treated for reuse
in recharging aquifers, supplying agricultural systems,
as well as for refrigeration in industrial processes, irrigation
of parks and gardens, street washing, and even for drinking
water. For example, in Singapore, in 2003, the Public Utilities
Board (PUB), Singapore’s National Water Agency, introduced
NEWater, a high-grade reclaimed water produced from
treated used water, which exceeds the drinking water
standards set by the World Health Organization and the US
Environmental Protection Agency. NEWater is used primarily
for non-potable industrial purposes at wafer fabrication
parks, industrial estates and commercial buildings (OECD,
2016a). In the City of Granada (Spain), the bio factory
transformed the concept of a wastewater treatment plant by
producing energy and new materials. As such, the bio factory
aims at : i) moving from being big consumers of energy to
energy producers; ii) reusing treated water rather than only
purifying and returning it to the natural environment; iii)
transforming waste into resources, rather than dumping it
into the landfill. The bio factory’s goal is to reach zero waste,
zero energy and zero emissions by 2020 (OECD, Forthcoming).
In 2019, the bio factory almost reached its 100% energy
self-suiciency goal; 18.91 million m3 of treated water have
been reused for irrigation and for the maintenance of the
minimum ecological flow of the local Genil River. In addition,
from the 16 525 metric tonnes of fresh sludge material
produced in the bio factory in 2019, 14.3% was reused for
compost and 85.7% for direct application in the agricultural
sector (Emasagra, 2019; OECD, Forthcoming).
The governance approach addresses the circular transition
in the water sector through institutional and organisational
aspects, such as regulation, policy coherence, and the
capacity to innovate and adapt to changes.
Some authors showcase the need for updating the
regulation of water infrastructure systems (Golthau, 2014;
Monstadt, 2007) to scale up technical solutions (e.g. waste
water treatment by halophyte filters, membrane filters for
extracting medicinal residues in hospital wastewater,
or extracting phosphates from the sewage system) and create
a market for secondary products (Giezen, 2018; Kirchher et al.,
2017; Van Doren et al., 2016).
At European level, as indicated by the Circular Economy Action
Plan adopted in 2020, the EU Water Reuse Regulation will
encourage circular approaches to water reuse in agriculture.
The European Commission will also develop an Integrated
Nutrient Management Plan and consider reviewing directives
on wastewater treatment and sewage sludge (European
Commission, 2020).
The recent regulation on minimum requirements for water
reuse (European Parliament, 2020) aims to guarantee that
reclaimed water is safe for agricultural irrigation, while
promoting the circular economy and suppor ting adaptation
to climate change. As part of the debates preceding the
Regulation, EU Urban Partnership on Circular Economy1
highlighted the need for reusing water for urban purposes
(e.g. street and car cleaning and green spaces irrigation)
and demanded a clearer risk assessment procedure and
cooperation between industrial and municipal wastewater
treatment plants and food producers to create positive
industrial symbiosis2(EU Partnership on Circular Economy,
2019).
Others scholars and organisations highlight the need to foster
policy coherence across sectors within a system approach.
For example, the Ellen Mac Arthur Foundation conceives
water as a sub-system of a “system of systems” including
environmental, agricultural, industrial and municipal
systems. As such, it emphasises the importance of applying
a systems perspective to enable policy makers to develop
the right governance tools to meet the future water demands
while creating value from resource eiciency and energy
(Arup, 2018).
New distributed, o-the-grid, circular solutions challenge
public authorities, utilities and stakeholders at large to adapt
to contexts in constant evolution. For example, in Amsterdam
(The Netherlands), the former industrial site of Buiksloterham
was transformed into a residential one, applying circular
economy principles, including decentralised sanitation
systems. This raised a number of governance related
questions, in particular for the water operator WATERNET
in terms of use of public resources, scaling up the practice
and on the role of institutions. As such, it was argued that
the more people invest in decentralised systems, the more
the cost of central systems will raise for those who remain
connected to the central system and do not have the option

30 Water Reuse and Principles
to switch, while there are also high investment sunk costs to
take into account (OECD, 2019).
In developing and emerging economies, enabling conditions
and right investments could leapfrog developed countries
in digital and materials innovation aimed at sustainable
production and consumption patterns. (Preston et al., 2019).
03
Water in Circular Economy Strategies in Cities
Governments at all levels are increasingly considering
the circular economy as a new socio-economic paradigm
aiming to foster eicient use of resources by minimising
waste. As such, it can provide a policy response to the above-
mentioned water challenges. Many countries, regions and
cities in Europe started this process due to the adoption
by the European Commission of a policy package to support
the EU’s transition to a circular economy, and related
frameworks, such as the European Green Deal for sustainable
growth (European Commission, 2015 , 2019b, 2019c).
By looking specifically at the role of the circular economy in
cities and regions, the OECD (Forthcoming) defines it as
a guiding framework whereby: ser vices are provided making
eicient use of natural resources as primary material and
optimising their re-use; economic activities are planned and
carried out in a way to close, slow and narrow loops across
value chains and infrastructure is designed and built to avoid
linear locks-in. These sections provide examples of how
the water and sanitation sector is included in circular
economy strategies in cities.
According to the preliminar y results of the OECD Survey on
the Circular Economy in Cities and Regions (OECD,
Forthcoming), a total of 66% of the surveyed circular economy
initiatives identified the water and sanitation sector as key for
the circular economy, aer the waste sector (78%).
Four cities (Amsterdam, Barcelona Metropolitan Area,
Rotterdam and Paris) and a region (Flanders), from those
contributing to the OECD Survey, have incorporated water and
sanitation into their circular economy initiatives: Amsterdam
focused on closing local nutrient cycles; Barcelona
Metropolitan Area prioritised the creation of a water cluster
and provided funds for research and development (R&D) in
the sector. Water-related initiatives in Flanders consist of
supporting companies in closing water loops and facilitating
demonstration projects. In Rotterdam, actions concentrate
in the health sector through filtering wastewater, while Paris
is advancing in wastewater energy recovery to heat and
cool public buildings and using technology to monitor water
consumption in green public spaces.
3.1. The Netherlands: The Cities of Amsterdam
and Rotterdam
The strategy “A circular economy in the Netherlands by
2050” (2016) considers key the interplay of the water sector
and agro-food and calls for a revision of the EU fertilisers’
regulation to foster the use of fertilisers from secondary
The recent
regulation
on minimum
requirements for
water reuse
aims to guarantee
that reclaimed
water is safe
for agricultural
irrigation, while
promoting the
circular economy
and supporting
adaptation to
climate change.

1 Water and the Circular Economy in Cities: Observations and Ways Forward 31
materials, such as base materials from wastewater (e.g.
phosphate or sludge and bio solids). It also encourages the
adaptation of local plans to disconnect rainwater collection
and install green roofs in new construction
In Amsterdam, the “Building blocks for the new strategy
Amsterdam Circular 2020-2025” (2019) identifies the need
to close local nutrient cycles from biomass and water flows.
Water reuse allows nutrients recovering (e.g. phosphates from
sewage) and reduces the use of synthetic fertilisers in the city
and its surroundings. The city intends to raise awareness on
the benefits of water reuse targeting students and citizens.
A single-person household consumes 52,000 litres of water
per year (on average 133.4 per day) (Waternet, 2019).
The strategy also includes the creation of closed water cycles
in buildings to reduce the consumption of drinkable water.
Circular procurement is signalled as a key tool to promote
these changes. Key stakeholders identified in the strategy
are the utility companies, to facilitate innovation for nutrient
recovery from wastewater, and public housing associations3
for the implementation of closed water systems in buildings.
The strategy foresees the use of organic waste and
wastewater sludge as fertilisers in local peri-urban and urban
farming to close local nutrient cycles, reduce transportation
costs and increase the water absorption capacity of the city
by expanding green spaces.
In the Rotterdam’s “Circularity Programme 2019- 2023” (2019)
water is a key part of the health sector focus, one of the four
strategic sectors identified in the circular strategy (alongside
construction, green streams such as organic waste, and
consumer goods). The city is working with hospitals to make
the health care sector more sustainable by filtering medicine
residues4 (e.g. medicine waste, hormone disruptors’ remnants
and cleaning agents) from wastewater and using them to
generate energy (biogas through anaerobic digestion)5.
Two hospitals in the city are already doing this (the Franciscus
Gasthuis and the Erasmus MC).
3.2. Spain: The Barcelona Metropolitan Area
Water reuse is one of the main lines of action of the Spanish
strategy for the circular economy to 2030 (España Circular,
2030)6, alongside with production, consumption, waste
management and secondary raw materials. Water reuse is
explicitly incorporated as an individual axis, due to
the importance of water in cities with a Mediterranean
climate. Four main water reuse-related actions are planned in
the Spanish strategy:
• Update of the regulatory frameworks on wastewater and
sewage sludge reuse to guarantee that all sludge is treated
in an appropriate and safe way;
• Support irrigation projects including wastewater reuse;
• Include water reuse actions in River Basin Management
Plans;
• Promote research to establish the minimum quality criteria
required for water reuse.
The Spanish government conceives wastewater reuse
as a valuable tool to reduce the actual pressure for water
in the country.
The Barcelona Metropolitan Area, in its “Green and Circular
Economy Promotion Programme” (2019), incorporates the
water sector as key for the circular economy, along with solar
energy, energy eiciency, recycling and food. The Programme
provides funding for R&D and the development of pilot
projects, including water management. Finally, it identifies
innovation oppor tunities related to water in the food sector
(using alternative resources like rainwater or ground water for
eicient irrigation); in the chemistry, energy and resources
sectors (through innovation in wastewater treatment and
resource recovery); and in the design sector, promoting
a water saving culture (cisterns, wells, irrigation channels).
3.3. Belgium: Flanders Region
The Flanders region’s “Vision 2050: A Long Term Strategy
for Flanders” (2016) defined the circular economy as one of
its seven priorities. The Flemish government identified four
sub-themes: materials, water, energ y, space and nutrition.
Regarding water, the vision follows the line established
by the EU Circular Package and the new Circular Economy
Action Plan that aims at emphasising the reuse of water and
the contribution of the bio-economy to a circular economy
(European Commission, 2015; 2020). The programme “Circular
Flanders” (2017) supports companies in closing water
loops and facilitating demonstration projects that could be
scaled-up to benefit the community. The Flanders European
Waterhub has been created to develop, test and upscale
water-related innovative projects. The creation of a water
demonstrator space is projected. This is an experimental
space where new water technologies can be tested in
a real-life setting (e.g. filtering and water reuse solutions are
being explored to reduce water use in the textile sector).
3.4. France: The City of Paris
As part of the “Circular Economy Plan of Paris 2017-2020”,
the City of Paris, France, incorporates the “cradle to cradle”
approach for specific material flows: water, food, phosphate,
waste, electricity and heating. Water-related applications
of the circular economy in the Plan apply to the energy and
waste management material flows. They consists in:
• Providing heating to public buildings from heat recovery
from wastewater to sixteen public institutions6;
• Exploring more sustainable ways of cooling buildings in
the city. As of now, the heating system connected to Paris’
non-potable water network is extracting energy from water
to cool the City Hall building.
• Rationalising water use (e.g. meters in green areas) and
remotely monitoring public water fountains, to prevent
leaks and optimise consumption.

32 Water Reuse and Principles
04
Ways Forward: A Governance Approach for
The Circular Economy in the Water Sector
The cases analysed in this paper showed a mix of technical
and governance approaches. The city of Amsterdam
combined water reuse techniques with educational
programmes and procurement tools. The Barcelona
Metropolitan Area promotes the creation of the water cluster
with dierent stakeholders and adopts an
intersectorial approach, in relation to the
interplay of the water sector with others,
such as food and design. Likewise, the
Flanders region has created dierent spaces
for stakeholder collaboration with a strong
technical innovation approach.
The Rotterdam’s strateg y mainly focuses on
applying technical solutions to the health
sector, while the City of Paris is putting in
place actions combined with technologies to
rationalise the use of water.
While there is no doubt that technical solutions
play a fundamental role, they represent only
part of the solution. Appropriate governance
dimensions are key for the transition towards the circular
economy, from raising awareness to engaging stakeholders,
developing an appropriate information system and adequate
regulation.
The circular economy is transformative, since it requires
a rethinking of actual business models also in ser vice
provision (e.g. decentralised systems). It is systemic, because
it takes into account water in connection with other sectors
such as waste, energy, construction; and it is functional,
as it connects cities and their surroundings, for example,
by taking into account the flows of resources within urban
and rural contexts (Romano & Eizaguirre, 2019; OECD,
forthcoming).
As such, the “3Ps” analytical framework, people, policies and
places (OECD, 2016a; OECD, forthcoming) can help diagnose
key governance components to enable circularity in the water
sector:
People: The circular economy is a shared responsibility across
levels of government and stakeholders. Water operators
can determine the shi towards new business models (e.g.
fostering water reuse, decentralised water solutions, etc.).
Citizens, on the other hand, can make choices regarding water
consumption and waste prevention.
Policies: The circular economy requires a holistic approach
that favours inter-sectoral coordination, while eiciently
allocating resources. Per above, the application of circular
principles to water entails fostering policy coherence between
water and energy (e.g. energy recovery from sludge sewage
treatment); water and agriculture (e.g. wastewater sludge
used as organic fertiliser) or water and construction
(e.g. wastewater sludge as input for construction materials).
When interactions and complementarities are overlooked,
the lack of a systemic approach might lead to the
implementation of fragmented projects over the short-
medium run, rather than sustainable policies in the long-run.
Places: Cities and regions are not isolated ecosystems, but
spaces for inflows and outflows of materials and resources,
in connection with surrounding areas and beyond. Therefore,
adopting a functional approach is important for resource
management and economic development.
Typically, for the water sector, the functional
area is represented by the basin. The
hydrological boundaries of the basin do not
correspond to the administrative boundaries
of the cities and this mismatch can add
complexity in managing water resources
eiciently across a wide range of institutions
in charge. Linkages across urban and rural
areas (e.g. related to bio-economy, agriculture
and forest) are key when it comes to recycling
organic residuals to be used in proximity of
where they are produced and to avoid negative
externalities due to transport. The use of
wastewater sludge generated in cities could
provide compost and organic fertiliser to
peri-urban farms and contribute to closing local nutrient
cycles (Wielemaker et al., 2018). Place-based solutions are
required to overcome territorial mismatches and favour
co-operation between cities and their surroundings.
Cities are laboratories for innovation, where experiments
and pilot projects can take place. The circular economy
can provide technically innovative solutions for facing and
overcoming water risks. Nonetheless, the potential of
the circular economy can be unlocked only if the necessary
economic and governance conditions will be in place
(OECD, forthcoming).
The circular
economy can
provide technically
innovative solutions
for facing and
overcoming
water risks.

1 Water and the Circular Economy in Cities: Observations and Ways Forward 33
References
Arup. (2018). Water and Circular Economy White Paper.
Retrieved from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/ce100/Water-and-Circular-Economy-White-
paper-WIP-2018-04-13.pdf.
Asakura, H., Endo, K., Yamada, M., Inoue, Y. & Ono, Y. (2009). Improvement of Permeability of Waste Sludge by Mixing with Slag or
Construction and Demolition Waste.Waste Management,29(6), pp. 1877-1884.
Barcelona Metropolitan Area. (2019). Green and Circular Economy Promotion Programme.
Retrieved from https://agenciaeconomica.amb.cat/ca/projectes/detall/-/projecteADE/7223568/7154508.
Bertule, M., Glennie, P., Bjørnsen, P. K., Lloyd, G. J., Kjellen, M., Dalton, J., Rieu-Clarke, A., Romano, O., Tropp, H., Newton, J. &
Harlin, J. (2018). Monitoring Water Resources Governance Progress Globally: Experiences from Monitoring SDG Indicator 6.5.1
on Integrated Water Resources Management Implementation.Water,10(12), 1744.
Circular Flanders. (2019). Indicators for a Circular Economy.
https://vlaanderen-circulair.be/en/summa-ce- centre/publications/indicators-for-a-circular-economy (accessed 7 November, 2019).
City of Amsterdam. (2019). Building Blocks for the New Strategy Amsterdam Circular 2020-2025.
http://www.circle-economy.com (accessed 7 November, 2019).
City of Paris. (2017). Circular Economy Plan of Paris 2017-2020.
Dutch Research Council. (2017). Seven Awards for the Closed Cycle Program - Transition to a Circular Economy.
https://www.nwo.nl/actueel/nieuws/2017/enw/zeven-toekenningen-voor-programma-gesloten-kringlopen-%E2%80%93-
transitie-naar-een-circulaire-economie.html (accessed 19 November, 2019).
Eliche-Quesada, D., Martínez-García, C., Martínez-Cartas, M. L., Cotes-Palomino, M. T., Pérez-Villarejo, L.,
Cruz-Pérez, N. & Corpas-Iglesias, F. A. (2011). The Use of Dierent Forms of Waste in the Manufacture of Ceramic Bricks.
Applied Clay Science,52(3), pp. 270-276.
Ellen MacAr thur Foundation. (2019). Cities and Circular Economy for Food.
Emasagra. (2019). Cambiemos la Mirada Biofactoría Sur Granada. De Depuradora a Biofactoría, Granada, Spain.
https://www.emasagra.es/depuracion (accessed 10 May 2020).
Engie Réseaux. (2019). Recovering Heat from Wastewater.
https://www.engie-reseaux.fr/en/solutions/2393-2/recovering-heat-wastewater/ (accessed 8 November, 2019).
European Commission. (2005). Implementation of Procedures Based on the HACCP Principles, and Facilitation
of the Implementation of the HACCP Principles in Certain Food Businesses.
https://www.fsai.ie/uploadedFiles/EU_Guidance_HACCP.pdf (accessed 13 November, 2019).
. (2015). Implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan.
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy (accessed 2 November, 2019).
. (2018). Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Minimum Requirements for Water Reuse
(2018/0169/EU).
. (2019a). IndustrialSymbiosis. Environment, European Green Capital.
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Industrial_Symbiosis.pdf
(accessed 9 November, 2019).
. (2019b). The European Green Deal, COM(2019) 640 final, 11 December.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/europeangreen-deal-communication_en.pdf (accessed 10 December, 2019).
. (2019c). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan,
{SWD(2019) 90 final}, March 4th.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1551871195772&uri=CELEX:52019DC0190 (accessed 8 November, 2019)
. (2020), A New Circular Economy Action Plan. For a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe,
Communication from the Commission, COM(2020) 98 final, Brussels.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN (accessed 15 May, 2020).
European Council. (2020). Regulation (EU) 2020/… of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020
on Minimum Requirements for Water Reuse.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CONSIL:PE_12_2020_INIT&from=EN (accessed 4 June, 2020).
EU Partnership on Circular Economy. (2019). New Proposal for a “Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on
Minimum Requirements for Water Reuse”- Position Paper by EU Urban Agenda Partnership on Circular Economy.
https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/system/files/ged/urban_agenda_partnership_on_circular_economy_-_position_on_
legislation_reuse_of_water_-_jan_2019.pdf (accessed 2 November, 2019).
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). (2009). How to Feed the World in 2050
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/expert_paper/How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf
(accessed 1 November, 2019).
Fatta-Kassinos, D., Meric, S. & Nikolaou, A. (2011). Pharmaceutical Residues in Environmental Waters and Wastewater:
Current State of Knowledge and Future Research.Analyrical and Bioanalytical Chemistry,399(1), pp. 251–275.

34 Water Reuse and Principles
Flanders Region. (2016). Vision 2050: A Long Term Strategy for Flanders.
https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/vision-2050-a-long-term-strategy-for-flanders (accessed 15 March 2020).
. (2017). Circular Flanders. Together Towards a Circular Economy.
https://www.vlaanderen-circulair.be/src/Frontend/Files/userfiles/files/Circular%20Flanders%20Kick-O%20Statement.pdf
(accessed 01 March, 2020).
Gherghel, A., Teodosiu, C. & De Gisi, S. (2019). A Review on Wastewater Sludge Valorisation and Its Challenges in the Context of
Circular Economy.Journal of cleaner production, 228, pp. 244-263.
Giezen, M. (2018). Shiing Infrastructure Landscapes in a Circular Economy: An Institutional Work Analysis of the Water and Energy
Sect or. Sustainability, 10(10), 3487.
Goldthau, A. (2014). Rethinking the Governance of Energy Infrastructure: Scale, Decentralisation and Polycentrism.
Energy Research & Social Science,1, pp. 134–140.
Government of the Netherlands. (2019). Housing Associations.
https://www.government.nl/topics/housing/housing-associations (accessed 18 November, 2019).
Government of Spain. (2018). España Circular 2030: Estrategia Española de Economía Circular.
Hossain, M. K., Strezov, V., Yin Chan, K. & Nelson, P. F. (2010). Agronomic Properties of Wastewater Sludge Biochar and
Bioavailability of Metals in Production of Cherry Tomato (Lycopersicon Esculentum). Chemosphere, 78(9), pp. 1167-1171.
IEA. (2016). “Cities are in the frontline for cutting carbon emissions”.
https://www.iea.org/news/cities-are-in-the-frontline-for-cutting-carbon-emissions-new-ieareport-finds
(accessed on 21 February 2020).
ISWA (International Solid Waste Association). (2015). Circular Economy: Energy and Fuels. Taks_Force_Report,
Prepared by the ISWA Task Force on Resource Management.
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualising the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions.
Resources, Conservation & Recycling,127, pp. 221–232.
Landaburu-Aguirre, J., García-Pacheco, R., Molina, S., Rodríguez-Sáez, L., Rabadán, J. & García-Calvo, E. (2016). Fouling Prevention,
Preparing for Re-use and Membrane Recycling. Towards Circular Economy in RO Desalination.Desalination,393, pp. 16-30.
Maddison, M., Soosaar, K., Mauring, T. & Mander, Ü. (2009). The Biomass and Nutrient and Heavy Metal Content of Cattails and Reeds
in Wastewater Treatment Wetlands for the Production of Construction Material in Estonia.Desalination,246(1-3), pp. 120-128.
Manara, P. & Zabaniotou, A. (2012). Towards Sewage Sludge Based Biofuels via Thermochemical Conversion–a Review.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,16(5), pp. 2566-2582.
Monstadt, J. (2007). Urban Governance and the Transition of Energy Systems: Institutional Change and Shiing Energy and Climate
Policies in Berlin.International Journal of Urban Regional Research,31(2), pp. 326–343.
Nghiem, L. D., Koch, K., Bolzonella, D. & Drewes, J. E. (2017). Full scale Co-digestion of Wastewater Sludge and Food Waste:
Bottlenecks and Possibilities.Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,72, pp. 354-362.
Norse, D. (2012). Low Carbon Agriculture: Objectives and Policy Pathways.Environmental Development,1(1), pp. 25-39.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2012).
OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264122246-en.
. (2015a). Water Resources Governance in Brazil, OECD Studies on Water. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264238121-en.
. (2015b). OECD Principles on Water Governance.
Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/cfe/regional-policy/OECD-Principles-on-Water-Governance.pdf.
. (2015c). The Metropolitan Century: Understanding Urbanisation and its Consequences. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264228733-en.
. (2016a). Water Governance in Cities, OECD Studies on Water. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264251090-en.
. (2016b). Urban Water Quality Management. Pharmafilter: an innovative waste and wastewater management system
for hospitals, The Netherlands.
https://www.oecd.org/environment/resources/The-Netherlands-case-study-urban-water-quality-management-diuse-
pollution.pdf (accessed 5 November, 2019).
. (2019). Public Value in Public Service Transformation: Working with Change. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/47c17892-en.
. (forthcoming). The Circular Economy in Cities and Regions. Synthesis Report, CFE/RDPC/URB(2019)16.
OECD/European Commission. (2020).Cities in the World:A New Perspective on Urbanisation, OECD Urban Studies, OECD
Publishing, Paris,Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/d0efcbda-en.
Pearce, G. K. (2008). UF/MF Pre-treatment to RO in Seawater and Wastewater Reuse Applications: A Comparison of Energy Costs.
Desalination,222(1-3), pp.66-73.
Preston, F., Lehne, J. & Wellesley, L. (2019).
Inclusive Circular Economy: Priorities for Developing Countries. Research Paper, Chatham House.

1 Water and the Circular Economy in Cities: Observations and Ways Forward 35
Puig, S., Baeza, J. A., Colprim, J., Cotterill, S., Guisasola, A., He, Z., Heidrich, E. & Pous, N. (2017).
Niches for Bioelectrochemical Systems in Sewage Treatment Plants.In Lema, J. M. & Suarez, S. (eds.) Innovative Wastewater
Treatment & Resource Recovery Technologies: Impacts on Energy, Economy and Environment, pp. 96-107. IWA Publishing.
Rezania, S., Taib, S. M., Din, M. F. M., Dahalan, F. A. & Kamyab, H. (2016). Comprehensive Review on Phytotechnology:
Heavy Metals Removal by Diverse Aquatic Plants Species from Wastewater.Journal of Hazardous Materials,318, pp. 587-599.
Romano, O. & Akhmouch, A. (2019). Water Governance in Cities: Current Trends and Future Challenges.Water,11(3), 500.
Romano, O. & Eizaguirre, A. (2019). La Economía Circular en Ciudades y Regiones.
Romano O. (2019). Water Economy Forum. https://www.iagua.es/noticias/foro-economia-agua/oriana-romano-gestion-agua-
puede-ser-medida-diversificacion-recursos (accessed 7 November, 2019).
Rotterdam City. (2019). Rotterdam Circularity Programme 2019- 2023.
Smol, M., Kulczycka, J., Henclik, A., Gorazda, K. & Wzorek, Z. (2015). The Possible Use of Sewage Sludge Ash (SSA)
in the Construction Industry as a Way Towards a Circular Economy.Journal of Cleaner Production,95, pp. 45-54.
Soares, A ., Czajkowska, J., Colprim, J., Gali, A., Johans son, S., Masic, A., Marchi, A., Mcleod, A., Nenov, V., Ruscalleda, M. & Siwiec, T. (2017).
Nutrients recovery from wastewater streams. In Lema, J. M. & Suarez, S. (eds.) Innovative Wastewater Treatment & Resource
Recovery Technologies: Impacts on Energy, Economy and Environment,pp. 369-398. IWA Publishing, London.
Tide Forecasting and Reporting Centre. (2019). Grafici e Statistiche.
https://www.comune.venezia.it/it/content/grafici-e-statistiche (accessed 10 November, 2019).
Tyagi, V. K. & Lo, S. L. (2013). Sludge: A Waste or Renewable Source for Energy and Resources Recovery?
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,25, pp. 708-728.
UN (United Nations). (2018). Revision of World Urbanization Prospects. UN Department of Economic and Social Aairs.
https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2018-Report.pdf (accessed 6 November, 2019).
Van Doren, D., Giezen, M., Driessen, P. P. J. & Runhaar, H. A. C. (2016).
Scaling-up Energy Conser vation Initiatives: Barriers and Local Strategies.Sustainable Cities Societ y, 26, pp. 227–239.
Van Loosdrecht, M. & Brdjanovic, D. (2014). Anticipating the Next Century of Wastewater Treatment.
Science,344(6191), pp. 1452–1453.
Venkatesh, G. & Elmi, R. A. (2013). Economic–Environmental Analysis of Handling Biogas from Sewage Sludge Digesters in WWTPs
(Wastewater Treatment Plants) for Energy Recovery: Case Study of Bekkelaget WWTP in Oslo (Norway).Energy,58, pp. 220-235.
Voulvoulis, N. (2018). Water Reuse from a Circular Economy Perspective and Potential Risks from an Unregulated Approach.
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health,2, pp. 32-45.
Van der Hoek, J. P., Struker, A. & Danschutter, J. E. M. (2017). Amsterdam as a Sustainable European Metropolis: Integration of
Water, Energy and Material Flows.Urban Water Journal,14(1), pp. 61–68.
Water UK. (2016). Research Shows More Action Needed to Protect Against Growing Drought Risk.
Waternet. (2019). Average Water Use.
https://www.waternet.nl/en/our-water/our-tap-water/average-water-use/ (accessed 20 February, 2020).
Wielemaker, R. C., Weijma, J. & Zeeman, G. (2018). Harvest to Harvest: Recovering Nutrients with New Sanitation Systems
for Reuse in Urban Agriculture.Resources, Conservation and Recycling,128, pp. 426-437.
Woltersdorf, L., Zimmermann, M., Dener, J., Gerlach, M. & Liehr, S. (2018). Benefits of an Integrated Water and Nutrient Reuse
System for Urban Areas in Semi-arid Developing Countries. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 128, pp. 382-393.
Notes
1. It is one of the Partnerships created for the implementation of the EU Urban Agenda.
2. Industrial symbiosis allows resources exchanges across companies (waste or by-products from an industry is used as raw
material by another) (European Commission, 2019a).
3. There are nine housing associations in Amsterdam. They are responsible for renting or selling accommodation and providing
homes for elder people. They are also in charge of building and letting social property (e.g. schools and sports facilities);
the maintenance of houses and their immediate surroundings; and selling rented properties to tenants and other house
seekers (Government of the Netherlands, 2019).
4. The filter system uses a high-tech shredder to break down waste products in hospital wards. The waste is then transported to
a plant where harmful substances in hospital water, such as disease-causing microbes and traces of medications, are filtered
out (ozonisation and filtration through activated carbon processes are applied) (OECD, 2016b).
5. Aer the filtering phase, in the same plant microorganisms through anaerobic digestion break down the solid waste.
The plant powers itself from the biogas that results from the breakdown of the solid waste, and any le-over energy is fed
back into the hospital grid.
6. Heat is recovered by flowing the wastewater over the sur face of a metal plate installed in the part of the system that is
in contact with the water. On contact with the metal, the fluid heats up and is fed into a heat pump that recovers heat at
temperatures of up to 60°C. This heat is then transported though the district heating network to heat local buildings
(Engie Réseaux, 2019).

©Rubi Rodriguez Mar tinez/Shutterstock .

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 37
2
From Waste to Resource:
Shifting Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater
Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean
Diego J. Rodriguez, Hector A. Serrano, Anna Delgado, Daniel Nolasco and Gustavo Saltiel
Diego J. Rodriguez, World Bank Group, Mexico.
e-mail: drodriguez1@worldbank.org
Hector A. Serrano, World Bank Group, Mexico.
e-mail: hserrano@worldbank.org
Anna Delgado, World Bank Group, Mexico.
e-mail: adelgado@worldbank.org
Daniel Nolasco, World Bank Group, Mexico.
e-mail: daniel@nolasco.ca
Gustavo Saltiel, World Bank Group, Mexico.
e-mail: gsaltiel@worldbank.org
Abstract
Population and economic growth have driven a rapid rise in demand for water resources . As a result, 36 percent of the world’s population
already lives in water-scarce regions. Especially in low- and middle-income countries, rapid urbanization has created various water-
related challenges. Moreover, by focusing on sustainability, the SDGs are adding a new dimension to the challenges faced in the water
supply and sanitation sector. In Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), only about 60 percent of the population is connected to
a sewage system and only about 30 –40 percent of the region’s wastewater that is collected is treated. These percentages are surprising,
given the region’s levels of income and urbanization, and have significant implications for public health, environmental sus tainability,
and social equit y. To improve the wastewater situation in the region, countr ies in LAC are embarking on massive programs to collec t
and treat wastewater. As cities continue to grow, there is an opportunit y to ensure that investments are made in the most sustainable
and eicient way possible, embracing the principles of circular economy, considering wastewater a valuable resource. Wastewater can
be treated to various qualities to satisf y demand from dierent sec tors, including industry and agriculture, it can be used to maintain
the environmental flow, and can even be reused as drinking water. Wastewater treatment for reuse is one solution to the world’s water
scarcity problem, freeing scarce freshwater resources for other uses. In addition, by-product s of wastewater treatment can become
valuable for agriculture and energy generation, making wastewater treatment plants more environmentally and financially sustainable.
Drawing from case studies and stakeholder consultations, this paper provides a conceptual framework and key policy recommendations
for the development of smarter wastewater interventions that adopt circular economy principles. In order to achieve this paradigm shi
in the sector, a framework for smarter wastewater inter ventions has been identified. First, at the country or regional level, wastewater
initiatives need to be planned within a river basin framework to ensure that the most cost-optimal and sustainable solution is achieved.
Then, at the project level, wastewater treatment plants need to be operated in an eicient and eective way, considering resource
recovery opportunities from wastewater. This will make it possible to explore innovative financing and sustainable business models
that leverage circular economy principles. Simultaneously, countries need to develop the right policy, institutional, regulatory
frameworks to promote the paradigm shi and scale up these solutions.
Keywords
Circular economy, LAC, wastewater, resource recover y, SDGs, reuse

38 Water Reuse and Principles
01
Context
1.1. A Growing Global Challenge
Population and economic growth have driven a rapid rise
in demand for water resources (WWAP, 2015). As stated by
the United Nations and World Bank Group High-Level Panel
on Water (HLPW, 2018), 36 percent of the world’s population
already lives in water-scarce regions and more than 60%
of the world’s population live in areas that experience water
scarcity at least one month in a year (W WAP, 2017).
By 2050 more than half the world’s population will be at risk
due to water stress (HLPW, 2018).
Rapid urbanization, especially in low- and middle-income
countries, has created a host of water-related challenges
(Reymond, et al., 2016): environmental degradation;
water stress accentuated by climate change; infrastructure
deficit and need for urban ser vices such as sanitation and
wastewater management; and expanding peri-urban and
informal settlements. As cities continue to grow rapidly, and
climate change impacts water resources’ availability and
distribution, it will become increasingly diicult and energy
intensive to meet the water demands of populations and
economies.
Combined, these problems present a challenge for policy
makers and municipalities in providing services to their
citizens; ensuring that there are enough resources such as
food, water, and energy; and protecting public health
—all while protecting the environment. In this challenging
context, wastewater becomes a valuable resource from which
water, energy, and nutrients can be extracted to help meet
the demands for water, energy, and food (WWAP, 2017).
1.2. The Sanitation Sector in Latin America and
the Caribbean
1.2.1. Population and Sanitation Coverage
In 2017, the population of Latin America and the Caribbean
region reached 644 million, 80 percent of which lived in urban
areas. Between 2012 and 2017, the population increased by
about 34 million, or by approximately 5.4 percent.
During the same period, rural populations dropped by
1 percent (WDI, 2019). According to the 2018 Revision of World
Urbanization Prospects (UNDESA, 2018), by 2030
the total population in the region will be 718 million with
an urban concentration of 84 percent, representing
the highest urbanization rate in the developing world.
Regarding access to water supply and sanitation, historically,
countries in the region have prioritized investments in water
supply, achieving good coverage in recent years. According
to WHO & UNICEF (2019) around 97 percent of households
had access to an improved source of drinking water in 2017,
although this average hides the gap between rural
(88 percent) and urban (99 percent) coverage and does not
reflect the sustainability and quality of the level of service.
The share of the population with access to safely managed
water services was only 74 percent.
About 87 percent of the region’s population had access to
some form of basic sanitation, with an important dierence
between rural (70 percent) and urban (91 percent) areas.
However, only 31 percent had access to safely managed
sanitation services. Urban rivers and waterways in the region
are among the most polluted in the world, since 70 percent
of the wastewater discharged in the region receives no
treatment. It is estimated that only about 66 percent of
the population is connected to a sewage system (18 percent in
rural and 77 percent in urban areas) and only about
30–40 percent of the region’s wastewater that is collected is
treated (FAO, 2017) - this value, however, does not reflect
the quality of the discharged water or whether it complies
with discharge standards. This is surprisingly low,
Figure 2-1 Acces s to sanitation services in selected countries of Latin America and the Caribbean region, 2017(Source: WHO & UNICEF, 2019)
Note: LAC = average in Latin A merica and the Caribbe an. Data for Argentina i s from WHO & UNICEF, 2017

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 39
given the region’s levels of income and urbanization, and
has significant implications for public health, environmental
sustainability, and social equity. As shown in Figure 2-1,
wastewater management and treatment levels vary
significantly across Latin America and the Caribbean
countries, and regional averages mask this significant
variation.
Regarding water resources, countries in Latin America and
the Caribbean region have a relative abundance of water
on a per capita basis compared to other regions of the world
(FAO Aquastad). However, water availability is highly seasonal
and unevenly distributed in space, with water scarcity already
aecting the life of millions in the region (Mejia, 2014).
In several countries, there are large asymmetries between
the location of water resources availability and population,
making many economically dynamic regions water stressed.
For example, in Peru, with one of the highest renewable
internal freshwater resources per capita in the world
(FAO Aquastad), 70 percent of the country’s population and
90 percent of the economic output is located along
the Pacific Coast, with only one percent of the country’s water
availability (Mejia, 2014).
1.2.2. Investment Needed to Reach the Sustainable
Development Goals in the Region
To reach universal coverage of basic and safety managed
sanitation services by 2030, the region will have to reach
a total of 307 million as-yet-unserved people.1 Hutton and
Varughese (2016) estimated that the level of investment in
the region (excluding Chile, Uruguay, and most of the
Caribbean countries) needed to meet the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) for sanitation ranged between
$3.4 and $11.8 billion per year for the period 2016–30, of which
approximately 95 percent would be devoted to urban areas.
The investment needs in the sector are significant, and to
improve the wastewater situation in the region, countries are
indeed embarking on massive programs to collect and treat
wastewater. There is a huge opportunity to ensure that these
investments are made in the most sustainable and eicient
way. As lessons learned in Latin America and the Caribbean
and other regions indicate, investment in technology alone
will not guarantee meeting the SDGs. Eiciently investing
in wastewater and other sanitation infrastructure to achieve
public health benefits and environmental objectives,
and to enhance the quality of urban life, is a major challenge
for the region. The revalorization of wastewater as part of
a circular economy process can contribute to an improved
investment eiciency.
1.3. Purpose and Methodology
The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness among
decision makers and practitioners involved in wastewater
planning, financing, and management (including water
utilities, policy makers, basin organizations, and ministries of
planning and finance) regarding the potential of wastewater
as a resource under the principles of circular economy.
The guidelines and policy recommendations provided here
aim to encourage a paradigm shi in the sector, resulting in
smarter wastewater interventions to be able to meet the SDGs
in a more sustainable way.
This paper summarizes the findings and conclusions from
six technical background papers (World Bank, 2019a; 2019b;
2019c; 2019d; 2019e; 2019f), from an in-depth analysis of
several case studies and
from multiple consultations
and workshops with key
stakeholders working on
wastewater management
projects in the Latin America
and the Caribbean region
(World Bank, 2020).
The case studies (summarized
in appendix A) shed light on
best practices to address
common challenges and
fully leverage the benefits
of resource recovery from
wastewater and provide
examples of projects and
programs that promote
the implementation of circular
economy principles.
A key regional workshop was
organized in Buenos Aires,
Argentina, where government
represent atives from Argentina,
Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, the
Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Honduras, Paraguay, Peru, and
Uruguay participated, shared
their challenges and ideas (World Bank & CAF, 2018).
The initiative’s findings have also been presented at several
international and regional conferences and events with key
stakeholders from governments, international organizations,
and the private sector. Feedback from these events and from
the workshops enabled to shape the key findings into more
practical recommendations.
Eiciently
investing in
wastewater and
other sanitation
infrastructure to
achieve public
health benefits
and environmental
objectives,
and to enhance
the quality of urban
life, is a major
challenge for the
region.

40 Water Reuse and Principles
02
The Opportunities Presented by Circular
Economy
The challenges of population growth and urbanisation,
as well as the water scarcity and security problem, present
an opportunity for both developed and developing countries
to invest in and develop wastewater and sanitation services
that are in line with the circular economy principles.
At its core, a circular economy aims to design out waste to
achieve sustainability (see Box 2-1). In this context, waste does
not exist; products are designed and optimized for a cycle of
disassembly and reuse.
Box 2-1 T he principles of a circular e conomy
(Sources: Ellen MacArthur Foundation, N.d.; WEF, 2014)
A circular economy is an industrial system that is restorative
or regenerative by intention and design. It is an econom-
ic system aimed at minimizing waste and making the most
of resources. The traditional approach is based on a linear
economy with a “make, use, and dispose” model of produc-
tion. The circular economy approach replaces the end-of-life
concept with restoration, shis toward the use of renewable
energy, eliminates the use of toxic chemicals that impair re-
use and return to the biosphere, and aims for the elimination
of waste through the superior design of materials, products,
systems, and business models. Such an economy is based on
three main principles: (i) design out waste and pollution, (ii)
keep products and materials in use, and (iii) regenerate nat-
ural systems.
The long-standing, linear approach of abstracting freshwater
from a surface or groundwater source, treating it, using it,
collecting it, and disposing of it (most of the time polluted)
is unsustainable. However, in most countries of the region,
sanitation and wastewater treatment services are still
thought out and planned in a linear way. Furthermore, very
oen water supply is planned first, sewerage systems are
planned next, and energy inputs for both are sometimes
only considered once the systems have been designed and
constructed.
Wastewater and sanitation product s and services should not be
a burden to governments and society but should be seen as an
economic oppor tunity as it can be transformed into a valuable
resource (W WAP, 2017; Otoo & Drechsel, 2018). This change
requires a paradigm shi in how we think about and how
institutions approach wastewater and sanitation (Andersson et
al., 2016; WWAP, 2017; Reymond et al., 2016; Lautze et al., 2014;
Otoo & Drechsel, 2018; Allaoui et al., 2015). Wastewater should
not be considered a “waste” but a resource.
Wastewater treatment and reuse is one solution to the water
scarcity issue, and also to the problem of water security.
Wastewater can be treated up to dierent qualities, to satisfy
the demand from dierent sectors, including industry and
agriculture, freeing water resources for household use,
to maintain the environmental flow or simply for water for
preservation. The diversification of water supply sources is
critical for enhanced security and resilience and wastewater
should be considered as an additional source when
estimating water balances.
Moreover, one of the key advantages of adopting circular
economy principles is that resource recovery and reuse
could transform sanitation from a costly service to a self-
sustaining and value-adding system. Improved wastewater
managementoers a double-value proposition: in addition
to the environmental and health benefits of wastewater
treatment, financial returns (Figure 2-2) that partially or fully
cover operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are possible.
Resource recover y from these facilities in the form of energy,
reusable water, biosolids, and other resources (such as
nutrients and microplastics) represent an economic and
Figure 2-2 Potential revenue streams a nd savings from implementing resource re covery projects in wa stewater treatment plants (Source:
Rodriguez et al., 2020)

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 41
financial benefit that can contribute to the sustainability of
these systems and the utilities operating them.
As documented in the case studies analyzed (Appendix A),
applying circular economy principles allow wastewater
treatment plants (WWTPs) to: sell treated water for reuse to
industry to cover O&M costs, as in the case of San Luis Potosí,
Mexico (Box 2-5) or Durban, South Africa (Box 2-7); generate
energy for self-consumption to save energy costs as
in the case of Ridgewood, United States (Box 2-6) and
Atotonilco, Mexico (World Bank, 2018a), or generate revenues
by selling energy as in the case of Santiago, Chile (World Bank,
2019g); sell recovered phosphorous for fer tilizer, as in the case
of Chicago, United States (ASCE, 2013), among others.
Fostering these new business models with additional revenue
streams would in turn attract the private sector to close the
funding gap. The private sector is oen reluctant to invest in
the sanitation sector given the low return on investment and
the high risks. There is a need for an enabling environment
that fosters business models that promote shiing from
waste to resource and that enables private investment in
infrastructure in tandem with improved eiciency in public
financing to promote sustainable service delivery, especially
in the poorest countries.
This new approach is also necessary to achieve the SDGs,
whichare adding a new dimension to the challenges in
the sector by considering sustainability. Table 2-1 summarizes
the targets and indicators for Sustainable Development Goal
(SDG) 6 “Ensure availability and sustainable management of
water and sanitation for all”.
SDG target 6.3 not only mentions wastewater management
but also emphasizes the need to increase wastewater
recycling and reuse, and the wording of it places wastewater
management firmly in the context of resource eiciency
and a circular economy (Andersson et al., 2016). Sustainable
wastewater treatment and management, which includes water
reuse and resource recovery, will be crucial to achieve SDG 6,
and can also contribute toward meeting several other goals.
For example, electricity generation in WWTPs,
using the biogas produced, can contribute toward SDG 7
(regarding energy) and SDG 13 (climate action); treating
wastewater and restoring watersheds also contributes to SDG
3 (good health and well-being), SDG 11 (sustainable cities), and
SDG 14 (life below water), among others. The High Level Panel
for Water (HLPW – see Section 3.2.1) also acknowledges the
importance of water in meeting almost all of the SDG targets:
“Water is the common currency which links nearly every SDG,
and it will be a critical determinant of success” (HLPW, 2018).
TARGETS INDICATORS
6.1 By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to
save and aordable drinking water for all
Proportion of population using safely managed
drinking water services
6.2
By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable
sanitation and hygiene for all and end open
defecation, paying special attention to the needs of
women and girls and those in vulnerable situations
Proportion of population using safely managed
sanitation services, including a hand-washing facility
with soap and water
6.3
By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution,
eliminating dumping and minimising release of
hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the
proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially
increasing recycling and safe reuse globally
Proportion of wastewater safely treated
Proportion of bodies of water
with good ambient water quality
6.4
By 2030, substantially increase water-use
eiciency across all sectors and ensure sustainable
withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address
water scarcity and substantially reduce the number
of people suering from water scarcity
Change in water-use eiciency over time
Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as
a proportion of available freshwater resources
6.5
By 2030, implement integrated water resources
management at all levels, including through
transboundary cooperation as appropriate
Degree of integrated water resources management
implementation
Proportion of transboundary basin area with
an operational arrangement for water cooperation
6.6
By 2020, protect and restore water-related
ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands,
rivers, aquifers and lakes
Change in the extent of water-related ecosystems
over time
Table 2-1 SDG 6 targets and indicators (Source: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg6)

42 Water Reuse and Principles
03
Existing Challenges
The lingering question is: we know that resource recovery
and circular economy principles are not new, so why
hasn’t this approach caught up in the region? Numerous
challenges —institutional, economic, regulatory, social,
and technological—were identified during the stakeholder
consultations (World Bank & CAF, 2018) and also found in
relevant literature (OECD, 2018; WWAP, 2017; Trémolet, 2011;
HLPW, 2018; Rodriguez et al., 2020). This challenges will need
to be overcome to achieve the needed paradigm shi
in the sector.
3.1. Institutional Challenges
A knowledge gap and a lack of political will uphold the
status quo. There is a general lack of understanding regarding
the concept of water resource recovery and how to implement
it in practice. Wastewater is still considered a hinderance or
a substance to be disposed of, rather than a resource (OECD,
2018). This results in a lack of political will to develop policies
and regulations that support and incentivize wastewater
reuse and resource recovery.
Lack of coordination
across institutions,
legislatures, and sectors.
In most countries in the
region, regulations in
the water sector are not
aligned with the energy,
health, industrial (including
mining), and agriculture
sectors, and therefore limit
resource recovery and
reuse from wastewater
(energy, irrigation water,
nutrients, preservation, etc.).
Moreover, responsibilities
for the provision of wastewater services are oen fragmented
across dierent levels of governments.
The national government sets policies and targets, while
service provision, including investment, operations and
maintenance (O&M), and monitoring, is usually delegated
to municipal governments, which in many cases lack the
technical and financial capacities to adequately provide
services (Trémolet, 2011). There is also a lack of coordination
between water resource management institutions and
those responsible for sanitation service delivery.
As a result, sanitation plans are usually not incorporated in
river basin planning eorts, leading to ineicient and costly
systems.
3.2. Economic Challenges
Water is undervalued. Unless water resources are properly
valued (HLPW, 2018), it will be diicult to promote resource
recovery initiatives. The inadequate valuation of water
also leads to improper pricing of water resources and
water services, which deters resource recover y projects.
For example, if industries pay a very low fee to withdraw
freshwater, they have limited incentives to pay for treated
wastewater unless there is a significant short-term water
shortage or a region is facing long-term water scarcity.
There is excessive emphasis on promoting and financing
new infrastructure, without suiciently considering the life
cycle of a plant or the sustainability of the system
(e.g., coverage of O&M costs) and without evaluating the real
capacity of existing infrastructure and optimizing its use.
WWTPs rely on conventional (i.e., public) financing without
taking full advantage of market conditions and incentives
to enhance sustainability. There is a need for innovative
financing mechanisms that can encourage the development
of and investment in wastewater systems to promote
the sustainability of operations and also the health of local
ecosystems.
3.3. Regulatory Challenges
Current regulatory standards are oen too restrictive and/
or inconsistent. Countries adopt internationally accepted
regulatory standards for water quality that are not tailored to
their specific needs. Regulations are oen designed without
considering the financial implications of their implementation
(especially their operational costs). More flexible standards
that can be introduced gradually and that are suited to
the objective of wastewater investment will encourage
innovative solutions needed to provide wastewater ser vices
as well as create value from water reuse and resource
recovery.
Control over industrial discharge is inadequate. Insuicient
legislation, enforcement, regulation, and monitoring of
industrial discharge mean that excessive pollutants are
released untreated into the environment or le to an already
overburdened WWTP. Where untreated industrial discharge
is released directly into receiving water bodies, water
quality deteriorates, with numerous economic, social, and
environmental implications. Where the eluents are le to
the WWTP, customers end up paying with their taris for
industrial treatment.
There is a lack of regulatory frameworks and guidelines
for water reuse, beneficial use of biosolids, and energy
generation in WWTPs. In Latin America and the Caribbean,
there are regulations that limit or forbid resource recovery
at WWTPs. For instance, in some countries, the reuse of
wastewater might be permitted only for a specific set of
activities, such as restricted irrigation, or the use of biosolids
In most countries
in the region,
regulations in the
water sector are
not aligned with
the energy, health,
industrial.

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 43
might be forbidden in the agriculture sector. Clear regulations
and guidelines are needed to ensure the safe use of human-
waste-derived products and to widen the market potential.
Moreover, a lack of regulation of the pricing of resources
recovered from wastewater deters utilities and the private
sector from investing in resource recovery projects due to
uncertaint y regarding the return on their investment.
The clear and fair pricing of reclaimed water, biosolids,
and energy would foster much-needed innovation and
investment.
Incentives for wastewater reuse and resource recovery are
absent or insuicient. There is a need for new regulatory
mechanisms that specifically provide incentives to all
stakeholders to consider wastewater systems as resource
recovery facilities. Today, in many countries the benefits and
extra revenues reaped from recovery inter ventions would
go only toward tari reduction. The existence of per verse
incentives such as the low price of freshwater abstraction is
also a barrier to resource recover y initiatives.
3.4. Social Challenges
Negative perceptions of reclaimed water and reuse products
have not been adequately countered. A major challenge to
the development of the resource recovery market is
the low social acceptance of the use of recycled products from
human waste. Also, among farmers already using untreated
wastewater, many are against treating it because they have
the perception that wastewater nutrients will be removed
and that their crop yield will diminish. Public awareness and
education campaigns are needed to build trust and change
negative perceptions.
3.5. Technological Challenges
Technology selection criteria are biased toward expensive
technologies without considering which possibilities best
suit local conditions. A challenge related to this point in some
countries is a lack of engineers and planners with knowledge
of dierent wastewater treatment technologies.
04
Framework to Promote
the Paradigm Shift
Based on the case studies analyzed (See Appendix A),
the background reports (World Bank, 2019a; 2019b; 2019c;
2019d; 2019e; 2019f) and the several workshops with
the key stakeholders (World Bank, 2020), a framework has
been identified (Rodriguez et al., 2020) in order to achieve
the paradigm shi in the sector. At the country or regional
level, wastewater initiatives need to be planned within a river
basin framework to ensure that the most cost optimal and
sustainable solution is achieved. Then, at the project level,
WWTPs need to be operated in an eicient and eective way,
considering resource recovery opportunities.
This will allow the exploration of innovative financing and
business models that leverage circular economy principles.
Simultaneously, countries need to develop the right policy,
institutional and regulatory frameworks that will help
promote the paradigm shi.
Develop wastewater initiatives as part of a basin planning
framework to maximize benefits, improve eiciency and
resource allocation, and engage stakeholders
There is the need to move from ad hoc and isolated
wastewater solutions, such as one treatment plant per
municipality, to integrated river basin planning approaches
that yield more sustainable and resilient systems.
Basin planning oers a coordinating framework for water
resources management that focuses public and private
sector eorts to address the highest-priority problems
within hydrologically defined geographic areas, taking into
consideration all sources of water. By planning and analyzing
water quality and quantity at the basin level, integrated
solutions that are more financially, socially, economically, and
environmentally sustainable are possible (Rodriguez et al.,
2020; World Bank, 2019b).
Considering an entire river basin can help planners
understand dierent water quality stressors, their interaction
in the basin, and can lead to smarter project designs.
Impairment of a water body is a result of pollution
from various land uses and wastewater discharges that drain
into it. Pollution can come from point sources
(e.g. from WWTPs, industrial plants, storm water outfalls,
sewer overflows, agricultural drains) and nonpoint sources
(e.g. illegal dumping and litter, fertilizers and pesticides,
agricultural runo, oil and gas from vehicles).
These dierent pollution sources exert a cumulative
eect on the receiving water bodies, depending on pollutant
types, loads, timing, and discharge locations in the basin;
therefore, their collective impact must be evaluated when
planning wastewater treatment investments.
Despite the widespread use and holistic perspective of river

44 Water Reuse and Principles
basin planning, it is rarely used in the planning and design of
sanitation projects and particularly wastewater treatment
plants. However, understanding these cumulative eects
at the basin level and their interactions can lead to
solutions that target distinct pollution sources, reducing
the burden on WWTPs and thus resulting in cost eiciencies
and greater environmental benefits. Moreover, river basin
planning allows for better treatment processes to be designed
as it considers the upstream characteristics of the river basin
(existing pollution sources and hydrology) and
the characteristics of the downstream users and the receiving
water body. The river basin approach can also inform
the adaptation of eluent standards to the specifics of
a receiving body instead of using a uniform or arbitrary water
pollution control standards.
Basin planning allows the identification of the optimal
deployment of WWTPs and sanitation programs, including
the location, timing, and phasing of treatment infrastructure
(Box 2-2). It also enables decision makers to set priorities for
investment planning and action (Box 2-3). Basin planning is,
therefore, an iterative process that allows decision makers to
move from the traditional approach of being reactive to
a serious environmental problem to a proactive approach of
managing available resources in any given basin through
a structured, gradual process.
Moreover, by including wastewater in the hydrological
system as a potential water source, it is possible to account
and plan for wastewater reuse. Through a basin planning
framework, treated wastewater can be included as part of
the basin’s water balance. Otakers for treated wastewater
can be identified, and its use promoted. A participatory
process fosters the identification of synergies across
sectors and promotes the development of projects
that bring in key otakers (of biogas, electricity,
water, biosolids) from the beginning (i.e. design and
conceptualization).
Box 2-2 The use of a river basin approach to plan wastewater
treatment promotes more eicient outcome and reduces
investment needs (Source: Santos, 2018)
The municipality of Guayaquil, Ecuador, has promoted the
creation of a water fund (Fondo de Agua) to clean and pre-
serve the Daule River Basin (Santos, 2018). The action plan in-
cludes monitoring and control of water quality, treatment of
wastewater, erosion and sediment control, and reforestation,
among other ac tions. The municipalit y has also developed an
integrated plan for wastewater management that includes a
hydraulic modelling of the receiving waterbody (Daule Basin)
to understand its characteristics and assess the needed level
of treatment to meet the existing regulation. The modelling
showed that the treatment needed in the wastewater treat-
ment plants to be built was lower than initially designed for
since the waterbody had a higher c apacity of absorption than
thought. This resulted in the more eicient and eective in-
vestment in wastewater treatment plants.
Box 2- 3 Basin plan for the Bogota River, Colombia
(Source: World Bank, 2019b)
A watershed management plan developed for Río Bogotá in
Colombia focused not only on wastewater and sanitation
but also on general water quality in the river, flood risks, and
the supply of water for both potable and nonpotable uses.
Aer a thorough inventory of current conditions, environ-
mental, operational, and ecological goals were defined. With
the help of sophisticated water quality, water supply, and
flood-risk models, the plan laid out several management al-
ternatives that were consolidated into a detailed investment
schedule as well as a monitoring plan to evaluate progress
toward the goals.
Build the utility of the future: Move from the concept of
wastewater treatment plants to one of water resource
recovery facilities, realizing wastewater’s value
The practice of waste water treatment continues to
evolve, not only technologically but functionally as
well. Traditionally, wastewater treatment was focused
on removing contaminants and pathogens and safely
discharging water back to the environment. Today,
wastewater treatment plants should be considered water
resource recovery facilities (NSF et al., 2015). This comes with
the realization that many components in wastewater can be
recovered for beneficial purposes, starting with the water
itself (for agriculture, the environment, industry, and even
human consumption), followed by nutrients (nitrogen and
phosphorus) and energy.
To move toward the ideal utility of the future, first utilities
have to be run properly and perform adequately. Wastewater
treatment and sanitation projects are designed to provide
service for decades. As mentioned in the previous action
point, planning wastewater at the basin level is most
advantageous because it leads to the best possible solutions
under a wide range of situations. However, unless the O&M of
the expensive infrastructure laid out in the plan is in the hands
of robust water utilities, the benefits of the basin planning
approach to sanitation and wastewater treatment will be
severely compromised. In Latin America and the Caribbean,
as in many regions around the world, poorly operated utilities
jeopardize the sustainability of the solutions deployed.
There are several examples of very well-run utilities in the
region, including in Brazil, Chile, and Colombia.
The issue of utility performance is complex and is not the
main purpose of this paper. For further reading, the World
Bank has published several documents on the topic
(Baietti et al., 2006; Soppe et al., 2018).
Second, treatment facilities need to be designed, planned,
managed, and operated eectively and eiciently. When
treatment facilities are designed and planned with resource
recovery and sustainability in mind, the road to circular
economy is paved. Smarter operation and maintenance
is then the next natural step to sustainability. Adequate
planning, design, and operation entail a series of actions
including projecting wastewater influents correctly, setting

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 45
sustainable targets for eluent quality, selecting an adequate
treatment process, using existing infrastructure correctly
(Box 2-4 ) and being energy eicient, among others (described
with further detain in Rodriguez et al., 2020 and World Bank,
2019a).
Box 2- 4 Saving costs by utilizing existing infrastructure:
Buenos Aires, Argentina
(Source: World Bank, 2019a; Rodriguez et al., 2020)
AySa, the water and wastewater utility in Buenos Aires, had
already planned the expansion of its wastewater treatment
plants to increase capacit y. The expansion costs we re around
$150 million. However, the application of process audit tech-
niques allowed the utility to use its facilities to the fullest
potential, resulting in cancellation of the expansion plans for
five years and savings of about $150 million in capital expen-
ditures.
Finally, countries need to recognize the real value of
wastewater and the potential resources that can be extracted
from it, incorporating resource recovery and circular economy
principles in their investment planning and infrastructure
design moving for ward. The ideal scenario is that utilities
would explore the recovery of several resources from
wastewater, as exemplified in the case studies analyzed
(Appendix A). Infrastructure is a long-term investment
that can lock countries into ineicient and unsustainable
solutions. This highlights the importance of having resource
recovery in mind when planning for wastewater investments.
A paradigm shi from treatment plants toward water resource
recovery facilities oers new possibilities to create new and
more sustainable business models, involve the private sector,
and enable new ways of finance, given the potential extra
revenue streams (Boxes 2-5, 2-6 and 2-7).
Box 2- 5 S elling wastewater to cover op eration and
maintenance costs: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
(Source: World Bank, 2018b)
New water reuse regulations and a creative project contract
incentivized wastewater reuse in San Luis Potosi. Instead of
using fresh water, a power plant uses treated eluent from
the nearby wastewater treatment plant (Tenorio) in its cool-
ing towers. This wastewater is 33 percent cheaper for the
power plant than groundwater and has resulted in savings
of $18 million for the power utility in six years. For the water
utility, this extra revenue covers all its operation and main-
tenance costs. The remaining treated wastewater is used for
agricultural purposes. Additionally, the scheme has reduced
groundwater extractions by 48 million cubic meters in six
years, restoring the aquifer. The extra revenue from water
reuse helped attract the private sector to partially fund the
capital costs under a public-private partnership agreement
(40 percent government grant, 36 percent loan, and 24 per-
cent private equity).
Box 2- 6 The potential of co-digestion: Ridgewood, United States
(Source: World Bank, 2018c)
In the case of Ridg ewood, United States, a well -designed pub -
lic-private partnership between the Village of Ridgewood’s
water utility and a co-digestion technology provider and
engineering company (Ridgewood Green) led to a successful
co-digestion project. The Village of Ridgewood leveraged the
potential of resource recovery, attracting the private sector
to fully finance the retrofitting of their W WTP for co-diges tion
under a PPP agreement, implying zero investment costs and
minimum risk for the village of Ridgewood.
The project allowed the wastewater treatment plant to gen-
erate enough biogas to meet all the plant’s power needs,
becoming energy neutral and decreasing carbon dioxide
emissions. Ridgewood Green made all the up-front capi-
tal investment needed to retrofit the plan for co-digestion.
In return, Ridgewood purchases the electricity generat-
ed by Ridgewood Green for the operation of the plant at a
lower price than it used to pay for electricity from the grid.
The power purchase agreement includes a fixed increase rate
of 3 percent per year for inflation, establishing the village’s
price and Ridgewood Green’s revenue for the duration of
the contract. Therefore, this agreement benefits both par-
ties. Since Ridgewood Green invested in the co-digestion in-
frastructure, it owns this new equipment, and the Village of
Ridgewood owns and operates the plant with technical sup-
port fr om Ridgewood Green. Ridgew ood Green expec ts to get
a reasonable return on its investment through an innovative
revenue model that leverages dierent revenue streams: (i)
selling electricity to the Village of Ridgewood; (ii) selling all
the renewable energy certificates to 3Degrees, a leader in the
renewable energy marketplace under an agreement of sever-
al years; and (iii) tipping fees for the organic matter collected
for the anaerobic digesters.
Box 2-7 Reusing wastewater for industrial purposes under
a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) agreement: Durban,
South Africa (Source: World Bank, 2018d)
In Durban, South Africa, the private sector provided all the
capital needed to implement a wastewater reuse project for
industrial purposes under a PPP agreement with the local
water utility, which resulted in a sustainable solution with no
extra cost for the municipality and the taxpayers. Durban’s
sanitation c apacity was reaching it s limits. Instead of increas -
ing the capacity of the existing marine outfall pipeline to
discharge primary treated wastewater to the ocean, Durban
explored the possibility to further treat it and reuse it for in-
dustrial purposes. Mondi, a paper plant, and SAPREF, an oil
refiner y, expressed interest in receiving the treated waste-
water. Given the technical complexity, cost, and risk of the
project, the municipal utility opted to implement the project
under a public-p rivate partners hip. Aer an international bid-
ding phase, Durban Water Recycling (DWR), a consortium of
firms, was chosen to finance, design, construct, and operate
the tertiary wastewater treatment plant at SWTW under a 20-
year concession contract. The municipal utility would still be
in charge of the preliminary and primary wastewater treat-
ment, and the eluent would be sent to the plant operated

46 Water Reuse and Principles
by DWR to be treated and then be sold to industrial users.
The private sector provided the entire funding needed for the
project. DWR also undertook the risks of meeting the water
quality needs of the two industrial users. The guaranteed de-
mand for treated wastewater from the two industrial users
made the project economically attractive and allowed DWR
to undertake the investment risks. The sale of treated waste-
water to industry has freed enough demand of potable water
to supply 400,000 extra people in the city. Moreover, as a re-
sult, the need for investment in new infrastructure for water
treatment has been postponed.
Explore and support the development of innovative
financing and sustainable business models in the sector
Financing sanitation infrastructure and recovering associated
costs are challenges throughout the region. Many utilities do
not collect adequate sanitation taris to cover the costs of
O&M, not to mention capital investment or future expansion.
Hence, there is considerable agreement that more eicient
subsidies are needed for sanitation, at least during
a transition period. The existence of subsidies, however, does
not mean that the sector has to rely on conventional financing
without taking advantage of market conditions and incentives
to enhance sustainability (World Bank, 2019e; Box 2-8).
Box 2- 8 Results-based financing of wastewater infrastructure:
PRODES , Brazil(Source: World Bank, 2 018e)
The most prominent incentive-based subsidy example that
has been used to finance wastewater is the results-based
financing scheme PRODES in Brazil. PRODES is a federal fi-
nancing scheme set up primarily for depolluting important
hydrological basins. PRODES does not directly fund the cap-
ital costs of wastewater treatment infrastructure. Instead,
PRODES provides clear incentives for eicient investment
and operation of wastewater treatment plants, because pay-
ments are linked to the quality of treated wastewater based
on certified outputs. PRODES did not focus on resource re-
covery; h owever, having a plan for the reuse of treated waste-
water is one of the criteria for obtaining PRODES support for
a wastewater treatment investment. A secondary results-ori-
ented objective of PRODES is to improve the decentralized
management of water resources. Criteria for receiving the
award includes, for example, the existence of a functioning
Basin Commit tee and evidence of planne d implementation of
water resource plans and investments.
Resource recover y can help overcome some of the challenges
to financing wastewater infrastructure and help to achieve
the needed paradigm shi in the sector. Resource recovery
can help move away from traditional public financing to
innovative financing and new business models that can
attract the private sector in the financing of infrastructure.
Resource recover y projects can leverage extra revenue
streams or cost savings (Figure 2-2) to reduce the financial
risk of infrastructure projects, improve the rate of return, and
create a more attractive environment for the private sector.
These revenues are not reliant on public sector taris. Instead
they rely on the market for by-products that are generated
during the wastewater treatment process. This requires the
identification and development of new markets for reused
wastewater, biogas, and biosolids. The rate of return can be
high, making these products of interest to operators, private
investors, and investment funds.
The case studies analyzed show that most large wastewater
projects, particularly those that involve reuse and resource
recovery from the onset, have been implemented through
various forms of public-private partnerships (PPPs) using
a mix of public and private finance (Rodriguez et al., 2020;
World Bank, 2019e; 2019f). The private sector can provide not
only additional capital but also the new technologies and
skills needed to implement and operate the plants.
Reuse and resource recovery projects oer an opportunity
to attract the private sector. Reuse and resource recovery
projects in wastewater treatment plants can provide
a long-term steady financial return, allowing plants to
reduce their financial cost, thus attracting those long-term
investment funds and investors that are comfortable with
long-term regular lower yields. This is shown in several of
the cases documented, such as San Luis Potosi, Durban, or
Ridgewood, where well-designed contracts secured demand
for resource recovery products, ensuring a stable revenue
stream and attracting private sector participation.
A specific risk associated with reuse and resource recovery
and considered one of the most critical obstacles to private
financing and participation is variable demand. The actual
volume of by-products that will be eventually used by end
users or consumers is uncertain and will decide the project’s
cost-recovery rate. To mitigate this risk, the case studies show
that several approaches are possible but a well-designed
contract between the par ties is essential.
The financial structure will require a long-term purchase
agreement that should provide securities to financial
institutions funding the project. Most successful projects
involve industries located near the WWTP (case studies of
Santiago, Nagpur [World Bank, 2019h], Arequipa [Box 2-9],
San Luis Potosi, Ridgewood or Durban) and a contractual
structure that mitigates the risk of variable demand.
Take-or-pay clauses or a suicient fixed portion of the
payment are common elements in long-term infrastructure
contracts and should also be part of reuse and/or resource
recovery projects in order to mitigate demand risk.
Box 2- 9 Collaborating wit h a mining company to reduce costs:
Arequipa, Peru (Source: World Bank, 2019i)
Cerro Verde, a mining company near Arequipa, Peru, was
planning a large-scale expansion that would require access
to additional water supplies in a water-scarce area. The mine
explored several options such as using desalinated sea water
and water from far-away aquifers, but the cheapest option
was to build a wastewater treatment plant to treat and use
wastewater from Arequipa. Under a PPP agreement, the min-
ing company agreed with SEDAPAR, the municipal water util-
ity, to design, finance, and build the plant, and in exchange,

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 47
be able to use a part of the treated water for its mining pro-
cesses. Under this agreement, the industry partner (and end
user of treated wastewater), Cerro Verde, provided all the
needed inve stment for capital and op erating expenditure n ot
only for the wastewater reuse system but for the entire plant.
The municipal authorities provided the land and permits for
the plant. Aer 29 years in private ownership by the mine, the
wastewater plant will be transferred to SEDAPAR. Under this
PPP agreement SEDAPAR has avoided the cost of construc-
tion and oper ation of the system thu s resulting in a net saving
of over US$ 335 million. Therefore, this mutually beneficial
solution has allowed the mine to expand its operations and
has resulted in significant savings for the municipality.
Implement the necessary policy, institutional, and
regulatory frameworks to promote the paradigm shi
Finally, for this paradigm shi to happen, policy, institutional,
and regulatory (PIR) incentives are needed to encourage
sustainable wastewater investments that promote circular
economy principles. The case studies analyzed
show that such projects are usually developed
in an ad hoc fashion and with no national
or regional planning, with the enabling
factors many times being physical and local:
water scarcity, distance to nearest water
source, etc. To enable the development of
innovative projects at scale, changes in the PIR
environment are also needed.
Wastewater treatment technologies for reuse
and resource recovery have been progressing
much faster than the enabling environment.
Weak policy and governmental systems are
among the key constraints to the development
of resource recovery projects.
Regulations and standards need to be tailored to the needs
of the region and the current trends in the sector. The vast
majority of the existing legislation in Latin America and
the Caribbean was created with the sole purpose of meeting
environmental standards and are reflective of instruments
from Europe and/or the United States, which have very
dierent capacities and financial means. However,
the changes in the sector call for new legislation and
regulation that embrace and promote gradual compliance,
are flexible, and foster reuse and resource recovery.
Finally, countries in the region need to ensure they have
the required institutional capacity to enforce environmental
regulations such as water pollution control standards.
Policy, institutional, and regulatory (PIR) initiatives can
either trigger or become a barrier to reuse and resource
recovery projects. Measures by the government such as
pricing freshwater use correctly, especially for industries,
could create incentives to switch to using treated wastewater
instead (San Luis Potosi case study [World Bank, 2018b]).
Economic instruments such as pollution taxes and fees can
positively contribute to reducing the treatment burden on
the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), positively impacting
capital and operating expenditures.
Governments can also promote energy generation in
WWTPs as part of their renewable portfolio, providing
WWTP operators the same incentives they would oer to
the energy sector. Better regulation of landfill use could
also promote the beneficial use of biosolids, for example.
On the other hand, banning treated water reuse for
agriculture, blocking power generation licenses for biogas
producers, or classifying wastewater biosolids as dangerous
materials can all pose a barrier to the development of reuse
and resource recovery projects.
One of the key factors that can encourage the development of
wastewater reuse and resource recovery is having
a clear national policy objective. A national policy statement,
such as the Brazil National Water Resources Policy,
shows the government’s commitment to the development of
wastewater management that includes reuse and resource
recovery. As seen in the case studies, this policy vision is
missing in several countries. Policy alone is not enough
to generate incentives for wastewater resource recovery;
it needs to be supported by a legal and
regulatory framework and an adequate
institutional arrangement (Rodriguez et al.,
2020; World Bank, 2019d).
A key institutional need for the development
of resource recovery projects is to foster
coordination between dierent levels of
government and between dierent sectors.
Coordination and cooperation among
dierent levels of government help ensure
that roles and responsibilities for wastewater
management and resource recovery are
clearly assigned and fulfilled. In many cases,
responsibility for policy development in the
wastewater sector lies with the national or
state level government, while the planning, investment, and
implementation of wastewater services are conducted by
local- or municipal-level governments. Various coordination
mechanisms can be used to address the institutional
disconnect between levels of government: creation of
a water/wastewater central institution such as the National
Water Commission (CONAGUA) in Mexico, contractual
arrangements between levels of government clearly
setting out roles and responsibilities as well as key
performance indicators and other monitoring mechanisms
or the reinforcement or creation of strong river basin
institutions.
Moreover, wastewater treatment and reuse and resource
recovery also involve stakeholders from dierent sectors
such as water and sanitation, energy, agriculture and food,
health, and others. Coordination between these dierent
stakeholders, in addition to an environmental protection
mechanism, is needed to create the right incentives for
wastewater resource recovery. Some ways to improve
coordination among sectors are: alignment of legislation
and regulatory frameworks across sectors; contractual
agreements between dierent sectors’ stakeholders,
Regulations and
standards need to
be tailored
to the needs of
the region and the
current trends in
the sector.

48 Water Reuse and Principles
as in the case of San Luis
Potosi (World Bank, 2018b),
where a national
agreement was signed
between the National Water
Commission (CONAGUA),
the Federal Electricity
Commission (CFE), and the
state government for the
sale of treated wastewater
to a thermal power plant
for cooling purposes;
or collaboration in the
development of multisector
master plans.
A robust regulatory framework can also provide incentives
for wastewater reuse and resource recovery. One of the main
obstacles to the recovery of wastewater as a resource is that
in most Latin American and Caribbean countries, the by-
products (treated wastewater, energy, and biosolids) are not
clearly regulated and have no clear value or price.
Countries should set clear regulations for the potential
by-products. Moreover, it is imperative that regulator y
frameworks from dierent sectors that are relevant to
wastewater reuse and resource recovery are aligned
(see diiculties in aligning water and energy regulatory
frameworks in the SAGUAPAC case study; World Bank,
2018f). The case studies depict dierent ways of bridging
intersectoral regulation, par ticularly between water and
energy. In most cases this was achieved through innovative
contracting arrangements, such as in the case of San Luis
Potosi.
Finally, the management of wastewater is intrinsically linked
to an ability to monitor and enforce water quality standards.
Countries in the region should strengthen their enforcement
capabilities. Without the right monitoring and enforcement
agencies and the right administrative procedures to impose
sanctions, it will be diicult to promote wastewater and
resource recovery initiatives (Rodriguez et al., 2020).
05
Conclusions and the Way forward
for the Region
Wastewater reuse and resource recovery will soon become
key aspects of wastewater management strategies
worldwide. The scarcity of freshwater in the face of
population growth and rapid urbanization, the challenge
of meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),
the impacts of climate change, and the logic of the circular
economy have created a compelling incentive to reuse and
recover wastewater. The linear approach to wastewater as
something to dispose of must give way to a more circular
conception of wastewater as a potentially valuable resource.
In order to implement the framework outlined above,
several actions are needed:
Basin planning eorts in the region need to be
strengthened. Governments need to support basin
organizations, so they can improve their technical expertise
and exert oversight powers to enforce the implementation
of basin plans. The sanitation sector—as one of the key
beneficiaries of river basin planning—needs to be present in
basin organizations and active in promoting basin planning.
Instead of fostering one WWTP per municipality, countries
should assess the real needs of basins, and work to achieve
a water quality standard consistent with the goals
established at the basin level (e.g., accounting for the diluting
capacity of a local river).
New or improved institutional arrangements may be
needed. Such arrangements could universalize basin-level
planning and encourage collaboration between dierent
levels of government, as well as between dierent sectors.
Moreover, budgets for government agencies could be linked
to river basin plans instead of targeting sector-specific
interventions.
Investment priorities need to be unique for each basin.
For this reason, a clear methodology to determine
investments priorities (in which areas, cities and towns should
investment take place), the timing or staging of investments,
the levels of treatment required and the technologies to
be used must be developed within the basin organization
or steering committee. These plans should have legally
binding powers and support from the central government to
overcome cross-sectorial constraints.
Promote the Utility of the Future. To move toward the ideal
utility of the future, utilities first have to be properly run and
perform adequately. Second, treatment facilities need to
be designed, planned, managed, and operated eectively
and eiciently. Finally, countries need to recognize the real
value of wastewater and the potential resources that can
be extracted from it, incorporating resource recovery and
circular economy principles in their strategy, investment
A robust
regulatory
framework can also
provide incentives
for wastewater
reuse and resource
recovery.

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 49
planning and infrastructure design. The utility of the future
aims for eicient operation and full resource recover y
with improved productivity and long-term sustainability.
The utility of the future operates under circular economy
principles and recognizes the real value of wastewater as
a resource: it aims to be net energy neutral or even energy
producing, implements beneficial use of biosolids, and reuses
water. Ideally, all these elements provide an extra revenue
stream or help cover O&M costs, making the utility both more
environmentally and financially sustainable.
Therefore, the utility of the future does not operate
wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) but water resource
recovery facilities (WRRFs). The utilit y of the future also
manages its infrastructure eiciency, while protecting
the environment and the health of the population.
Wastewater treatment technology must be adequately
understood and used. Adequate guidelines for wastewater
treatment process selection are needed in order to avoid
unnecessar y bias towards expensive technologies such as
activated sludge. Technologies that result in lower capital
expenditures (CapEx) and operational expenditures (OpEx)
must be promoted when possible (UASBs, trickling filters
(TFs), and lagoons). A staged or gradual implementation
approach in terms of treatment technology, geared towards
meeting limits imposed by legislation in the long term,
and supported by sound knowledge of wastewater treatment
technology and receiving water body capacity, must be
promoted.
Private sector involvement in wastewater has proven to
be key for the promotion of waste-to-resource projects.
Private sector participation brings technical expertise and
technology, as well as investment in infrastructure and
technology. Moreover, private sector participation early on
has led to the successful identification of resource o takers
from wastewater treatment plants. Eective private sector
participation, in turn, depends on a conducive, enabling
environment for investment as well as a clear policy and
regulatory framework. A well-developed and implemented
PPP law will therefore be important to attract private
operators (Box 2-10).
Box 2-10 Us ing a public-private par tnership (PPP) to increas e
wastewater coverage and foster wastewater reuse:
New Cairo, Egypt (So urce: World Bank, 2018g)
As the PPP in Eg ypt, initially the project faced significant gov-
ernance issues, since there were no legal or regulatory struc-
tures to handle PPPs. The solution was to use the process of
the New Cairo wastewater treatment plant to design a model
for future PPPs in Egypt and eventually approve a PPP law in
2010. To ensure that the first project was a success, outside
advisors were enlisted to assess and evaluate broad options
for PPP structuring. The Government of Egypt worked with
the International Finance Corporation and the World Bank
Group’s Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility to cre-
ate a conceptual framework and transaction model. To facil-
itate the PPP process, a PPP Central Unit was created to act
autonomously within the Ministry of Finance. Following the
success of the project, the government has created a set of
laws and regulations that will govern future PPP projects in
the country, drawing on lessons learned from the New Cairo
project. The establishment of a PPP central unit enabled co-
ordination within the government.
Various forms of public-private partnerships are oen
needed for the financing of waste-to-resource projects.
Blended finance is typically necessary, with subsidies from
governments or donors combined with private equity and
debt financing that is recovered through user taris and
resource recovery revenues. The level of subsidy warranted
should be determined by economic and financial analysis
at the basin level. To provide incentives for eicient
performance, subsidies should be disbursed based on
achieved results (Box 2-6).
Governments should support the creation of markets
for resource recovery products. Technical standards and
clear regulations for resource recovery products (treated
wastewater, energy, biosolids) are important in building
public and private confidence and creating a market that
makes resource recovery investments viable. Standards must
be flexible and well adapted to local conditions, as standards
that are too strict may disincentivize resource recovery.
They must also be consistently enforced. Cross-subsidies
from taris on fresh water may be needed to allow the price of
resource recovery byproducts to be set low enough to allow
the market to grow. Economic regulation can also be used to
stimulate and create competition in the bioresource market.
There is also a great need to align regulator y frameworks from
other sectors relevant to wastewater resource recover y,
as overlapping regulations can create negative incentives.
It is important to align policy, institutional, regulatory,
and financing frameworks to encourage and incentivize
the development of wastewater resource recovery projects.
Although policy and regulatory reforms are context specific
and linked to the political economy of each countr y, a clear
policy statement that promotes resource recovery as part
of a broad policy on water is a good first step. Around it,
commitments from high-level political leaders can coalesce
and public suppor t can be built. A set of policies to create
incentives for resource recovery from wastewater comes next,
accompanied by complementary institutional, regulator y, and
financing frameworks that can be improved over time.
In fact, flexibility and adaptability may well be most
conducive to progressive adoption of resource recovery
practices. The policies and frameworks then need to be
cascaded down from the national or federal levels to
lower levels. Finally, it will be important to raise awareness of
the reuse and resource recovery potential and benefits
in the region at all levels.

50 Water Reuse and Principles
References
Allaoui, M., Schmitz, T., Campbell, D. & Cherryl de la Porte, A. (2015). Good Practices for Regulating Wastewater Treatment:
Legislation, Policies and Standards. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
Retrieved from https://www.waterlex.org/beta/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Wastewater-Regulation.pdf.
Andersson, K., Rosemarin, A., Lamizana, B., Kvarnström, E., McConville, J., Seidu, R., Dickin, S. & Trimmer, C. (2016).
Sanitation, Wastewater Management and Sustainability: from Waste Disposal to Resource Recovery. United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) & Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), Nairobi and Stockholm.
Retrieved from https://www.sei.org/publications/sanitation-wastewater-and-sustainability/.
ASCE (American Societ y of Civil Engineers). (2013). Chicago to Add Nutrient Recovery to Largest Plant. Civil Engineering, 5 November.
Retrieved from https://www.asce.org/magazine/20131105-chicago-to-add-nutrient-recovery-to-largest-plant .
Baietti, A., Kingdom, W. & van Ginneken, M. (2006). Characteristics of Well-Performing Public Water Utilities. Working Note No. 9,
World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Ellen Macarthur Foundation. (N.d.). Concept: What Is a Circular Economy? A Framework for an Economy That Is Restorative and
Regenerative by Design. Retrieved from https://www.ellenmacarthur foundation.org/circular-economy/concept.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). (2017). Reutilización de aguas para agricultura en América Latina y el Caribe: Estado,
Principios y Necesidades. FAO, Washington, D.C.
HLPW (High Level Panel on Water). (2018). Making Every Drop Count. An Agenda for Water Action: High-Level Panel on Water Outcome
Document. 14 March , 2018. Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/17825HLPW_Outcome.pdf.
Hutton, G. & Varughese, M. C. (2016).The Costs of Meeting the 2030 Sustainable Development Goal Targets on Drinking Water
Sanitation, and Hygiene, Water and Sanitation Program: Technical Paper. World Bank Group, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/415441467988938343/The-costs-of-meeting-the-2030-
sustainable-development-goal-targets-on-drinking-water-sanitation-and-hygiene.
Lautze, J., Stander, E., Drechsel, P., da Silva, A. K. & Keraita, B. (2014). Global experiences in water reuse. Colombo, Sri Lanka,
International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). p. 31.
(Resource Recovery and Reuse Series 4).
Retrieved from http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/wle/rrr/resource_recovery_and_reuse-series_4.pdf.
Mejia, A. (2014). Water Scarcity in Latin America and the Caribbean Myths and Reality. In Garrido, A. & Shechter, M. (eds.)
Water for Americas: Challenges and Opportunities. Routledge, Oxford.
NSF (National Science Foundation), DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) & EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (2015).
Energy-Positive Water Resource Recovery Workshop Report: Executive Summary. Workshop on April 28–29, 2015, Arlington, VA.
Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/11/f27/epwrr_workshop_executive_summary.pdf.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2018). Financing Water: Investing in Sustainable Growth,
OECD Environment Policy Paper no. 11.
Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/water/Policy-Paper-Financing-Water-Investing-in-Sustainable-Growth.pdf.
Otoo, M. & Drechsel, P. (eds.). (2018). Resource Recovery from Waste: Business Models for Energy,
Nutrient and Water Reuse in Low- and Middle-income Countries. Routledge – Earthscan, Oxon, UK.
Retrieved from http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Books/PDF/resource-recovery-from-waste.pdf.
Reymond, P., Renggli, S. & Luthi, C. (2016). Towards Sustainable Sanitation in an Urbanising World. In Ergen, M. (eds.) Sustainable
Urbanization, IntechOpen. Retrieved from https://www.intechopen.com/books/sustainable-urbanization/towards-
sustainable-sanitation-in-an-urbanising-world.
Rodriguez, D. J., Serrano, H. A., Delgado, A., Nolasco, D. & Saltiel, G. (2020). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter
Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Santos, J. L. (2018). Gestion Integral de Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales en la Ciudad de Guayaquil.
Retrieved from http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/527501544484090056/4-Jose-Luis-Santos-argentina-ing-santos-
final-14112018.pdf .
Soppe, G., Janson, N. & Piantini, S. (2018). Water Utility Turnaround Framework: A Guide for Improving Performance. World Bank,
Washington, D.C. Retrieved form http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/515931542315166330/Water-Utility-Turnaround-
Framework-A-Guide-for-Improving-Performance.
Trémolet, S. (2011). Identifying the Potential for Results-Based Financing for Sanitation, Water and Sanitation Program: Working Paper.
Retrieved from https://www.cseindia.org/static/mount/recommended_readings_mount/09-Identifying-the-Potential-for-
Results-Based-Financing-for-Sanitation.pdf.
UNDESA (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Aairs). (2018). Population Division. World Urbanization Prospects:
The 2018 Revision, Online Edition. Retrieved from https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Publications.
WDI (World Development Indicators). (2019). Latin America and the Caribbean Dataset (online).
Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/region/latin-america-and-caribbean.
WEF (World Economic Forum). (2014). Towards the Circular Economy: Accelerating the Scale-Up across Global Supply Chains. World
Economic Forum, Geneva, prepared in collaboration with the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company.
Retrieved from http://reports.weforum.org/toward-the-circular-economy-accelerating-the-scale-up-across-global-supply-
chains/.

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 51
WHO (World Health Organization) & UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund). (2017). Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and
Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines. Geneva: WHO and UNICEF.
. (2019). Progress on household drinking water, sanitation and hygiene 2000-2017. Special focus on inequalities. New York:
UNICEF and WHO, 2019.
World Bank. (2018a). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Atotonilco de Tula, Mexico. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29493.
. (2018b). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of San Luis Potosí, Mexico. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29491.
. (2018c). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Ridgewood, NJ, USA. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29487.
. (2018d). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Durban, South Africa. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29489.
. (2018e). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Prodes, Brazil. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29488.
. (2018f). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29492.
. (2018g). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of New Cairo, Egypt. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29490.
. (2019a). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the
Caribbean, Background Paper I: Eicient and Eective Management of Water Resource Recovery Facilities. World Bank,
Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33380.
. (2019b). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America
and the Caribbean, Background Paper II: Showcasing the River Basin Planning Process through a Concrete Example:
The Rio Bogota Cleanup Project. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33381.
. (2019c). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the
Caribbean, Background Paper III: The Role of Modeling in Decision Making in the Basin Approach. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33382.
. (2019d). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and
the Caribbean, Background Paper IV: Policy, Regulatory and Institutional Incentives for the Development of Resource
Recovery Projects in Wastewater. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/
handle/10986/33383.
. (2019e). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America
and the Caribbean, Background Paper V: Financial Incentives for the Development of Resource Recovery Projects
in Wastewater. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33384.
. (2019f). From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the
Caribbean, Background Paper VI: Market Potential and Business Models for Resource Recovery Products. World Bank,
Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33385.
. (2019g). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Santiago, Chile. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/32744.
. (2019h). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Nagpur, India. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33111.
. (2019i). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource—The Case of Arequipa, Peru. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33110.
. (2020). Wastewater: From Waste to Resource. The Participator y Process.
Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/water/publication/wastewater-initiative#participatory.
World Bank & CAF (Development Bank of Latin America). (2018). Agua Residual: De Desecho a Recurso
—Cambiando Paradigmas en America Latina y el Caribe. Agenda
Retrieved from http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/569441545316362225/FINAL-AGENDA-BancoMundial-Agua-Residual-SPA.pdf.
WWAP (United Nations World Water Assessment Programme). (2015). The United Nations World Water Development Report 2015,
Water for a Sustainable World. Paris: UNESCO.
. (2017). The United Nations World Water Development Repor t 2017, Wastewater: The Untapped Resource. Paris: UNESCO.

52 Water Reuse and Principles
Appendix A
These case studies iustrate internationa best practices and provide exampes of projects and programs that promote the
impementation of one or severa circuar economy principes (i.e., resource recover y from wastewater treatments pants, eicient
pant management and cost savings, innovative financing mechanisms, integrated panning principes, and additiona revenue
streams from resource recovery). In each case study severa project eements were anayzed: (i) circuar economy and resource
recovery mode, (ii) contract arrangements, (iii) financing structure, and (iv) enabing factors (i.e., institutiona, reguator y and
technica) to be abe to draw concusions. The fu pubished case studies can be found cicking in the hyperinks (and in the
reference ist).
Case study
Circular economy model
Contract structure
Financial structure
Enabling factors
Mexico:
San Luis
Potosí,
Ten orio
Project
Treated wastewater
reused for industry
(power plant cooling),
agriculture (irrigation
of 500 hectares),
and environmental
conserv ation (wetland
improvement) as part
of a wider sanitation
and water reuse plan.
Build, own,
operate, transfer
(BOOT); 20 years
Revolving
purchase
agreement with
the Federal
Electricity
Commission
(CFE)
40% government
grant from FINFRA
funds
36% from
Banobras loan;
18-year maturity
period
4% equity by risk
capital company
Federal
government
guarantee
Institutional: Strong leadership of
the federal and state water authorities.
Cross-sectoral collaboration with CFE.
Regulatory: Local water prices at
contract signing promoted the use of
non-aquifer water. Clarity of payment
mechanism and risks well defined and
allocated.
Technical: Scarcity of water resource,
multiple quality levels of treated
wastewater tailored to dierent uses.
Mexico:
Atotonilco
de Tula
Treated wastewater
reused for agriculture
(irrigation Valle
Mezquital). Self-
generation of energy
with biogas to cover
around 60% of energy
needs. Biosolids used
for fertilizers and soil
enhancement.
Design, build,
own, operate,
transfer
(DBOOT);
25 years
49% government
grant from El
Fondo Nacional
de Infraestructura
(FONADIN)
20% equity from
consortium
partner
31% commercial
finance
Institutional: Strong ownership
of experienced water resources
management institutions. Strong
experience of public funding agency.
Regulatory: Clear regulations allowed
the reuse of water and biosolids.
Technical: Multiple quality levels of
treated wastewater tailored to dierent
uses, Water Treatment Technology
Program (WTTP) adapted to dry
seasons.
Bolivia:
Santa Cruz
de la Sierra
Purchase of certified
emission reductions
(CERs) from methane
gas capture.
Electricity for self-
consumption.
Emission
reduction
purchase
agreement for
biogas capture.
First of its kind
for low-income
countries.
World Bank
financing CER
but withdrew
due to change in
legislation
Regulatory: Project failed to be
implemented due to regulatory
limitations in the energy sector.
Technical: Methane capture technology
adapted to anaerobic lagoons.
Egypt:
Cairo,
New Cairo
project
Treated water reused
for agriculture.
Biosolids used as
fertilizers.
First public-
private
partnership
(PPP) in Egypt
Design, build,
finance, operate,
transfer; 20 years
71% public finance
21% nonrecourse
finance
8% equity
Institutional: Strong leadership of
central government (creation of
a centralized PPP unit).
Regulatory: The full potential of
the project has not been realized
due to ambiguous or no regulatory
frameworks. Both the sale of carbon
credits and the use of electricity
generated have been stalled.
Technical: Strong external technical
support and advising (Public-Private
Infrastructure Advisory Facility, PPIAF).
United
States:
New
Jersey,
Ridgewood
Plant energy
neutrality through
the use of biogas
generated
by the plant
(with co-digestion).
20-year power
purchase
agreement
with municipal
utility
4 million
private finance
(Ridgewood
Green)
Renewable energy
certificates
Institutional: Strong public support and
commitment form the municipality.
Technical: Innovation used to retrofit
existing infrastructure.

2 From Waste to Resource: Shiing Paradigms for Smarter Wastewater Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean 53
Notes
1. Approximately 233 million people who currently do not have access, plus 74 million additional people.
Brazil:
PRODES
Output-based
grants tied to strict
environmental
and managerial
performance
standards promoting
resource eiciency.
Funding eligibility
tied to river basin
committees
promoting a river
basin planning
approach.
No particular
contracting
structure is
promoted
Results-based
financing
Institutional: Strong support from
the Finance Ministry and
the National Water Agency.
Regulatory: Strict connection
between results and financial aid.
Technical: Strong technical support
from ANA during the certifying
process.
South Africa:
Durban
Treated wastewater
sold for industrial
purposes:
Modi (paper industr y)
and SAPREF (refinery).
20-year BOOT
contract
47% Development
Bank of Southern
Africa loan
20% equity
33% commercial
loan
Institutional: Strong coordination
mechanisms supported by the local
government.
Technical: Closeness of treated
wastewater o takers.
Technological innovations to retrofit
existing plant.
Chile:
Santiago,
La Farfana
Generation and sale
of biogas to one end
user
Joint Venture +
Biogas Purchase
Agreement
(6 renewable years)
Corporate
blended funding
instruments
(green bonds/
debt)
Possibility to sell
renewable energy
certificates
Strong ownership from stakeholders
and financially sound partners.
Technical: Proximity to
the Town Gas Plant. Technological
innovations to retrofit existing
plant.
Regulatory: Regulated gas market
allows using biogas for town gas
production. Water regulation that
fosters innovation: It provides
a grace period of five years during
which utilities can keep the profits
obtained from an innovation before
they are obliged to pass them
through to consumers via tari
reductions.
Peru:
Arequipa
Treated Wastewater
reuse for the mining
industry
BOOT 29 years
awarded to End
user
100% financed
by the end user
(private mining
company)
Institutional: Comprehensive PPP
legislation, strong support from
local and federal government
Technical: Private partner ensured
that the best technology was
chosen for the local conditions
Water scarcity: the cost of tapping
the nearest water source was high.
India:
Nagpur
Treated wastewater
reuse for cooling
purposes in thermal
power plant
30-year DBOT-PPP
End User Model
50% Government
Grant
50% Private
(sole end user)
Water scarcity: the cost of tapping
the nearest water source was high.
Institutional: Strong Regional and
Federal Government support
Technical: The proximity of
the power plant lowered
transportation cost

©Iakov Kalinin/Dreamstime.

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 55
3
Water Reuse in Singapore:
The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular
Economy?
Cecilia Tortajada and Ishaan Bindal
Cecilia Tortajada, Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore.
e-mail: cecilia.tortajada@nus.edu.sg
Ishaan Bindal, Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore.
e-mail: ishaan.bindal@nus.edu.sg
Abstract
As part of the circular economy, there is increasing interest internationally in water reuse, reclaimed water or recycled wastewater.
This interest responds to water scarcity concerns at present and to demands projected for the resource by all sectors
in the future, which will surpass freshwater available. It also responds to the incentive to close the water loop and extend the
lifetime of water resources through longer use, with the related economic, social and environmental benefits. In this chapter,
we discuss water reuse in Singapore where it has been implemented since 2003 for potable and non-potable uses, putting in
practice the concept of circular economy. We argue that water reuse is part of a comprehensive framework of water security
in the city state that considers long-term policy, planning, management, governance and technological developments.
As essential foundations for a reliable water reuse system, we discuss water resources management related institutional and
legal frameworks and their evolution over time. We conclude that water reuse is one of the most important pillars for Singapore to
provide safe and reliable water sources at present and looking towards the future.
Keywords
Water reuse, recycled wastewater, potable applications, non-domestic users, Singapore

56 Water Reuse and Principles
01
Introduction
The circular economy approach seeks to recover and reuse
as much as possible of the resources that are used for socio-
economic development in any given place. It has the objective
to reduce pressure on the use of resources and protect the
environment within a framework of sustainability
(Byrne et al., 2016). In the case of water resources, when
properly planned and implemented, recycling and reuse can
produce additional sources of clean water for the increasing
number and types of uses. Applications include potable
water supplies, urban non-potable applications
(e.g. landscape irrigation, street cleaning), irrigation for
agriculture production, groundwater storage and recharge,
barriers to avoid saltwater intrusion, environmental
restoration (e.g. wetland remediation), industrial processes,
onsite non-potable use, etc. (USEPA, 2017).
The potential sources of wastewater for water recovery are
municipal and industrial. In the case of municipal sources,
they are treated to the level required for the intended use,
and reused for potable and non-potable applications
in the broad economy. In the case of industrial sources, they
are reused for on-site purposes. In both cases, drivers for
water reuse are related to water quantity and quality concerns
and include actual and potential water scarcity risks,
and also to the need for discharging wastewater eluents to
the environment within certain quality limits with
the associated fines and penalties if discharges are above
the norms. Instead, by treating wastewater to higher quality
standards, resulting water can be reused for dierent uses
increasing the amount of water available (USEPA, 2012).
Water recycling and reuse
applications depend
on the short and long-term
needs and resources of the
specific cities, water utility
operators and industries.
They also depend
on the possibility to
respond to strict laws
and regulations, to be
able to cover high-capital
expenditure costs in the
long-term, and to address
potential risks to human
health and the environment
as well as public perception
concerns, among others.
Our analysis focuses on
water reuse (recycled
wastewater or reclaimed
water) from municipal
wastewater in Singapore to augment and diversify water
resources for all uses. NEWater, as it is known locally, is part
of broad, comprehensive water resources policy, planning,
management, governance and technological development
security framework. Water reuse covers up to 40 percent
of the water needs at present and this percentage is expected
to increase to 55 percent by 2060. Therefore, the reason for its
importance.
We also discuss how Singapore has put in practice the circular
economy concept by reusing water for potable and non-
potable applications, instead of discharging the wastewater
to the sea aer treatment. With this, the water loop has been
closed and the lifetime of water resources has been extended
through longer use, with significant economic, social and
environmental benefits.
In the case of
water resources,
when properly
planned and
implemented,
recycling and
reuse can produce
additional sources
of clean water
for the increasing
number and types
of uses.

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 57
02
Water Resources Management
Singapore is a city-state of 725.7 km2 in Southeast Asia
situated 137 km nor th of the equator at the southern end of
the Malay Peninsula. It has a total population of 5.7 million
and a population density of 7,866 persons per km2 (Singapore
Department of Statistics, 2020). Even though it has an average
annual rainfall of around 2,340 mm, it is unable to store
it due to the limited land area that can be allocated for
reservoirs and the absence of aquifers. Instead, Singapore has
to rely on imported water from the state of Johor, Malaysia,
and to produe reused and desalinated water.
Total water demand in the city-state is projected to double by
2060 from approximately 1.9 million m3/d at present.
In order to respond to the expected demand, in addition to
water conservation strategies, water reuse and desalination
capacities are being increased to supply up to 85 percent of
the water needs at that time (PUB, 2018d).
Singapore’s long-term water security strategy started
in 1965 aer independence due to physical scarcity of water
resources. Throughout the years, it has developed
a comprehensive water resources management system that
considers catchment management (including land use),
infrastructure development, treating and storing local and
imported water sources (from Johor, Malaysia), developing
pricing and non-pricing mechanisms for conservation
purposes for domestic and non-domestic users, wastewater
management, production of reused water from municipal
sources since 2003 (known as NEWater), and desalinated
water since 2005. For both non-conventional sources of water
(NEWater and desalination), major investments have been
made since the 1970s in research and development to support
technological developments such as membrane technology,
reverse osmosis, and lower energy-intensive processes,
among others.
Fundamental components of water management in Singapore
have included long-term planning horizons, eective legal and
regulatory frameworks, and strong political will (Tortajada et
al., 2013). Following is the analysis of institutional and legal
frameworks for water resources management, indispensable
for NEWater production.
03
Institutional and Legal Frameworks
The objectives of the Clean Water Policy in the city-state
include: ensuring supply of water for all, conser ving water
resources, and encouraging ownership of waterways.
Key targets comprise increasing supply of water from
non-conventional sources of water (reused and desalinated
water) to cover up to 85 percent of water needs in 2060;
reducing daily per capita domestic water consumption to
130 /capita/day by 2030; and working with the public and
private sectors as well as the society as a whole to create
greater awareness of the importance of water conservation.
PUB, the National Water Agency, a statutory board under
the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources (MEWR),
manages water supply, water catchment and wastewater
in an integrated way. Two other statutory boards under
MEWR are the National Water Agency (NEA), and Singapore
Food Authority (SFA). NEA is responsible for ensuring a clean
and green environment and the sustainable development
of Singapore. Key roles are to protect natural resources
(including water resources) from pollution, maintain a high
level of public health and provide timely meteorological
information (NEA , n.d.). The recently created SFA is
responsible for ensuring and securing safe food supply for
the city-state (Singapore Food Agency, n.d.).
The Public Utilities Act, The Public Utilities (Water Supply)
and the Sewerage and Drainage Act provide the legal
framework for the water sector. The following sections
present a historic view of some of the legal instruments that
support eicient water resources management.
3.1. Public Utilities Act
The Act to reconstitute the Public Utilities Board and matter
connected therewith is the Public Utilities Act. This was
first enacted in 1963 as the Public Utilities Ordinance, when
Singapore was still a British colony. The Ordinance was
necessitated by the peculiar structure which the Singapore
government inherited from the British administration –
Singapore had both a Central Government and a City Council,
which existed “side by side and [were] duplicating each
other’s functions and activities”. For eiciency purposes,
various functions of the City Council, including streets,
sewage, and public health, were absorbed by the Central
Government ministries. In the case of water, this was
transferred from the water departments of the City Council
to the newly created Public Utilities Board (now PUB National
Water Agency) (Parliament of Singapore, 1962).
In 1972, the Public Utilities Act (having become an Act
upon Singapore’s independence in 1965), was amended to

58 Water Reuse and Principles
allow PUB to cut o supplies of gas and electricity in case
of emergency, fire and in certain other circumstances and
also to cut o supply of water in case of misuse or waste
(Singapore Government, 1972). Two years later, in 1974,
the Act was amended as Singapore began to licence water
service workers, e.g., workers who design, install, construct,
erect or repair, or carrying out of any other work on pipes,
water fittings, apparatus or appliances which supply fresh
water (Singapore Government, 1974).
In the same year, electrical workers and contractors were
licensed under the Electrical Workers and Contractors
Licensing Act (Singapore Government, 1998). This Act would
be repealed in 2001, and the licensing scheme brought under
section 82 of the Electricity Act (Singapore Government,
2002a).
In 1991, the Public Utilities Act was amended again to
implement a licensing scheme for gas ser vice workers, and to
provide for a list of water services works that could be done by
non-licensed workers (Singapore Government, 1991).
The Act was repealed and re-enacted in 1995 (Singapore
Government, 1995) to allow for the Public Utilities Board
to transfer its Electricity and Gas Departments to a private
company, Singapore Power Pte. Ltd. Privatisation was
part of a plan to allow Singaporeans to buy shares of this
new company. The PUB would become a regulator for
the electricity and gas service industries (Parliament of
Singapore, 1995).
In 2001, the Act was again repealed and re-enacted (Singapore
Government, 2001a). This time, the PUB took over the Ministry
of Environment’s Drainage and Sewerage Depar tments.
The Act gave the Board a mandate, and the resources,
to manage the entire water cycle optimally, opening the way
for the Board to begin treating and recycling wastewater.
The Act was amended in 2012 to provide for a new function
of the PUB in regulating and managing activities in and
around reser voirs and waterways, including the management
and maintenance of any dam or boat transfer facility in or
connecting to a reservoir (Singapore Government, 2012a).
This new regulatory function was required as a prerequisite
for the Board to open up water bodies for community and
recreational uses. It allowed the Board to draw up rules and
regulations for the proper use of water bodies by the public.
The Act was also amended to properly reflect the Sanitar y
Appliance Fee and the Waterborne Fee as a tax contribution to
the sewerage system (Singapore Government, 2012b).
These fees were previously justified as part of
the government’s general taxation power (Parliament of
Singapore, 2012). Additionally, the Act now included a list of
costs that may be included in the price of water supplied
by the Board (Singapore Government, 2012b).
In 2018, the Act was amended once again. The water service
worker licensing regime was reformed to bring sanitary
plumbers into the scheme (who were previously not subject to
licensing) (Singapore Government, 2018). This was done over
concerns of cross-contamination of the drinking water supply
and the sewerage systems, citing the case of Alameda City,
California, where a cross-connection between
the city’s drinking water supply and a non-potable irrigation
well rendered parts of the city’s water supply undrinkable
(Parliament of Singapore, 2018).
Institutionally, in 2004, the Ministry of Environment
became the current Ministry of the Environment and Water
Resources (2019) in charge of law and policy making in
the environmental and water fields. Its two statutory boards,
the Public Utilities Board and the National Environment,
are in charge of implementing its policy directions (Tortajada
et al., 2013).
At present, the PUB is the primary statutory agency which
manages Singapore’s water supply, as well as its sewerage
and drainage networks. Its statutory functions include
providing, constructing and maintaining water catchment
areas, reser voirs and other works; managing and working
water installations; securing and providing adequate supply
of water at reasonable prices; regulating the supply of piped
water for human consumption; collecting and treating used
water (as wastewater is known locally); promoting water
conservation; regulating the construction, maintenance,
improvement, operation and use of sewerage and land
drainage systems; regulating the discharge of sewage and
trade eluent1; and regulating and managing activities in and
around reser voirs, waterways, and water catchment areas
(Singapore Government, 2002n-v).
3.2. National Environment Agency (NEA)
NEA was created in 2002 under the National Environment
Agency Act by the merger of the then-Ministry of
Environment’s Environmental Public Health and
the Environment Policy and Management divisions, and
the Meteorological Service Department (Tortajada et al.,
2013). This was to prepare for the streamlining of the Ministry
of Environment to become a policymaker in 2004, while the
NEA and the PUB would implement Ministr y of Environment
policies (Singapore Government, 2003a).
At present, the NEA is the primary statutory agency which
manages Singapore’s sanitation facilities, as part of its wider
remit to manage and protect the environment. Its statutory
functions include, inter alia, monitoring and assessing
the water quality of inland and coastal waters, and managing
and regulating the discharge of trade eluent, oil, chemicals,
sewage and any other polluting matter into water courses or
on land; constructing, developing, managing, and regulating
refuse treatment and disposal facilities and regulating refuse
collection and disposal; controlling land contamination and
regulating the remediation of contaminated land; embarking
on educational programmes to promote and encourage public
awareness of and participation in environmental matters;
making regulations on public cleansing, conservancy and
the depositing, collection, removal and disposal of dust, dirt,
ashes, rubbish, night soil, dung, trade refuse, garden refuse,
stable refuse, trade eluent and other filth; and matters

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 59
relating to the receptacles used or provided in connection
therewith; and regulating the provision and maintenance
of sanitary conveniences (Singapore Government, 2002m;
2003b-e).
The Public Utilities Act establishes that the PUB is the only
entity allowed to supply water, unless the agency gives
written approval to another entity (Singapore Government,
2002w). The quality standards of the water supplied are
regulated by the NEA under the Environmental Public
Health Act (Chapter 95) (Water suitable for drinking) (Part 1)
Regulations enacted in March 2019 (NEA, 2019a)
and Environmental Public Health (Water Suitable for Drinking)
(No. 2) Regulations 2019 enacted in April 2019 (Singapore
Government, 2019).
For water quality and safety standards there is a single set of
standards stipulated by the National Environment
Agency pursuant to the Environmental Public Health Act
(Singapore Government, 2002l). These standards are found in
the Environmental Public Health (Water Suitable for Drinking)
Regulations 2019 (NEA, 2019a).
These Regulations also require piped drinking water quality
to be monitored by the supplier (i.e. the PUB). The specific
rules are found in the NEA’s Code of Practice on Drinking
Water Sampling and Safety Plans (NEA, 2019b) under the
provisions of the Environmental Public Health (Water Suitable
for Drinking) Regulations 2019 (NEA, 2019a). The water safety
and water sampling plan, as well as the annual review of these
plans, must be approved by the NEA (Singapore Government,
2008a). The laborator y used to test the samples must also
be approved by this agency (Singapore Government, 2008b).
Regarding wastewater, the Environment Protection and
Management Act provides that “any person who discharges
or causes or permits to be discharged any trade eluent,
oil, chemical, sewage or other polluting matters into any
drain or land”, without a written permission from the NEA,
is guilty of an oence. Further, it provides for a statutory
presumption that “where any trade eluent…[etc.] has been
discharged from any premises into any drain or land, it shall
be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the occupier
of the premises… had discharged” the trade eluent, etc.
Additionally, any trade eluent, etc., which has been allowed
to be discharged into any drain or land by the NEA must first
be treated to meet the standards in both the Environmental
Protection and Management (Trade Eluent) Regulations
(for discharge into watercourses) (Singapore Government,
2008c), or the Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent)
Regulations (for discharge into sewers) (Singapore
Government, 2007a).
Further, in the case of the Sewerage and Drainage
(Trade Eluent) Regulations, persons may seek permission
from the PUB to discharge trade eluent with a higher amount
of TSS, BOD, or COD, subject to a fee in the case of TSS or BOD.
Even then, these higher amounts are still subject to absolute
caps (Singapore Government, 2007b).
It is the NEA who is responsible for monitoring water pollution
through discharge of waste, pursuant to the Environmental
Protection and Management Act (Singapore Government,
2002b).
The discharge of eluents into a watercourse or drain or land
requires prior permission from the NEA under
the Environmental Protection and Management Act
(Singapore Government, 2002b). The discharge of eluents
into sewerage requires prior permission from the PUB under
the Sewerage and Drainage Act (Singapore Government,
2001b).
Permission to discharge eluents may be revoked or
suspended at any time, under the Environmental Protection
and Management (Trade Eluent) Regulations,
or the Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent) Regulations,
as may be applicable. The permission can be revoked or
invalidated when the relevant Regulation has been breached,
or at the discretion of the NEA or PUB (Singapore Government,
2008d).
The NEA is in charge of the administration of penalties for
the pollution of watercourses, and the PUB is in charge of
the administration of the penalties relating to discharge of
eluent into sewerage. Application of fines in Singapore
to enforce regulatory measures is ver y strict. For example,
failure to treat eluents before discharging into watercourses,
drains or on land results in fines that do not exceed S$20,000
the first conviction and $50,000 the second or subsequent
conviction, with possible imprisonment for 3 months.
The damage of any public sewerage system that renders
the sewerage system inoperable or severe disruption to
the process of treating sewage, trade eluent or the process
of water reclamation due to discharging toxic substances or
hazardous substance into sewerage systems results in
a fine that does not exceed S$200,000 and/or imprisonment
not exceeding 2 years. Penalties by both agencies can be seen
in tables 1 and 2 in the Appendix.
It is within this legal, regulatory and institutional framework
that is continuously adapted to the changing needs,
that the PUB, National Water Agency, has produced reused
water for potable and non-potable uses since 2003.
This is analysed below.

60 Water Reuse and Principles
04
NEWater
Reused water, planned from the 1970s and first produced in
2013, known as NEWater in Singapore, has been successfully
implemented due to support from policymakers and the
public in general, within a long-term security framework
(To rt ajada et al., 2013). It has passed more than 150,000
scientific tests and exceeds the World Health Organisation’s
drinking water quality standards (PUB, 2017a). Tests are
supervised by a panel of local and international experts.
Table 3 in Appendix shows typical values of NEWater quality.
NEWater is reclaimed municipal water that augments and
diversifies water resources for all users. It is supplied directly
for non-domestic purposes to wafer fabrication plants
(the largest users) and industrial states and commercial
buildings, by designated pipes to all users (shown in purple
in Figure 3-1). The venture has been highly successful.
NEWater is also used for indirect potable purposes during
dry periods by augmenting water sources in the reservoirs.
It blends with raw water and is treated by conventional
treatment before being distributed as tap water. Its use for
indirect potable reuse represents a small proportion of water
demand; however, this propor tion can increase when and
if necessar y (Lee & Tan, 2016).
Figure 3-1 shows the water cycle in Singapore, including
the NEWater contribution to the circular economy by closing
the water loop and extending the lifetime of water resources
through longer use (Ng, 2018), with numerous related
economic, social and environmental benefits.
Economic benefits include a growing industrial sector that
is supplied with NEWater; socially, it is essential because it
provides the water for domestic use during dry periods
for the population, and because of the jobs it supports in
industrial and commercial sectors. Environmentally,
its benefits are unquestionably because wastewater is treated
properly before being discharged to the sea.
Currently, NEWater meets approximately 40% of Singapore’s
water demand. It is expected to meet up to 55% of the demand
by 2060, mainly by streamlining the water infrastructure to
collect 100% of wastewater.
At present, the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System (DTSS) collects
and transpor ts wastewater by gravity to centralised water
reclamation plants for treatment. Phase One of the DTSS,
which covers the eastern and northern areas of Singapore, was
completed in 2008, and Phase Two, which will extend to western
areas, is projec ted to be completed by 2025. The expanded
system will augment overall water reclamation capacities.
Existing intermediate pumping stations will be decommissioned
as they will not be necessary any more (PUB, 2017a).
To produce NEWater, clarified secondary eluent from
the treatment processes is introduced as feedwater
in the NEWater plant. This secondary eluent is micro-
screened before passing through microfiltration or
ultrafiltration to remove fine solids and particles,
and then further purified with reverse osmosis to remove
bacteria, viruses and most dissolved salts. The reverse
osmosis permeate is finally disinfected by ultraviolet radiation
producing a high-grade, ultra-clean reclaimed water end
product, NEWater (PUB, 2015). Improving the process
and the technolog y used in its production is one of the key
strategies of the PUB for water demand management with
S$77.01 million spent in Research and Development for
treatment processes since 2002 (PUB, 2018b). For example,
in 2018, in the Phase 4 expansion for the management of
industrial used water, the treatment capacity the Jurong
Water Reclamation Plant was increased from 204,574 to
259,127 m3/d by implementing a thermal hydrolysis process.
Future capacity improvements are projected for other plants
such as in the case of the Changi Water Reclamation Plant,
the treatment capacity of which is expected to increase from
918,310 to 1 million m3/d thanks to the use of membrane
bioreactors (PUB, 2018a).
The PUB recognises that urban water
resilience is reliant on numerous aspects
that include, but are not limited to NEWater.
One of the most important aspects is
water conservation by domestic and
non-domestic sectors (Seah & Lee, 2020),
followed by expansion and advancement
of water networks, and advance in
technological development. As part of
resilience building, in 2017 alone, the PUB
spent S$733 million in capital expenditure
to replace, improve and expand water,
wastewater, NEWater, and industrial water
infrastructure in the order of S$404.6
million, S$294.6 million, S$13.9 million, and
S$19.9 million, respectively. It is important
to note that infrastructure is funded from
cash generated from revenue collected (net
Figure 3-1 Water cycle i n Singapore (adapted from PUB, 2018d)

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 61
of expenses) and borrowings (PUB, 2018a).
For a circular economy, more eicient use and conservation
of (all) water resources is essential. In the case of Singapore,
according to the current models used, total water use is
expected to more than double by 2060 from 1.9 million
m3/d in 2020 to 4.1 million m3/d. Approximately 70% of it is
expected to be for non-domestic use, for which NEWater and
desalinated water are the main water sources.
This has enormous implications in terms of energy use
as energy requirements to produce NEWater and desalinated
water are 5-17 times higher than conventional treatment
methods.
With the expected increase in non-domestic water use and,
if current technology did not improve, the energy footprint to
produce both NEWater and desalinated water would increase
from the current 1,000 GWh/year to 4,000 GWh/year in 2060
(PUB, 2018c). PUB’s target at present is thus to reduce both
water consumption of all users (mainly non-domestic)
and energy consumption, mainly of the desalination
processes, by more than half from the current 3.5 kWh/m3 to
1.5 kWh/m3 in the short term, and to 1 kWh/m3, as a system,
in the long-term. Regarding NEWater, PUB’s short-term target
is to increase its recovery rate from the current 75% to 90%
at the same energy consumption of 0.4 kWh/m3 for its energy-
intensive RO treatment stage. In order to improve technology
with the previous objectives, between 2002 and 2018,
PUB, research partners, and the Singapore National Research
Foundation, have invested S$453 million in over 600 water
projects (PUB, 2018b).
With the aim to achieve water use eiciency and conser vation,
PUB provides technological support to all companies.
As a result, there are companies that are now using less
potable water; others are replacing potable water use with
NEWater use; and some others are using less NEWater
and/or replacing it with desalinated water. For example,
Systems of Silicon Manufacturing Company (SSMC) reports
that their water consumption has reduced, and that water
reclamation rates have increased from 50 percent in 2011 to
80 percent in 2015, resulting in an annual reduction of potable
water of approximately 1 million m3 since 2003. Companies
like Mitsubishi Heavy Industries-Asia Pacific (MHI-AP) are
in the planning stage to reduce consumption of NEWater
replacing it with desalinating water for cooling purposes,
and diverting surplus NEWater for other uses. The objective
is to reduce consumption of potable water, first, and then
of NEWater, for eiciency purposes and with the resulting
reduction in infrastructure development investment.
There are also companies that are constructing recycling
plants to reuse more water in their own processes. In one of
the cases, a recycling plant under construction will be able to
treat 2,000–2,500 m3/d, increasing its water recycling rate
from the current 18 percent to 41 percent and reducing
NEWater consumption by 2,000 m3/d. A key component of
water conservation for non-domestic users has been
to understand industries’ water needs, which it is done
as much as possible.
05
Final Remarks
With the objective to achieve
water security, Singapore
has diversified its water
resource alternatives within
a forward-looking,
long-term framework, which
has ensured it can meet
present and estimated future
water requirements.
These strategies have
included support from
the highest political level, within institutional and legal
frameworks that are modified and improved when and as
required.
Singapore implemented water reuse in 2003, at a time when
Windhoek, Namibia, and Orange County, California,
had already been producing reused water for several decades,
in the case of Windhoek for direct potable reuse (Tortajada
& van Rensburg, 2020). Singapore studied their experiences
and established its own system, achieving industrial large-
scale implementation and wide public acceptance for
indirect potable use thanks to comprehensive education and
communication strategies.
Singapore’s framework for water reuse within the concept of
a circular economy focuses on implementing a closed system
where, instead of discharging treated wastewater into the sea,
this resource is treated further to produce NEWater.
This water is used then directly for non-potable uses
(industrial and commercial uses) and indirectly for potable
reuse (domestic use). Behind the circular economy concept,
there are robust legal, institutional, managerial frameworks
which aim at a mostly successful system that protects human
health and protects the environment.
Water, being fully recyclable, is the archetypical circular
economy resource. In the city-state, the trigger to develop
a “circular water approach” was the realisation, shortly
aer independence, that water recovery and reuse through
unconventional sources of water, was necessary and was
possible. This meant incorporation of water resources
management tools within a circular economy approach where
wastewater is not discharged to the sea aer treating it,
but further treating it and reusing it for social and economic
applications. This will ensure Singapore water security
towards the future.
Water, being
fully recyclable, is
the archetypical
circular economy
resource.

62 Water Reuse and Principles
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore,
grant R-603-000-289-490. The authors would like to thank Mr. Eric Bea, then research assistant at the Institute of Water Policy,
for his assistance with the research.
References
Byrne, E., Fitzgibbon, K., Minescu, A., & Blanke, J. (2016).
Water Reuse in the Context of the Circular Economy. Government of Ireland, Report No. 293, Wexford.
Lee, H. & Tan, T. P. (2016). Singapore’s Experience with Reclaimed Water: NEWater. International Journal of Water Resources
Development, 32(4), pp. 611-621. DOI: 10.1080/07900627.2015.1120188.
MEWR (Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources Singapore). (2019). Our Organisation: History.
Retrieved from https://www.mewr.gov.sg/about-us/our-organisation/history.
NEA (National Environment Agency). (n.d.). About Us.
Retrieved from https://www.nea.gov.sg/corporate-functions/who-we-are/about-us.
. (2019a). Environmental Public Health (Water Suitable for Drinking) Regulations 2019 (Part 1, No S 156).
Retrieved from https://www.nea.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/eph-water-suitable-for-drinking-
regulations-2019.pdf.
. (2019b). Code of Practice on Drinking Water Sampling and Safety Plans.
Retrieved from https://www.nea.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/code-of-practice-on-drinking-water-
sampling-and-safety-plans-(25-mar-2019).pdf.
Ng, P. J. H. (2018). Singapore: Transforming Water Scarcity into a Vir tue. In Biswas, A. K., Tortajada, C. & Rohner, P. (eds.)
Assessing Global Water Megatrends, pp. 179–186. Springer, Singapore.
Parliament of Singapore. (1962). Legislative Assembly Debates: Oicial Report (9 July 1962, Vol 19, Sitting 1).
Retrieved from https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report?sittingdate=9-7-1962.
. (1995). Public Utilities Bill. Parliamentary Debates of Singapore: Oicial Report (7 July 1995, Vol 64, Sitting 13).
Retrieved from https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?reportid=028_19950707_S0003_T0011.
. (2012). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill. Parliamentary Debates of Singapore: Oicial Report (9 April 2012, Vol 89, Sitting 1).
Retrieved from https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?reportid=021_20120409_S0003_T0001.
. (2018). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill. Parliamentar y Debates of Singapore: Oicial Report (6 Februar y 2018, Vol 94,
Sitting 59), Clause 2. Retrieved from https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/sprs3topic?reportid=bill-260.
PUB (Public Utilities Board). (2015). Innovation in Water Singapore, 7. Singapore.
Retrieved from https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/vol7.pdf.
. (2017a). Innovation in Water Singapore, 9. Singapore.
Retrieved from https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/PUB_InnovationinWater_Issue9.pdf.
. (2017b). NEWater Quality (Typical value).
Retrieved from https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/PUB_NEWater_Quality.pdf.
. (2018a). Annual Report 2017/2018. Singapore.
Retrieved from https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/annualreport2018.pdf.
. (2018b). Innovation in Water Singapore, 10. Singapore.
Retrieved from https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/Innovation_in_Water_Singapore_Vol10.pdf.
. (2018c). PUB Pushes the Frontier of Water Technology to Reach Future Energy and Sludge Reduction Targets.
Press Release. Singapore. Retrieved from http://sglinks.news/article/81bee7/pub-pushes-the-frontier-of-water-technology-to-
reach-future-energy-and-sludge-reduction-targets. .
. (2018d). Our Water, Our Future: Saving Water is in Our Hands.
Retrieved from https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/PUBOurWaterOurFuture.pdf.
Seah, H. & Lee, N. (2020). Technological Enablers and Confidence Building for Eective Non-domestic Water Demand Management.
International Journal of Water Resources Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2019.1695587.
Singapore Food Agency. (n.d.). About SFA.
Retrieved from https://www.sfa.gov.sg/about-sfa.
Singapore Depar tment of Statistics. (2020). Population and Population Structure.
Retrieved from https://www.singstat.gov.sg/find-data/search-by-theme/population/population-and-population-structure/
latest-data.
Singapore Government. (1972). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill (Bill No 31/1972), Clauses 7 and 8.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/31-1972.
. (1974). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill (Bill No 14/1974), Sections 64A-B, Clause 4.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/14-1974.

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 63
. (1991). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill (Bill No 20/1991), Clause 7.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/20-1991.
. (1995). Public Utilities Bill (Bill No 20/1995).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/20-1995.
. (1998). Electrical Workers and Contractors Licensing Act (Chapter 89, Section 14).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/89-RG2.
. (2001a). Public Utilities Bill (Bill No 7/2001).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/7-2001.
. (2001b). Sewerage and Drainage Act (Chapter 294, 2001 Rev Ed), s 16(4).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/SDA1999.
. (2001c). Sewerage and Drainage Act (Chapter 294, 2001 Rev Ed), s 16A(5)(a).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/SDA1999.
. (2001d). Sewerage and Drainage Act (Chapter 294, 2001 Rev Ed), s 16A(5)(b).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/SDA1999.
. (2001e). Sewerage and Drainage Act (Chapter 294, 2001 Rev Ed), s 16A(6).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/SDA1999.
. (2001f). Sewerage and Drainage Act (Chapter 294, 2001 Rev Ed), s 17(4).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/SDA1999.
. (2002a). Electricity Act (Chapter 89A).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EA2001.
. (2002b). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 15.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002c). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 15(5).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002d). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 16(3)(a).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002e). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 16(3)(b).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002f). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 17(1)(a).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002g). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 17(1)(b).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002h). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 18(2).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002i). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 67(1)(a).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002j). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 67(1)(b).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002k). Environmental Protection and Management Act (Chapter 94A, 2002 Rev Ed), s 67(2).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPMA1999.
. (2002l). Environmental Public Health Act (Chapter 95, 2002 Rev Ed), s 80.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPHA1987.
. (2002m). Environmental Public Health Act (Chapter 95, 2002 Rev Ed), s 111(1).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EPHA1987.
. (2002n). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(a).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002o). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(b).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002p). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(c).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002q). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(d).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002r). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(da).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002s). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(e).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002t). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(g).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.

64 Water Reuse and Principles
. (2002u). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(h).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002v). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 6(1)(ja).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2002w). Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261, 2002 Rev Ed), s 41(1).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PUA2001.
. (2003a). National Environment Agency Act (Chapter 195, 2003 Rev Ed).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/NEAA2002.
. (2003b). National Environment Agency Act (Chapter 195, 2003 Rev Ed), s 11(1)(h).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/NEAA2002.
. (2003c). National Environment Agency Act (Chapter 195, 2003 Rev Ed), s 11(1)(i).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/NEAA2002.
. (2003d). National Environment Agency Act (Chapter 195, 2003 Rev Ed), s 11(1)(j).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/NEAA2002.
. (2003e). National Environment Agency Act (Chapter 195, 2003 Rev Ed), s 11(1)(p).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/NEAA2002.
. (2007a). Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2007 Rev Ed).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/SDA1999-RG5.
. (2007b). Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2007 Rev Ed), para 11.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/SDA1999-RG5.
. (2007c). Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2007 Rev Ed), para 14(2).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/SDA1999-RG5.
. (2007d). Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2007 Rev Ed), para 4(5).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/SDA1999-RG5.
. (2008a). Environmental Public Health (Quality of Piped Drinking Water) Regulations 2008, ss 5-6.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL-Supp/S35-2008/Published/20080129?DocDate=20080129#legis.
. (2008b). Environmental Public Health (Quality of Piped Drinking Water) Regulations 2008, s 7.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL-Supp/S35-2008/Published/20080129?DocDate=20080129#legis.
. (2008c). Environmental Protection and Management (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2008 Rev Ed).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/EPMA1999-RG5.
. (2008d). Environmental Protection and Management (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2008 Rev Ed), para 3(5).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/EPMA1999-RG5.
. (2008e). Environmental Protection and Management (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2008 Rev Ed), para 12(a).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/EPMA1999-RG5.
. (2008f). Environmental Protection and Management (Trade Eluent) Regulations (Rg 5, 2008 Rev Ed), para 12(b).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/EPMA1999-RG5.
. (2012a). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill (Bill No 7/2012), Clauses 3 and 26.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/7-2012.
. (2012b). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill (Bill No 7/2012), Clause 5.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/7-2012. To see current prices: https://www.pub.gov.sg/sites/assets/
PressReleaseDocuments/WPR2017-AnnexA.pdf.
. (2018). Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill (Bill No 4/2018), Clauses 2, 4, 8, and 9.
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/4-2018.
. (2019). Environmental Public Health (Water Suitable for Drinking) Regulations 2019 (Part 2 No s 274).
Retrieved from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL-Supp/S274-2019/Published/20190401?DocDate=20190401.
Tortajada, C. & van Rensburg, P. (2020). Drink More Recycled Wastewater. Nature, 577, pp. 26–28. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-019-03913-6.
Tortajada, C., Joshi, Y. & Biswas, A. K. (2013). The Singapore Water Story: Sustainable Development in an Urban City State.
Routledge, London.
USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). (2012). Guidelines for Water Reuse. EPA/600/R-12/618. Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-08/documents/2012-guidelines-water-reuse.pdf.
. (2017). 2017 Potable Reuse Compendium. EPA/810/R-17/002. Washington, D.C.
Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-01/documents/potablereusecompendium_3.pdf.
Notes
1. “Trade eluent” means any liquid, including particles of matter and other substances in suspension in the liquid, which is the
outflow from any trade, business or manufacture or of any works of engineering or building construction.

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 65
Appendix
Oence Penalty
Failure to inform the National Environment Agency of
a discharge of eluent into watercourse/drains or
on land without permission
Fine not exceeding $5,000
(Singapore Government, 2002c)
Failure to obtain permission from the National
Environment Agency prior to discharging eluent into
watercourse/drains or on land
First conviction:
Fine not exceeding $20,000; and a further fine not
exceeding $1,000 for ever y day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2002i)
Second or subsequent conviction
Fine not exceeding $50,000; and a further fine not
exceeding $2,000 for every day or part thereof during
which the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2002j)
The National Environment Agency may also seek
compensation through the courts for amount of any
expense in connection with the execution of any work,
with interest (Singapore Government, 2002k)
Failure to treat eluent to the standards in
the Environmental Protection and Management
(Trade Eluent) Regulations
First conviction:
Fine not exceeding $10,000; and a further fine not
exceeding $300 for every day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2008e)
Second or subsequent conviction
Fine not exceeding $20,000; and a further fine not
exceeding $500 for every day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2008f)
Failure to treat eluent before discharging into
watercourse/drains or on land
First conviction:
Fine not exceeding $20,000 / imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 3 months, or both; and a further fine not
exceeding $1,000 for ever y day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2002d)
Second or subsequent conviction
Fine not exceeding $50,000 / imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 3 months, or both; and a further fine not
exceeding $2,000 for every day or part thereof during
which the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2002e)
Discharging toxic substances
or hazardous substances into watercourse/drains
or on land
First conviction:
Fine not exceeding $50,000 / imprisonment for a term not
exceeding 12 months, or both (Singapore Government, 2002f)
Second or subsequent conviction
Fine not exceeding $100,000 and imprisonment for a term
not less than one month and not more than 12 months
(Singapore Government, 2002g)
Failure to comply with a notice by the National
Environment Agency to remove/clean up toxic substance
or trade eluent, oil, chemical, sewage, hazardous
substance or other polluting matters which that person
has discharged
Fine not exceeding $50,000
(Singapore Government, 2002h)
Table 3-1 Penalties according to the National Environment Agency

66 Water Reuse and Principles
Oence Penalty
Failure to obtain permission
from the Public Utilities Board prior
to discharging eluent into sewerage system
Fine not exceeding $20,000; and a further fine not
exceeding $1,000 for ever y day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2001b)
Failure to treat eluent to the standards
in the Sewerage and Drainage (Trade Eluent)
Regulations
Fine not exceeding $15,000 / imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 3 months, or both; and a further fine not
exceeding $500 for every day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2007c)
Discharging toxic substances
or hazardous substances into sewerage system
First conviction:
Fine not exceeding $50,000 / imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 12 months, or both; and a further fine not
exceeding $2,000 for every day or part thereof during
which the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2001c)
Second or subsequent conviction:
Fine not exceeding $100,000 / imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 12 months, or both; and a further fine not
exceeding $2,000 for every day or part thereof during
which the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2001d)
Causing
(a) injury or death to any person;
(b) damage to any public sewerage system which renders
the sewerage system inoperable; or
(c) severe disruption to the process of treating sewage or
trade eluent or the process of water reclamation,
by discharging toxic substances or hazardous
substances into sewerage system
Fine not exceeding $200,000 / imprisonment
for a term not exceeding 2 years, or both
(Singapore Government, 2001e)
Failure to comply with an order by the Public Utilities Board
to stop discharge of trade eluent containing dangerous
or hazardous substance into sewerage system
Fine not exceeding $40,000 / imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 3 months, or both; and a further fine not
exceeding $1,000 for ever y day or part thereof during which
the oence continues aer conviction
(Singapore Government, 2001f)
Table 3-2 Penalties according to the Public Utilities Board

3 Water Reuse in Singapore: The New Frontier in a Framework of a Circular Economy? 67
PUB NEWater Quality (Typical value)
Characteristics Unit WHO 2016 GV
(First A ddendum to 4t h Edition)
Typical value
Microbiological Parameter
Escherichia coli (E. coli)cfu/100 m <1 <1
Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) cfu/m -<1
Physical Parameters
Colour Hazen -<5
Conductivity uS/cm -<250
Chlorine mg/ 5<2
pH Value Units -7.0-8. 5
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/ -<150
Turbidity NTU 5<5
Chemical Parameters
Ammonia (as N) mg/ -<1.0
Aluminium mg/ -<0.1
Barium mg/ 1.3 <0.1
Boron mg/ 2.4 <0.5
Calcium mg/ -4-20
Chloride mg/ -<20
Copper mg/ 2<0.05
Fluoride mg/ 1.5 <0.5
Iron mg/ <0.04
Manganese mg/ <0.05
Nitrate (as N) mg/ 11 <11
Sodium mg/ <20
Sulphate mg/ <5
Silica (as SiO2)mg/ <3
Strontium mg/ <0.1
Total Trihalomethanes Ratio <1 <0.04
Total Organic Carbon (TOC) mg/ <0.5
Total Hardness (as CaCO3)mg/ <50
Zinc mg/ <0.1
Table 3-3 PUB NEWater Quality (Typical value) (Source: PUB, 2017b)

©Evgeniy Biletskiy/Shutterstock.
II
Decision-Making
for Water Reuse

©Attila Jandi/Dreamstime.

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 71
4
Water Availability and Water Reuse:
A New Approach for Water Resources Management
Elisa Stefan and Cristóvão Vicente Scapulatempo Fernandes
Elisa Stefan, Postgraduate Program in Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, Federal University of Paraná, Brazil.
e-mail: elisasstefan@gmail.com
Cristóvão Vicente Scapulatempo Fernandes, Department of Hydraulics and Sanitation, Federal University of Paraná, Brazil.
e-mail: cris.dhs@ufpr.br
Abstract
This paper highlight the importance of studying water availability which integrates its quantity, quality and purpose as essential
for decision-making regarding the introduction of reuse systems based on the circular economy. Water resources management
in Brazil has been developed in a traditional manner (linear model), considering water use by society and returned to the rivers
as wastewater. Introducing water reuse systems breaks the linear economy and transforms it into a circular economy model,
where the wastewater is no longer a waste product but a resource for potential use. This research aims to evaluate the water
availability, including not only the volume of water, but also the variability of water quality, and, additionally, considering
treated sewage eluents as available water for industrial use. In order to estimate the importance of a holistic assessment of
water resources availability, a case study on the Iguazu river in Brazil was carried out. Due to water quality data scarcity, there
were two approaches to permit working with BOD concentration variability. The first strategy consisted in fitting a statistical
regression of measured BOD with associated flow, using the statistically established relationship, and then, monthly series of BOD
concentrations were generated. The second strateg y was to simulate with AcquaNet soware the upstream released loads
by the water users as, assuming there were no initial concentrations in the river. Eleven scenarios were introduced to
assess the impacts on water availability for the user itself, for other users in the region, as well as the availability in the Iguazu
River considering: (i) variations in the volume of water abstracted; (ii) the reused water from the WWTP; (iii) the reused water from
the industrial wastewater. The average BOD concentration in the river due to upstream releases results 3.2 mg/.
This means that water abstracted from the river at this point of the Iguazu River is already an indirect reuse process,
which concentrations of organic material from released eluents upstream have not fully assimilated until this point.
The result demonstrates, how in regions where the river has experienced degraded water quality, the inclusion of reuse systems
may be even more interesting from the point of view of the economics of treatment requirements than of river water abstraction.
Finally, this paper presents many concepts that have been previously addressed individually and how to integrate them to
subsidise the development of the circular economy in urban water resources management.
Keywords
Water availbility, water reuse, circular economy, water resources management

72 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
01
Introduction
This paper reflects on the importance of studying water
availability which integrates its quantity, quality and purpose
as essential for decision-making regarding the introduction
of reuse systems based on the circular economy.In order to
understand the relevance of changing the management of
the water resources into a circular economy model, this paper
reviews the status quo of the water resources management
in Brazil.
The next topic considered is the concept of water availability
in the world. It was found there is no consensus on the said
concept. It is suggested in this paper the concept of water
availability based on water quantity, quality and purpose
that supports the decision-making of water resources
stakeholders.
Many guidelines address
the introduction of water
reuse systems such as EPA’s
Guidelines for Water Reuse
(2012). In Brazil, Hespanhol
(2002) approaches the legal
and cultural aspects of
the introduction of water
reuse. However, before this
study, it is apparent a lack
of scientific literature that
approaches the subject
of water availability in
urban water resources
management regarding
the circular economy
(Stefan, 2019).
In order to estimate
the importance of a holistic
assessment of water
resources availability,
a case study on the Iguazu
river in Brazil was carried
out. This study shows the
industrial stakeholder the
following possibilities of
the river’s water availability: an increase in captured volume,
reuse of water from a wastewater treatment plant and/or
water recycling. This study also shows the point of view of
water availability throughout the river, raising arguments
concerning the allocation of water resources.
Finally, this paper presents many concepts that have been
previously addressed individually and how to integrate them
to subsidise the development of the circular economy
in urban water resources management.
02
The Current Paradigm of Urban Water
Resources Management
Water resources management has been developed with
a focus on meeting the human consumption demands and
entrenching a linear economy model: water withdrawal,
purification, consumption, wastewater treatment and return
to the rivers.
Concerning the water withdrawal step, a relevant fact is that
water availability is aected by temporal and spatial changes.
Additionally, the increasing population density is creating
a stressed hydrologic scenario in metropolitan regions.
Another factor is water quality conditions as a consequence
of anthropic influences. According to the Brazilian Water
National Agency (ANA), just 7% of water quality from urban
rivers, considering Brazilian Metropolitan areas, are classified
as excellent (ANA, 2019).
Brazil, despite having the largest freshwater supply in
the world, with 12 per cent of the entire planet’s total volume,
faced a water crisis between 2012 and 2016. According to
ANA(2014), the crisis started because of the increased water
demand, poor water quality of local rivers, and a shortage
of rainfall, causing hydrologic stress. This crisis required
emergency measures, such as water rationing and incentives
to save water. Although there was a gradual recovery
in 2016 with an increase in rainfall, that alone does not ensure
another water crisis will not happen.
Traditionally, the water is treated to meet drinking water
standards and it is then distributed to dierent users.
However, the water quality requirements are dierent among
the users: industrial, agriculture and domestic. Using drinking
water for purposes for which the high water quality is not
required causes a negative impact on economic, energy and
environmental aspects (EPA, 2012).
Aer the water use, in urban centers with sewage
infrastructure, once potable water is used, it is conveyed to
a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and then it is
discharged to a river, lake or other surface waterbody.
The water discharged from WWTP is not necessarily returned
to the original watershed from which it was withdrawn.
The large volume of water transferred to other watersheds
impacts the environment and the economy (Hespanhol, 2008).
The water
discharged
from WWTP is
not necessarily
returned to the
original watershed
from which it was
withdrawn.
The large volume of
water transferred
to other watersheds
impacts the
environment and
the economy.

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 73
03
Water Availability:
The Decision-making Key
Evaluating water availability is paramount to management
strategies and plans to make decisions about which source
to use, how to allocate water, choice of the best performing
process and to ensure water for every user.
Natural processes such as rainfall, evapotranspiration
and human interventions such as hydraulic infrastructure,
aect water flow, making water availability a complex
variable to estimate.
Falkenmark (1989) defined blue water indices based on per
capita water resources. Regions with more than 1,700 m3 per
inhabitant per year (/ inhab.year) of water were considered
outside the water deficit zone, whereas lower per capita
volumes are considered a water stress situation. More critical
water deficit conditions, when the water volume is below
1,000 m3 / inhab.year, are defined as water scarcity,
and absolute scarcity occurs when the water volume does not
exceed 500 m3 per inhabitant per year (Xu & Wu, 2017).
On the other hand, Jia et al. (2019) points out the necessity to
evaluate an indicator of water availability including not only
the water volume, but integrating water quantity with quality,
and also considering wastewater as a source.
The water quality is also important to determine water
availability. Compromised water quality might prevent
its immediate use for some purposes, however, it can be
used to other ends. In order to attend a specific industrial
or agriculture demands, Suspended Solids (SS), Chemical
Oxygen Demand (COD) and Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)
are relevant water quality parameters to be used as control
parameters (JIA et al., 2019).
Wastewater should be considered a source of water and
be included in water availability estimations, since some
water might be available depending on its purpose. Aer all,
wastewater has the potential for direct use before undergoing
treatment that meets the specific criteria for the intended
use as water reuse. In this context, the water purpose concept
should not be confused with the concept of water user, since
one user at the same site might use water in several distinct
processes for dierent purposes, and each of these purposes
may have a particular demand for water quantity and quality.
Then, it is also important to partition the demand by quality
requirements to evaluate real water availability.
There is no consensus on a definition of water availability and
how to estimate it from a perspective of circular economy.
There are several indices and indicators that attempt to
generate more awareness of the urgency to protect water
resources, to mitigate problems related to water scarcity and
to promote sustainable use. In order to break the linear logic
of water resources management and to develop an integrated
system promoting a circular economy, water availability
should integrate not only the volume of water available but
also the quality and the dierent water purposes,
as summarized in Figure 4-1.
3.1. Urban Water Resources Management and
Circular Economy
The assessment of water availability in the triad of quantity,
quality and purpose is fundamental for the transformation
of water resources management and with the view of closing
the loop of water use, as well as closing the loop of the soluble
matter that water carries.
Figure 4-2 illustrates the diversity of pathways from water
purification (WTP) and wastewater treatment/reuse systems
(WRT) that water may follow according to dierent uses and
purposes.
There is this misperception of evaluating water in absolute
terms only in volume and not considering the fact that it is
normally carr ying various compounds, which also have their
own natural cycles in the environment. In order to choose
the proper pathway water will follow, whether returning to
water bodies or being reused, its transport in volumetric
terms (quantitive measures) and concentration of
environmental relevant chemical elements must be taken into
account (qualitative measures). It is relevant to consider
the natural hydrological cycle, the cycles of nitrogen,
phosphorus and other substances that are normally carried
by the water.
Figure 4-1 Water Availability Concept

74 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
The linear model in the use of natural resources is responsible
for these contradictions, in which it is possible to observe
water bodies polluted and eutrophicated due to nutrient
enrichment, while agricultural land is lacking nutrients and
making use of fertilizers.
The introduction of reused water into the current water use
model transforms the water system from a linear model to
a circular model concept. The water reuse system can be
either on the micro-scale (e.g. reuse within an industr y
itself) or macro-scale (among dierent users). Household
wastewater might be reused for irrigation in agriculture or
industry, aer appropriate treatment for each use.
This systemic approach to water management disrupts
the linear model of wastewater disposal and reintroduces
water, with a new approach within the context of the water
cycle and water carried compounds, establishing a still-
developing conceptual challenge that might potentially
promote economic and environmental gains.
3.2. What to Expect from the Future of Urban Water
Resources Management?
The need for urban model reformulation is required, specially
aer the latest water crisis events in Brazil (ANA, 2014).
The current model has long been developed without
regulation for integrating with new strategies and ideas for
including circular economy concept. This caused
a conservative water resources planning and management
plans, focus on achieving eluents regulations. Clearly, there
is a very high-level water supply (drinking water) for dierent
uses (such as industry and agriculture), and disjointed from
natural resources cycles.
The introduction of reused water systems positively impacts
the water availability of the basins, as they act to directly
reduce the need for water withdrawal and decrease
the volume of eluents returned. This allows a larger volume
of water to be available for other uses in the basin.
Treated sanitary eluent is no longer a disposal but a water
resource with potential use for specific purposes.
Another positive impact is the environmental benefit,
whereby water from the wastewater treatment plant is no
longer discharged into rivers, which mainly reduces the input
of nutrients into recipient bodies, thereby increasing water
availability in terms of quality for other uses.
The path that water should take between returning to water
bodies and / or recycling for dierent uses should focus
on the development of a sustainable strategy for economy
criteria and water quality recovery. In this context, the water
availability study of the Iguazu River at MRC, integrates
the consideration of eluents as potentially reusable water,
thus encouraging users to choose practices such
as the introduction of reuse systems, and consequently
the transformation of water resource management into
a circular economy system.
Figure 4-2 Ilustrated water pathways possibilites

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 75
04
Case-study on Urbanized Brazilian River:
Iguazu River at MRC
The Iguazu River is known by the Iguazu Waterfalls, which is
the largest waterfall system in the world, in terms of volume
and elevation change. Figure 4-3 shown the Iguazu River
located. The river headwaters are in the metropolitan region
of Curitiba in Brazil, with a population of nearly 3.5 million
people (IBGE, 2017), and plays an important role to multiple
users in this region. The industrial sector is expanding and
water is a limiting factor. Currently, the industry is supplied by
a water treatment plant located on the Iguazu River, attending
the industrial demands.
From the source of the Iguazu River at MRC to the monitoring
point of the study for water availability, there are 4 points
for monitoring the water quantity and quality. The river
water quality is degraded with measured BOD concentration
ranging from 25 to 65 mg/ (Knapik, 2014). The main Iguazu
River releases for dilution comes mainly from three sources:
wastewater treatment plants, landfills and industry.
The largest portion of BOD load released, comprising 97%
of the BOD loading, comes from the WWTPs. Although the
eluent volume permitted by the industry is close to those
granted for landfill eluents, the BOD load from landfill
eluents is four times higher than that released by the
industry (Stefan, 2019).
The study area has peculiar characteristics, located in the
Araucaria industrial region, aer the it passes through a highly
urbanized region. Figure 4-4 shows the current framework of
the waterways at the study point. Approximately 50 meters
upstream from this monitoring point is the industry intake
water treatment plant (WTP Ind), which is responsible for
the industr y’s water supply demand. As shown in Figure 4-4,
downstream of the monitoring point, also approximately
50 meters away, is the Araucaria wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP Cachoeira).
4.1. Methods: Assessing Water Availability
4.1.1. Water Availability: Quantity and Quality
Available water quantity on this interest site was evaluated
using historical series with monthly waterflow over 12 years.
The chosen quality water parameter was Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD). Due to water quality data scarcity, there were
two approaches to permit working with BOD concentration
variability.
The first strategy is illustrated at Figure 4-5, consisted
in fitting a statistical regression of measured BOD with
associated flow, using the statistically established
relationship, and then, monthly series of BOD concentrations
were generated.
Figure 4-3 Iguazu River Location (Source: Knapik, 2014)

76 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
The second strategy was to simulate the upstream released
loads by the water users as, assuming there were no initial
concentrations in the river. The Figure 4-6 is an illustrative
figure of the Iguazu River in the study region showing
the locations of wastewater discharge, water withdrawals,
and monitoring points on the river is introduced.
To this strategy was simulated using AcquaNet network flow
model (AcquaNet, 2013). Acquanet is a Brazlian free soware
based on the ModSim Model (Labadie, 2006). The components
of the water resources system might be represent by nodes
(reservoirs, demands, confluences, withdrawals and so forth)
and links (stream reaches and canals). The water quality
module of AcquaNet allows the simulation of concentrations
of: Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD), total phosphorus, total fecal coliforms, organic
nitrogen, ammonia, nitrate and nitrite. To simulate the users
BOD loads and water demands on Iguazu River at MCR were
obtained on Paraná Water Institute and designed the Iguazu
network flow on AcquaNet.
To understand how much water quantity and concentration
load is available, a statistical analysis was performed
using monthly mean flow and observed concentrations.
The frequency analysis adopted is the duration curve,
which consists in calculating the percentage of cumulative
frequency. The cumulative frequency is interpreted as
the percentage of time when the flow or the concentration
were exceeded.
4.1.2. Water Reuse Scenarios – Closing the Loop of
Water Use
In order to understand the impact on water availability
that the closing of water cycles were considered two water
reuse systems in the study area. Figure 4-7 illustrates
the wastewater from WWTP and from industries that was
previously discarded into Iguazu river being reused.
The first system assumed reuse among users, in which
the industr y user reuses the eluent from the municipal
Figure 4-4 Current framework of the waterways at th e study point
Figure 4-5 Strategy for obtaining BOD concentration serie by regression

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 77
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The WWTP treats
the eluent from the MRC and releases a volume of 0.16 m3/s
with a concentration of 90 mg/ BOD aer treatment into
Iguazu river. The second system considered the reuse of water
by the industr y itself. For this estimation an industry release
concentration of 10 mg/ BOD was assumed and the flow rate
equal to 80% of the abstracted water volume by the industry.
Currently the industrial region abstract a quantity 0.45 m3/s
from the Iguazu river that passes through a water treatment
plant (WTP).
Eleven scenarios were introduced that var y from one to
another, with variations in the volume of water abstracted,
the reused water from the WWTP and the reused water
from the industrial wastewater in order to assess the impacts
on water availability for the user itself, for other users
in the region, as well as the availability in the Iguazu River.
The wastewater treatment plant eiciency required to meet
an industrial demand for BOD of a maximum concentration of
10 mg/ was calculated. As to calculate its eiciency,
it was assumed that the water quality could not under any
circumstances be higher than 10 mg/ for use by the industry
for limiting release concentration in the river. The amount of
annual treated load for each scenario was calculated based
on the annual variation of the concentrations present
in the river added to the loads from treated water recycling.
The water withdrawal rate was defined as the fraction of
the abstracted volume from river in relation to the maximum
volume that potentially could be abstracted, that
according to bazilian regulations to Iguazu river is 50% from
the volume with the frequency of 95% time.The recycle rate
of the municipal WWTP is the percentage of water actually
reused as a ratio of the total volume that can be reused,
which was considered the actually treated eluent volume
and concentration realesed into the river, a constant equal
to the currently flow rate, 0.16 m3/s, and also the constant
concentration of 90 mg/ BOD.
The industrial eluent water recycling rate is the percentage
of the total volume that can be reused, which is variable,
since the water returned by the industry is propor tional
to volume of water withdrawl from the river, which was
considered variable among the scenarios.
In this analysis, it was assumed that 80% of the water taken in
by the industrial facility’s WPP was returned as eluent from
the industrial process. With respect to water quality,
the concentration of BOD of the industrial eluent was
assumed to be constant equal to 10 mg/, a value adopted
under the hypothesis of conservation of the water quality
in the industrial use, being the same concentration treated
for the use.
Figure 4-7 Closing Loop with water reuse in the study cas e. Orange
node is an ar tificial node to illus trated the water reuse
system studied.
Figure 4-6 Strategy for obtaining BOD concentration serie simulating the upstream released loads

78 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
05
Results
5.1. River Water Availability Results
The results of the water availability analysis for decision
making on how to introduce circular economy model and
the water reuse systems as water resources planning and
management strategy are presented.
The Figure 4-8 shown below results of river water availability:
• Water Flow:
With 12 years of monthly average flow data was calculated
month by month the flow that is occurring 95% of the time.
The dashed line represents the flow occurring 95% of
the time over the years.
• BOD concentrations from upstream users discharges:
With 12 years of monthly average flow data and
the concentrations released by users upstream of the study
point, the BOD concentration occurring 95% of the time was
calculated month by month.
• BOD concentrations by measured samples regression:
With 12 years of monthly average/ flow data and
the concentrations measured at the study point,
the 12-year BOD concentration series was regressed and
the BOD concentration occurring 95% of the time was
calculated month by month.
The assessment of water availability in this monitoring point
at the Iguazu River at MRC is associated to possible limits of
withdrawing water to ensure minimum flow for preservation
of the aquatic environment and also for other users.
Analyzing the quantity of water in the Iguazu River, the flow
frequency of 95% of the time is at least 15.52 m3/s (Stefan,
2019). Figure 4-8 is the monthly flow analysis indicating
between the months of April to August presented a volume
lower than 15.52 m3/s. This monthly volume dierence
between and the one with the 12 years of data may lead to
a misallocation of water, which would be considered a large
amount of water available in times of drought.
It is expected that with this amount of water, especially during
drought seasons, one strategy would be consider
the potential saved treated water with this potential volume
for industrial reuse.
The average BOD concentration in the river due to upstream
releases is 3.2 mg/. This means that water abstracted from
the river at this point of the Iguazu River is already an indirect
reuse process, which concentrations of organic material from
realesed eluents upstream have not fully assimilated until
this point. One potential strategy to water management may
be the requirement for releases with lower pollutant loads
upstream, which would provide the downstream users with
better water availability. Thus, the responsibility for
handling that load is returned to the polluting user rather than
the downstream river water user.
The mean BOD concentration using the regression of
the sampled data was 19.53 mg/. This dierence is due to
the fact that, in addition to the contribution of the loads
released by users, there are several diuse loads, such
as the natural flow from the river beds, from surrounding
agricultural areas, and also the possibility of releases that
are not legally registered. This result emphasizes the need for
constant monitoring of the waterbody’s quality.
As verified in terms of the flow between April and August,
during a period with less rain, less water is present at
the monitoring point in the Iguazu River. Lower river flows
negatively aect the BOD concentration levels since there
is a smaller volume of water for dilution of eluent releases.
Therefore, a higher concentration of BOD might be observed
between April and August, during the driest period.
This result allows a conclusion about the water availability
of the river in terms of quantity and quality: from September
to March it would be possible to optimize the use of water,
both for the catchment and for eluent dilution, whereas
between the months of April to August water availability is
lower.

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 79
Figure 4-8 River Water Availabilit y (95% frequency monthly flow serie)

80 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
5.2. Water Availability with Water Reuse
Table 4-1 describes the water fractions used among
the dierent water sources: river water abstraction,
WWTP eluent reuse and industrial eluent reuse.
The results presented in Table 4-1 are the water availability
for the user and the water availability in the river.
The introduction of reuse gives the user the responsibility for
water treatment and eases the pressure on the water body,
so the results should be analyzed together.
The evaluated results are the water availability for
the industrial user and the water availability in the river.
Water availability for the industrial user has the following
parameters:
Total volume of water available: sum of the volume of water
captured with the volumes of water reused.
Total BOD load treated per year: considers the river load
(BOD concentration temporal serie by measured samples
regression) added the reused eluent loads considering
constant concentration (WWTP eluent concentration =
90 mg/, industrial eluent concentration = 10 mg/).
Treatment eiciency: Treatment eiciency was calculated
according to the river and reuse loads to meet the industrial
need considered with the 10 mg/ BOD concentration limit.
Availability of water in the river: was calculated as
the released load into the river due to the discharge of treated
eluents from the WWTP and industry, and the load that is
not released into the river due introduction of water reuse.
Table 4-1 Global Water Availability Analysis
Abstracted
water rate
Reclaimed eluents
reuse rate Industrial water availability River water
avilability
[current/river
limit]
[current/WWTP
limit]
[curre nt
/Industry limit]
[total m 3/s]
[load to trea t
tones/year]
[% treatment
eiciency]
[load rele ased into
river(tones/year)]
[load no lon ger
release d into the
river(tones/year)]
Without reuse 16% 0% 0% 0.45 132.2 62% 5 67.65 -
Decrease in
abstracted water
and replacing with
reused water
24% 100% 0% 0.45 537.9 80% 72.53 454.12
31%a100% 100% 0.45 542.7 75% 0c526.65
Increase in
availability
with reuse and
maintaining the
same abstracted
water amount
46% 50% 0% 0.53 358.5 72% 340.59 227.06
56% 100% 0% 0.61 584.9 77% 113.53 454.12
66% 100% 50% 0.78 641.5 72% 56.76 510.88
76% 100% 100% 0.96 698.1 67% 0c567.65
Increase in
availability with
reuse and increase
in abstracted water
825% 100% 100% 3.74 1, 537.1 55% 0c955.54
950% 100% 100% 7.3 2 2,621.5 51% 0c1,456.96
10 75% 100% 100% 10.89 3,702.9 100% 0c1,958.39
11 100% 100% 100% 14.47b4,787. 3 49% 0c2,459.81
a Lowest water abs traction possible to me et industrial demand (with reuse)
b Large st volume of water available considering river and reuse water
c Zero Eluente D ischarge into the river

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 81
1. Current Scenario (without reuse/ scenario 1)
The current abstraction rate by all users is 6% (0.45 m3/s) of
available river volume, following the local policies. Since there
are currently no reuse practices, the abstracted water volume
represents the total volume available to the user,
and is equal to 0.45 m3 / s. The release is the volume of
wastewater discharged into the river that, under the current
conditions (scenario 1), is the total volume that comes from
two eluents: WWTP and industr y, thus resulting in a total
eluent release of 0.52 m3/s.
2. Decrease in Abstracted Water and Replacing with
Reused Water
In this strategy, the volume of abstracted water from the river
was reduced and replaced by the reuse of eluents.
Scenarios 2 and 3 consist of the reduction of water
abstraction currently made by the industries of the region and
the introduction of eluent reuse, so that water availability
remains the same as currently practised (0.45 m3/s).
Scenario 2 reuses the eluent from the WWTP, allowing
the reduction of water abstraction to 4% of the available river
volume. In scenario 3, the maximum possible reuse is made,
using the total eluent volume from the WWTP and
the industr y, which makes it possible to reduce water taken
from the river to 1%.
For the industrial user, this change from river water source to
reused water would result in an increased need for treatment,
from 132.2 tons of organic matter to 542.7 tons per year.
The user would need to increase treatment eiciency also to
75% to meet the minimum water quality for industrial process
user.
Water availability in the river increases as a smaller volume of
water will be abstracted, so a larger volume of water will be
available in the river to other downstream users.
In addition to a volume available in the river, the decrease of
526.65 tons per year of release of organic matter into
the river increases, since the eluent instead of being
discharged into the river is treated and reused by industr y.
Thus, also increasing water availability in terms of water
quality for downstream users who will be able to abstracted
better quality water.
3. Increase in Availability with Reuse and Maintaining
the Same Abstracted Water Amount
In this strategy, the same current water abstracted was
maintained and the possibility of an increase in availability for
the user was evaluated just by reusing the eluents.
Four scenarios were evaluated varying the eluent recycling
rates of the WWTP and industry eluents (scenarios 4 to 7
in Table 4-1). The user might double the amount of water
available only considering reuse. User-treated load increase to
698.1 tons per year. However, the treatment eiciency of 67%
is close to the current treatment without reuse (62%).
This is due to the volume of water captured diluting
the eluent loads, and thus not impacting the treatment
eiciency too much. With the reuse of eluents, the water
availability in the river increases in terms of quality,
as it reduces the release of 567.65 tons per year of organic
matter into the river.
4. Increase in Water Availability with Reuse and
Increase in Abstracted Water
In this strategy, the scenarios 8 to 11 was elaborate as
the water abstracted was increased until the maximum
volume abstracted from the river at this point, in accordance
with Brazilian guidelines. The maximum water availability
consider this strategy is showed by scenario 11 with a total of
14.47 m3/s of water available, which considers the maximum
water abstracted plus maximum reuse possible in this study
case. Under scenario 11, the user would have to handle a load
of 4,787.3 tonnes per year of organic matter.
Treatment eiciency would decrease to 49%, which is even
lower than the eiciency to treat river water only.
This is because the river water quality has an average
concentration of 19.35 mg/, and as the industrial eluent
concentration used was 10 mg/ BOD, the industrial eluent
is diluting the river load and thus reducing the treatment
eiciency required. This is possible for industrial uses that do
not impact water quality or have little impact, such
as the use of water for cooling turbines and others. In this way,
reuse helps by reducing the eiciency required to handle river
loads.
This result demonstrates how in regions where the river has
experienced degraded water quality, the inclusion of reuse
systems may be even more interesting from the point of view
of the economics of treatment requirements than of river
water abstraction. This should not be taken as a premise
for not improving and maintaining good river water quality,
which should be the basic principle for structuring the water
resources management model that is more in line with
the planet’s natural cycles.

82 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
06
Conclusions and Recommendations
Water resources in Brazil and worldwide are under preassure,
whether by water scarcity in dry regions, water stress in
densely populated areas or/and regions with degraded
water quality, or by influences os potential climate changes
conditions. Society has developed in a linear way.
Nature is cyclical. It is necessar y that human use of water
resources respects the natural cycles, in order to not cause
overloads to the environment as has happened currently and
in the past.
This study highlight
how water availability
analysis is fundamental
for transforming water
resources management into
an integrated and circular
economy model.
There are several pathways
that water may follow among
users. The determination
of the best economic and
environmental eiciency
should be made based
on the analysis of water
availability that includes
the quantity, quality and
purpose of water.
In the Iguazu River, indirect
water reuse already occurs,
in which the loads released
by upstream users are
not totally assimilated.
The introduction of reuse in the Iguazu River allows for
the improvement of water availability in the river and for
several users. The case study results indicate the possibilit y
to evaluate in an integrated way how to develop a circular
economy system in the management of urban water
resources.
Other scenarios may be studied to evaluate dierent
alternatives for the user. It is possible to simulate scenarios
with dierent flow demand and dierent water quality criteria
and parameters, such as phosphorus heavy metals and
nitrogen. The paths that water might follow are diverse and
will be dierent for each reality and region. It is also possible
to include other economic variables in order to guarantee
the best strategies in this regard. The complexity of best path
assessment may necessitate the development of a decision
support system that integrates the triad of water availability
and the multiple paths that water might have among dierent
users and the return to recipient bodies (and the hydrological
cycle) and ensure the best economic eiciency.
The introduction of reuse systems should not be considered
as the primary option in water resources management
planning. Conscious water use, water loss reduction and other
actions that make it possible to reduce water demand must
be evaluated as paramount. The reused water must have
adequate physical, chemical and biological characteristics for
each use. It must also be considered that the concentration
of certain contaminants increases as the reuse is applied
and oer health risks. Therefore, guidelines such as of main
Environmental Agencies (EPA, 2012) are fundamental for
the introduction of reuse systems.
The
determination
of the best
economic and
environmental
eiciency should
be made based
on the analysis of
water availability
that includes the
quantity, quality
and purpose of
water.

4 Water Availability and Water Reuse: A New Approach for Water Resources Management 83
References
ACQUANET. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.labsid.eng.br/soware/ManualAcquaNet2013.pdf.
ANA (AGÊNCIA NACIONAL DE ÁGUAS). (2014). Encarte Especial sobre a Crise Hídrica, 2014.
Retrieved from http://conjuntura.ana.gov.br/docs/crisehidrica.pdf.
. (2019). Conjuntura dos Recursos Hídricos no Brasil 2019.
Retrieved from http://www.snirh.gov.br/portal/snirh/centrais-de-conteudos/conjuntura-dos-recursos-hidricos/conjuntura_
informe_anual_2019-versao_web-0212-1.pdf.
Davie, T. (2008). Fundamentals of Hydrology. Routledge.
European Commission. (2019). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan.
COM/2019/190 final. European Commission, Brussels. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/.
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency of United States). (2012). Guidelines for Water Reuse.
Retrieved from http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/P100FS7K.pdf.
Falkenmark, M. (1989). The Massive Water Scarcity Now Threatening Africa: Why isn’t It Being Addressed? Ambio, 18(2), pp. 112-118.
Knapik, H, G. (2014). Organic Matter Characterization and Modelling in Polluted Rivers for Water Quality Planning and Management.
Thesis (doctor) – Federal Universit y of Paraná.
Hespanhol, I. (2008). A New Paradigm for Water Resource Management. Estudos Avançados, 22(63), pp. 131-158.
. (2014). A Inexorabilidade do Reúso Potável Direto.Revista DAE, São Paulo.
IBGE (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estátistica). (2017). Estimativa da População.
Retrieved from https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/pr/curitiba/panorama.
JIA, X., Varbanov, P. S., Klemes, J. J. & Alwi, S. R. W. (2019). Water Availability Footprint Addressing Water Quality.
Journal of SustainableDdevelopment of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, 7(1), pp. 72-86.
Labadie, J. W. (2006). MODSIM: Decision Support System for Integrated River Basin Management.
Retrieved from: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3254&context=iemssconference.
Makropoulos, C., Rozos, E., Tsoukalas, I., Plevri, A., Karakatsanis, G., Karagiannidis, L., Makri, E., Lioumis, C., Noutsopoulos, C.,
Mamais, D., Rippis, C. & Lytras, E. (2017). Sewer-mining: A Water Reuse Option Supporting Circular Economy, Public Service
Provision and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Environmental Management, 216, pp. 285-298.
MA, Shu-hua., Wen, Zong-guo., Chen, Ji-ning. & Wen, Zhi-chao. (2014). Mode of Circular Economy in China’s Iron and Steel Industry:
A Case Study in Wu’an City. Journal of Cleaner Production, 64, pp. 505-512.
Stefan, E. (2019). Disponibilidade Hídrica e Água de Reúso: Uma Nova Abordagem para a Gestão de Recursos Hídricos em Bacias
Urbanas. Master thesis – Federal University Paraná (UFPR).
Xu, H. & Wu, M. (2017). Water Availability Indices–A Literature Review. Argonne National Laborator y (ANL), Argonne, IL (United
States).

©Tero Hakala/Dreamstime.

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 85
5
Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy
Keng Han Tng, Conna Leslie-Keefe and Greg Leslie
Keng Han Tng, School of Chemical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia.
e-mail: k.h.tng@unsw.edu.au
Conna Leslie-Keefe, Global Water Institute, University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia.
e-mail: conna.leslie@gmail.com
Greg Leslie, School of Chemical Engineering, Global Water Institute, University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia.
e-mail: g.leslie@unsw.edu.au
Highlights
• Industrial water recycling systems provide water intensive industries with greater control over water and wastewater costs
and eliminate dependencies on external water supplies.
• Industrial water recycling can be achieved via external “end-of-pipe” and internal systems and use a variety of treatment
processes to remove suspended solids, reduce colour and salts and recovery energy.
• The unit cost ($/m3) of industrial water recycling can exceed the cost of water supply by a factor of 1.5 to 2, however,
the recycling schemes can be justified using triple bottom line (TBL) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) techniques
which account for project externalities.
• Optimising inputs in circular economy in paper production is important as increasing the percentage of recycled paper
in the feed stock increases loads in wastewater which results in higher cost of water recycling
• Unlike municipal waste recycling, which has national guidelines for water quality and compliance, industrial water recycling
is regulated at a state level. In addition, barriers to water recycling exist in food processing for export markets,
particularly red meat expor ts.
Abstract
Industrial water recycling systems provide water intensive industries in Australia with greater control over water and wastewater
costs and eliminate dependencies on external water supplies. This can be achieved via external “end of pipe” or internal recycling
systems which use a variety of treatment processes to remove suspended solids, reduce colour and salts and recovery energy.
The unit cost ($/m3) of industrial water recycling can exceed the cost of water supply by a factor of 1.5 to 2, however, the recycling
schemes can be justified using triple bottom line (TBL) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) techniques which account for project
externalities. Unlike municipal waste recycling, which has national guidelines for water quality and compliance, industrial water
recycling is regulated at a state level. Various industries accrue their own benefits and have their own pitfalls.
For instance, optimising inputs in the circular economy of paper production is impor tant as increasing the percentage of recycled
paper in the feed stock increases loads in wastewater which results in higher cost of water recycling. Barriers to water recycling
also exist in food processing for export markets, particularly red meat exports.
Keywords
Food and fibre processing, regulations, treatment, triple bottom line, life cycle assessment

86 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
01
Introduction
A key objective of the circular economy is to decouple
economic growth from the availability of finite resources
(Laurent et al., 2019). Water recycling schemes value waste as
a resource and enable water-intensive industries in Australia
to realise the benefits of the circular economy.
In particular, the poultry processing, beer brewing, and wood
fibre industries have invested in water recycling to increase
domestic and export production while balancing the risk
of projected declines in water availability due to a warmer
and drier climate. The importance of water recycling to
these industries is underpinned by a range of geographical
limitations including access to climate independent water
supplies such as seawater desalination or municipal
wastewater recycling.
Three aspects of the water security problem for these water
intensive industries are presented in Figure 5-1. First, Australia
is a highly urbanised country, however, most water intensive
industries are located in regional areas removed from urban
centres.
More than 90% of the 24.6 million people reside in 9 major
cities occupying less than 0.22% of the total land area (Cress
& Murphy, 2017). Additionally, 85% of the population are
located within 50 km of the coast. In contrast, the major
centres of fibre (pulp, paper, and paperboard), meat, brewing,
and vegetable processing are located, on average, 150 km
inland from the large coastal cities (Figure 5-1). Although the
brewing, poultry, and fibre processing industries collectively
account for less than 2% (approximately $23bn) of Australia’s
Gross Domestic Product (GDP), they are critical to regional
towns as sources of direct and indirect employment and local
economic activity (Table 5-1). For example, the pulp, paper,
and paper board industries, which are mostly located in the
south-east of Australia, account for the employment of 12,450
people in production and a further 47,500 in the supply chain,
of which 30,000 jobs are located in regional areas (Australian
Forest Products Association, 2018). These industries are
connected to a network of regional businesses that are
linked to the food processing industries, which is the largest
overall employer in the manufacturing sector that delivers
more than $18 billion in exports to countries such as Japan,
China, United States of America, New Zealand, and Korea.
Consequently, the viability of towns in regional Australia is
dependent on sustaining industries that create jobs and drive
local economies.
Second, the majority of brewing, poultry, and fibre processing
industries are located in areas where the annual average
rainfall has declined between 10 and 30 mm per decade from
the long-term average (BOM, 2020) . In some catchments,
a 10% decline in rainfall translates to a 30% decline in surface
water runo into rivers and reser voirs (Jones & Brooke, 2005).
This decline in water availability exposes water-intensive
Figure 5-1 Changes in decade average rainfall patterns and location of water intensive industries in Australia.
(Adapted from: “Climate chan ge – trends and extrem es”, by Bureau of Meteorology (2020).
Retrieved from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/#tabs=Tracker&tracker=trend-maps)

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 87
A key objective
of the circular
economy is
to decouple
economic growth
from the availability
of finite
resources.
industries to supply chain vulnerabilities and can be a
constraint on expansion of production. Beer brewing, poultry
processing, and fibre processing are particularly vulnerable to
water shortages. Collectively, these industries consume
133 Giga litres per Annum (GLA) (Table 5-1). To put this value
in perspective, in 2013-14, the Murray Darling Basin, the
largest inland river system in eastern Australia, only allocated
320 GLA out of 8,024 GLA for activities not directly related to
agricultural irrigation. The most water-intensive industrial
process is fine and high value paper production using the
Kra process, which consumes 20-40 tons (m3) of water per
ton of paper production (Table 5-1). High water consumption
in the Kra process is associated with the batching and
application of chemicals used to achieve a high brightness
in the final product. In contrast, manufacture of newsprint
(10-20 m3/ton) and paperboard (6-10 m3/ton) use less water
(Table 5-1). Similarly in the poultry industry, the preparation
and processing of chickens in broiler abattoirs consumes
22 litres per bird (approximately 20 m3/ton) while on average,
water consumption in beer brewing is 4 litres per litre
(4 m3/ton) (Table 5-1). Each of these industries is expanding
production to meet the increased demand. In the paper
industry, declines in newspaper production have been oset
by the growth in paperboard packaging and high quality
paper. In these applications, 70% of recycled paper is used
to supplement virgin fibre which increases specific water
consumption due to the need to wash ink and other material
from the recycled feed stock. In poultry processing,
the number of birds processed in Australia has increased from
125 million tons per year in 1995 to 250 million tons per year
in 2015. In all industries, this expansion in production
in towns in regional eastern Australian is taking place against
a background of declining precipitation. Thus, securing water
resources in the manufacturing supply chain is critical to
the beer, paper, and poultry industries.
The third and final aspect of the geographical challenge for
these industries is a of lack access, at scale, to modern water
and wastewater infrastructure. In response to
the Millennium drought, Australian state and federal
governments collectively invested $16billion ($10b USD) to
expand the nations desalination capacity from 45 GLA to
500 GLA (Hoang et al., 2009). The expansion of desalination
capacity provided the large coastal cities with climate
independent water supplies. However, desalination is not
viable for the water-intensive industries located away from
the coast. In addition, a corollary of high water consumption
is high wastewater production. Unlike petrochemical,
building products, chemical and other industries located
in the cities, paper, poultry, and some breweries are located
in towns where discharge to municipal wastewater treatment
plants is not feasible. Consequently, expansion of production
is attended by an increase in capital and operating costs of
wastewater treatment. The problem is compounded when
return of the treated waste water to the environment is
constrained by lack of hydraulic capacity in the conveyance
infrastructure or assimilative capacity in the environment.
Consequently, investing in water recycling capacity in
lieu of traditional waste treatment and disposal enables
water-intensive industries to expand production
Industry BrewingaPulp &
PaperbPoultryc
Market size $16.5Bn
(1.0% GDP)
$3.7Bn
(0.25% GDP)
$2.9Bn
(0.19% GDP)
Employment
d
:
Production
Tot al
3,700
141,200
12,450
60,800
(30,000
regional)
9,000
58,000
Water Use
Tot al
Specific
Demand
5.6 GLA
4.0 L/
(Avg)
100 GL A
20-40 m3/tn
Kra
10-15 m3/tn
Newsprint
6-10 m 3/tn
Paperboard
27.7 GLA
22.2 /Bird
(Avg)
a Brewe rs Association of Au stralia (2020)
b Australian Forest Products As sociation (2019)
c AgriFutures Australia (2020)
d Employment e xpressed as total contributio n including production,
supply chain and wholesale/retail
Table 5-1 Market size, employment and water demand of selected
water intensive manufacturing industries

88 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
independently of external water and wastewater
infrastructure.
In the last 20 years, there has been an exponential growth
in urban and regional water recycling projects in Australia.
In 1994, the first industrial recycled water scheme was
commissioned at the Eraring power station where treated
water from the Dora Creek wastewater treatment plant
was pumped to the power station for reuse as feedwater
to its high pressure boilers. From 2002, which was the start
of the millennium drought in eastern Australia, the eects
of population growth coupled with less predictable and
declining yield from dams and reservoirs accelerated
the number of recycled water schemes.
During this period, the motivation has been to develop
schemes that oset the need to supply water from the potable
distribution system which resulted in an increase in schemes
supplying industries such as the petrochemical and paper
processing industries. Till date, there has been an increase
in water recycling schemes adopted by Australian states
(Radclie, 2007). A further increase can be expected as
the projects currently under construction are completed,
reaching a projected 30% by 2030 (Figure 5-2). Industrial
wastewater recycling is growing at a comparable rate across
Australia, however, the installed capacity is typically less than
10% of the volume of municipal water recycling.
The following chapter provides an overview of features and
modalities of industrial water recycling, regulations, water
quality, treatment options, and system performance for
specific projects in the brewing, paper manufacturing,
and poultry processing industries. The central finding is that
the unit cost ($/m3) of industrial water recycling can exceed
the cost of water supply by a factor of 1.5 to 2, however,
the schemes can be justified using Triple Bottom Line (TBL)
and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) techniques which account for
project externalities. Emphasis is placed on providing one key
feature from each scheme that articulates the benefits,
risks and emerging trends in water recycling in the context of
the Australian industries.
Figure 5-2 Percenta ge of water recycling in Aus tralia with projection to 2030
(Adapted from: “Water Rec ycling - Trends, Challenges an d Responses”, by AWRCoE (2015))

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 89
02
Features of Industrial Water Recycling
2.1. Comparison with Municipal Water Recycling
Water recycling is an important component of integrated
water resource management (IWRM) strategies used by cities
and municipalities to develop water resilient communities
(Asano, 2005). Municipal water recycling plants build on
existing wastewater collection, treatment and discharge
infrastructure. These schemes originally had a public health
and environmental protection purpose and were designed
to prevent contamination of drinking water and to protect
receiving waters such as rivers, lakes, and oceans from
nutrients, chemicals, and pathogens (Asano et al., 2007).
Wastewater is comingled streams sourced from residential,
commercial, and industrial connections to the collection
system. Municipal water recycling provides additional
treatment prior to diversion of the water for use in lieu of
limited drinking water supplies. Increasing the degree of
treatment to improve qualit y accommodates the reuse water
in a range of non-potable purposes such as agricultural and
landscape irrigation through to application in cooling towers,
steam production, and batching of chemicals, and finally
through to potable uses such as replenishing groundwater
aquifers or direct augmentation of drinking water supplies
(Asano et al., 2007, Seah et al., 2003).
The treatment component of the municipal water recycling
scheme is referred to as the Advanced Water Treatment Plant
(AWTP) because the level of treatment for reuse exceeds
the treatment required for discharge to the environment.
Emphasis in the design of the AWTP is placed on protection
of public health through the reduction in concentration of
pathogens in the wastewater. Multiple barriers for pathogens
include filtration and disinfection. Additional processes
are included to remove dissolved salts and reduce colour
depending on the final application. Examples of industries in
Australia using water from municipal water recycling plants
include oil refineries (Kwinana, WA), steel mills (Wollongong,
NSW), and chemical plants (Qenos, Vic). Although these
industries are located in a 5 km radius of the wastewater
treatment plant the capital cost of conveyance from the AWTP
to the point of application can equal or, in some cases, exceed
the additional cost of treatment. Consequently, the use
of recycled water, sourced from a municipal wastewater
treatment plant by industry, is oen only viable if the end use
customer is located in the vicinity of the AWTP or adjacent to
the route of the eluent discharge pipeline if the customer is
located near a conventional wastewater treatment plant.
In contrast, industrial water recycling schemes operate
on waste generated by unit operations within the production
process. Any waste streams containing domestic waste water
from showers, toilets, kitchens and oices used by employees
is segregated and diverted to the sewer.
Oen in smaller industries the inability to segregate the
domestic from industrial waste restricts either the ability to
recycle water or the use of the recycled water in external uses,
oen irrigation, that do not feed back into the manufacturing
process. For most large scale industries, such as large
brewers, pulp and paper mills, and poultry abattoirs,
the site provides for separate collection and treatment of
the industrial and municipal waste.
In addition to separating waste streams, the larger industries
have separate reticulation systems for potable water used by
employees and process water used in manufacturing.
This separation of both water supply and wastewater
collection provides for greater flexibility in industrial
water recycling applications that has implications on the
development of regulations and guidelines which will
be discussed in Section 2.3 and the features of the water
recycling scheme including the modality (Section 2.2) and
the selection of treatment processes (Section 3.2).
Consequently, in contrast to municipal recycling systems,
industrial systems do not operate on domestic waste streams
and can reuse the water on-site with minimal conveyance
costs in multiple applications.
2.2. Modality of Industrial Water Recycling
The provision of separate and segregated water systems
enables recycled water to be reused either directly at
a specific point in the manufacturing process or recycled back
into the overall industrial water supply. The first mode of
operation is referred to as “internal” or point of use recycling,
while the second mode is referred to as the “end-of-pipe”
recycling. Examples of internal use include wash-down
of work areas and diversion to heat exchange networks
whereas end-of-pipe applications include use in boiler steam
production through boiler feed make up, chemical batching
and final washing and rinsing of process equipment. Features
of each modality including the treatment components and
feed water quality are contained in Figure 5-3 and Table 5-2.
The “end-of-pipe” mode is based on traditional approaches
to pollution abatement to remove nutrient loads prior to
discharge to the environment. Nutrient loads in brewery
and poultry waste, measured as Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD), can range from 4 to 15 times greater than the load from
domestic waste (COD of 500 mg/) (Table 5-2). End-of-pipe
treatment for brewery (Figure 5-3A) or poultry (Figure 5-3B)
waste involves biological nutrient removal to convert soluble
carbonaceous, nitrogenous and phosphorous waste to
sludge. To comply with wastewater discharge requirements,
industries install and operate separate external wastewater
treatment plants, which discharge into a dedicated industrial
sewer collection pipe. Consequently, increasing production
capacity in the brewery and poultry abattoir necessitates
upgrade of the end-of-pipe treatment plant and in some
cases, expanding the sewer hydraulic capacity.
The capital cost to expand and operate end-of-pipe
infrastructure oen prevents expansion of plant production

90 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
capacity unless a circular economy approach is used to
manage water and wastewater (see business outcomes
in Section 4). The circular economy approach involves
the installation of an industrial form of the AWTP process,
usually involving the removal of suspended and dissolved
solids, including salts and colour, to enable reuse in
applications including high-pressure boilers for steam
production, cooling towers, chemical batching,
and final cleaning and rinsing of process equipment.
Internal water recycling schemes include the reuse of
segregated waste streams that do not require nutrient removal
(Table 5-2). Water from internal recycling schemes used
directly in the manufacturing process include work area wash-
down and use in heat exchange systems. An internal approach
is favoured for lightly contaminated hot and cold waste
streams (Table 5-2). Examples of waste streams with significant
thermal energy include waste from the scald tank (50-60ºC),
which is the de-feathering step in poultry processing, and
from the spin chiller (1-4ºC), which is the carcass holding step
immediately prior to cutting and packaging (Table 5-2, Figure
5-3B).
Waste from these streams contain minimal nutrients (<30 mg/
COD) and provide oppor tunities for energy recovery which
are lost when the waste is comingled and sent to end-of-pipe
treatment systems. Internal recycling schemes oer a number
of opportunities for innovation, particularly in food processing
applications. Given the varying temperatures of wastewater
streams in food processing, the use of ceramic membranes
have an advantage over conventional polymeric membranes
Recycling Modality External “end of pipe” Internal
Industry Brewing Pulp & Paper Poultry Poultry
Product Beer
Bright
paper
Kraa
Newsprint
TMPbProcessed broilers
Waste stream Comingled Scalder Spin Chiller
Biological treatment Anaerobic & Aerobic Aerobic None
Temperature (oC) 20-40 15-30 15-30 20 50-60 1-4
pH 8-11 8 8 6 7 6.5
Total suspended solids (mg/)
300 20 20 250 30 <10
COD (mg/)5,000-8,000 600-800 600-800 2,000 <30 <30
DOC (mg/)50 70 50 250 20 10
Color (PCU) 450 1,000 370 600 50 10
Total dissolved solid (mg/)
2,000 2,700 1,000-2,200 2,000 300 350
Sodium (mg/)550 770 260 - 800 100 85 100
Chloride (mg/

)
150 490 40 120 195 235
Silicac (mg/)NA 20 30 -120 NA NA NA
a Kra chemical processing for high brightness specialty paper.
b hermomechanical pulping of virgin and recycled fiber content (RFC).
c Sodium and Silica content increases with increasing RFC .
Table 5-2 Modality of recycling and t ypical characterist ics wastewater for selec ted water intensive manufacturing industrie

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 91
Figure 5-3C Internal and external water recycling in Poultry processing. Internal recycling operate on segregated waste streams and
incorporate e nergy recovery through heat exchangers. Ex ternal recycling (A) ha s similar complexity to b rewery applications
depicted i n Figure 5-2A.
Figure 5-3B Water Recycling Processes Utilised in the Pulp and Paper Industry.
Figure 5-3A Water Recycli ng Processes Utilised in the Beer Brewing Industr y.

92 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
as they can operate in hot and cold streams due to the ceramic
material’s high thermal stability. Data on the per formance
of these membranes is presented in Figure 5-4. In addition,
incorporating energy recovery into water recycling allows for
the use of project evaluation methods, such as Triple Bottom
Line (TBL), Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), and Sankey Diagrams
that capture all the benefits of the circular economy and
provide an alternative to simple cost of water ($/m3 ) metrics to
assess water recycling schemes. These aspects are presented
in Section 3 and in Figures 5-5, 5-7, and 5-8.
2.3. Regulation of Industrial Water Recycling
Schemes
In response to the millennium drought (2003-
2008), Australia developed robust guidelines
for water recycling schemes to promote
diversification of water supplies and to protect
public health and provide municipalities and
industries with certainty in the planning,
construction and operation of recycling projects.
Guidelines for water recycling projects are
based on a risk management approach which
involves; (i) identification of hazard type and
concentration, (ii) estimation of exposure and
consequence (risk), and (iii) reducing the risk
to acceptable levels through the application of
treatment barriers and preventive measures.
This approach does not prescribe how the
wastewater should be treated which allows the
use of dierent treatment technologies to reduce
the concentration of biological and chemical hazards to an
acceptable level. The guidelines also require proponents of
recycling schemes to develop a Recycled Water Management
Plan (RWMP) to document the risk management approach
through design, construction and operation. One element
of the RWMP includes the application of Hazard Analysis
and Critical Control Points (HACCP) methods to ensure that
appropriate continuous on-line monitoring of performance,
particularly for surrogate metrics that ensure the risk
associated with microbial pathogens, such as virus, bacteria
and protozoa, is reduced to acceptable residual levels.
Although there are similarities, there are two key dierences
between industrial and municipal wastewater recycling
guidelines. The first dierence is municipal wastewater
recycling guidelines have been adopted at the national
(federal) level while industrial guidelines dier among
states (Table 5-3). Consequently, a company in the same
industry, for example brewing or poultry, operating the
same manufacturing process but in dierent states can have
dierent guidelines, water quality testing and repor ting
requirements. For example, a poultry operating plant in South
Australia must comply with the requirements to develop
a HACCP plan and establish suitable critical control points
(Table 5-3). The same requirement would apply to a poultry
plant in NSW with the addition of additional requirements
for on-line monitoring of Turbidity, Free Chlorine and pH, and
biweekly sampling and testing for Chemical and Biological
Oxygen Demand (COD/BOD), Total Suspended Solids (TSS),
and total coliform (Escherichia coli).
The second, and the more important, dierence is that
a separate set of federal regulations governing exported food
products are also applied to industrial recycling projects. This
requirement limits the development of internal water recycling
projects in some industries, particularly in the food and
beverage industry, if there is direct contact of
the recycled water with the final food product. In these
cases, either the use of recycled water is prohibited, or will
require additional approval from the Australian Quarantine
and Inspection Service(AQIS)as well as the relevant state
based food authority before the implementation of any
water recycling strategies. An example of
how current health and safety regulations
have resulted in strong inhibitions when
considering water recycling is in the red meat
processing industry, due to export market
requirements in the meat industr y. To receive
accreditation as a meat processor at Tier
1 or 2 Expor t Registered Australian Standard
Meat Establishment, recycled water cannot
be a direct ingredient in meat products.
These standards prohibit meat processors
from expor ting to overseas markets if they
use recycled potable water inside processing
plants that comes in contact with meat
products. Hence, it is diicult for red meat
processors to become more water resilient
to alleviate the water demand experienced in
drought-aected communities.
2.4. Water Quality and Treatment Technologies
Industrial wastewaters generally contain higher levels of
carbonaceous nutrients and dissolved solids than municipal
wastewater, but lower levels of microbial pathogens, urea and
phosphorous due to the segregation of domestic waste from
toilets, laundries and showers. A selection of water quality
data for external end-of-pipe and internal industrial water
recycling schemes in brewery, paper and poultry applications
is presented in Table 5-2.
External water recycling systems operate on comingled
wastes. The temperature of the waste ranges from 15 to
30ºC due to mixing of hot and cold streams in the production
process which enables the waste to equilibrate with
atmospheric conditions. Treatment processes for these
streams are based on a biological treatment component
followed by clarification, filtration and processes to remove
residual salts and colour so that the product water can be
returned to the general process water feed tank (Figure 5-3A,
5-3B, and 5-3C).
Brewery waste presents the highest nutrient load expressed
as COD which can range from 5,000 to 8,000 mg/ (Table 5-3).
Internal
recycling schemes
oer a number
of opportunities
for innovation,
particularly in
food processing
applications.

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 93
Brewery waste consists of complex sugars and proteins from
the spent fermentation tanks. Biological treatment of brewery
waste consists of anaerobic treatment to reduce the COD
from >5,000 mg/ to approximately 2,000 mg/ followed by
aerobic treatment to further reduce the COD to approximately
500–600 mg/ which is acceptable for discharge to municipal
wastewater treatment plants (Figure 5-3A).
The use of anaerobic treatment in external recycling
schemes presents an opportunity to generate energy via the
production of methane which osets the cost of additional
treatment prior to reuse. Comingled waste from poultry
processing has a COD of approximately 2,000 mg/ while
waste from pulp and paper typically ranges from
500-600 mg/ COD due to dilution associated with the high
water use at 20-40 m3/ton for Kra and 10-15 m3/ton for TMP
(Tab le 5 -2) .
Eluent from the biological treatment stage
is treated to reduce total suspended solids,
recalcitrant organics and salts. Removing
the suspended solids prevents blocking of
sprays, nozzles and other fixtures used in
the industrial water systems. Tertiary unit
operations such as reverse osmosis and ion
exchange are oen utilised for the removal
of dissolved salts, whilst nanofiltration and
granular activated carbon are usually used
to remove colour and dissolved organics
(Bassandeh et al., 2013, Ciputra et al., 2010),
however, all these processes require
a pretreatment step for suspended solids
removal with external water recycling schemes
using a range of solid/liquid separation
processes to reduce the concentration of
suspended solids. External recycling schemes
in brewing applications have the most rigorous solids
removal process post biological treatment due to the high
concentration (300-400 mg/) and neutral buoyancy of the
suspended biological materials. An external water recycling
plant at a brewery in Queensland employs dissolved air
floatation and filtration to remove fine biological flocs aer
the anaerobic and aerobic nutrient removal stages (Figure
5-3A). Because space is a premium in industrial systems,
breweries, pulp and paper and poultry use membrane
filtration (microfiltration or ultrafiltration) as the final solids
removal step prior to final processing to remove colour and
salts (Figure 5-3A, 5-3B, and 5-3C). Membrane filtration is
the de-facto industry standard for pretreatment to reverse
osmosis in municipal wastewater recycling (Seah et al., 2003)
and this trend has continued in industrial applications.
Membrane filtration is preferred by industr y due to the ease
of operation (pressure filtration), small footprint, and minimal
chemical use.
External water recycling systems use 0.01 to 0.2 micron
polymeric membranes which are suitable for the ambient
temperature streams. These systems are ver y reliable and
have a long track record in both municipal and industrial
applications. In internal water recycling schemes,
where it is necessary to handle both hot and cold streams,
the use of ceramic membranes that have higher mechanical
strength and thermal tolerance than polymeric membranes
are evaluated (Grant et al., 2011) (Figure 5-3B).
The removal of salts and colour is particularly important for
fine paper production which produces a paper product with
high brightness. The Kra process is designed to separate
lignin and organic acids from the cellulosic fibre to produce
a high brightness (white) paper. The eiciency of the colour
removal coupled with the high chemical use produces a waste
that typically contains 1,000 colour units (PCU), 70 mg/ of
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC), 700-800 mg/ of sodium and
2,700 mg/ of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS).
The production of newsprint does not require the same
brightness levels as fine paper so a chemical free thermo-
mechanical process (TMP) employing steam and shear is used
to remove cellulose fibres from virgin pulp. Consequently,
the colour (370 PCU), DOC (50 mg/), TDS
(1,000 mg/) and sodium (260 mg/) of TMP
eluent is lower than Kra eluent (Table 5-3).
Another significant characteristic of TMP
eluent is the eects of a trend to replace
virgin pulp with recycled fibres from used
papers and magazines. In some applications,
such as paper board, 100% of the feedstock
is Recycled Fibre Content (RFC). In newsprint,
RFC can vary from 20 to 70%. As the RFC
percentage increases the eluent will contain
more silica (up to 120 mg/) and sodium (up to
800 mg/) (Table 5-2). Increasing RCF content
to 50% decreased reverse osmosis water
recovery from 80% to 22%. This reduction
was due to the increase in silica and sodium
associated with the use of surfactants and
caustic soda to remove inks and dyes from
the recycled fibre before pulping and use
in the paper machine. It is also noteworthy that increased
sodium increases the osmotic potential of the waste that
increases the operating pressure of the reverse osmosis, while
increased silica limits the recover y of the reverse osmosis
process (Negaresh et al., 2013). Studies on wastewater
from TMP processes with high RFC found that additional
chemical with lime and magnesium hydroxide upstream
of microfiltration was required to remove residual silica
(Figure 5-3C). Consequently, treatment processes such as ion
exchange or granular activated carbon have been evaluated
for colour removal in TMP applications (Antony et al., 2012)
(Figure 5-3C).
It is diicult
for red meat
processors to
become more water
resilient to alleviate
the water demand
experienced in
drought-aected
communities.

94 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
Table 5- 3 Summary of features of legislation governing internal industrial water recycling in food and beverage applications at national and state level
Jurisdiction Relevant Legislation/Regulation
National
No testing parameters are defined in national legislation or standards.
A risk assessment, including HACCP and food safety plan, must be developed and implemented.
Risks identified in the HACCP and safety plan must be monitored acceptably to ensure food safety
and quality is not compromised (FSANZ (Food Standards Australia & New Zealand), 2011)
New South Wales
As per national requirements for risk assessment and risk monitoring.
Testing criteria provided for validation of recycled water meeting potable standards by NSWFA
WRG which also states the minimum testing limits and frequency of monitoring for reused water
in direct contact with food or food contact surfaces, which are: online for Turbidity, Free Chlorine
and pH, and biweekly for BOD, TSS and E. coli (NSWFA (New South Wales Food Authority), 2008)
Australian Capital
Territory
No testing parameters are specified. Identified risks by mandatory HACCP and safety plan must
be monitored acceptably. The ACT Environment & Health – Wastewater Reuse Guidelines 1997
recommends that an application to the Department of Health include plant eluent information
on thermos-tolerant coliforms, Total Phosphorus, Total Nitrogen, Sodium Absorption Ratio,
Acidity (pH), Total Dissolved Solids, Turbidity and Biological Oxygen Demand (Australian Capital
Territory (ACT) Government, 1997).
Victoria
Victorian legislators do not specify testing parameters. Identified risks by mandatory HACCP and
safety plan must be monitored acceptably.
The minimum testing limits and monitoring frequency for Class A recycled water are outlined,
but this is not mandatory in a food setting (EPA Victoria, 2003). HACCP may require more or less
stringent limits and should be used as the compliance value.
South Australia South Australia legislators do not specify testing parameters. Identified risks by mandatory HACCP
and safety plan must be monitored in an acceptable manner (South Australian Government, 2001)
Tas m ani a
No testing parameters are specified. Identified risks by mandatory HACCP and safety plan must
be monitored acceptably. The Environmental Guidelines for the Use of Recycled Water in Tasmania
specify that microbiological, chemical and physical risks should be minimised; however, the
guideline stops short of setting a specific limit to be maintained for use with recycled water for
use in food. The guidelines provide testing criteria for Class A recycled water and may apply to
treatment systems in food processing plants (Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, 2002).
Western Australia
No testing parameters are specified. Identified risks by mandatory HACCP and safety plan must be
monitored acceptably.
The Guidelines for the non-potable uses of Recycled Water in Western Australia provide testing
criteria for treated water that has a high risk of human contact (Western Australian Department of
Health, 2011). These guidelines may apply to treatment systems in food processing plants but are
not explicitly addressed in the document.

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 95
03
Performance and System Evaluation
3.1. Performance
3.1.1. Use of Ceramic Membranes in Internal
Recycling Schemes
End-of-pipe water recycling in poultry processing, while
feasible, is capital and energy intensive. The alternative is to
process internal waste streams that are lightly contaminated
(<30 mg/ COD) and do not require biological treatment prior
to reuse. In poultr y processing, the best candidate streams
are the waste from the scald tank and the spin chiller,
which collectively account for 70% of total energy demand.
Reuse of these streams generally requires membrane
filtration to remove suspended solids and coliforms and
reduce the turbidity to allow the product to be reused.
In these applications, ceramic membranes are preferred over
polymeric membranes due to the wide temperature range of
the chiller (<4°C) and scalder (>60ºC) waste streams.
Recently, a poultry processing plant in the state of New South
Wales evaluated the performance of a pilot-scale (2,500 /day)
membrane filtration system fitted an alumina (Al2O3) coated,
0.2m (micron) Ceramic Microfiltration (CMF) membrane in
an internal water recycling scheme. The ceramic membrane
was operated at a sub-critical flux (no cleaning required)
of 48 /m2/h on scald tank waste and a sub-critical flux of
100 /m2/h on spin chill water. The higher fluxes on the spin
chill waste were possible because of the lower suspended
solids concentration (Table 5-2). Turbidity was selected as
an appropriate Critical Control Point (CCP) based on NSW
legislation and was measured upstream and downstream of
the ceramic membrane in both applications. When connecting
the CMF to both the scald tank and spin chiller, all permeate
turbidity values satisfied the NSWFA WRG 95% compliance
limit for turbidity of 1.00 NTU (Figure 5-4). When connected to
the scald tank, CMF permeates turbidity varied from 0.01 to
0.98 NTU with an average of 0.31 NTU (n = 29). CMF permeate
turbidity from spin chiller feed water had a range from 0.04
to 0.77 NTU with an average of 0.27 NTU (n = 17). Despite the
dierent quality of the scald tank and spin chiller wastewater,
the average turbidity of the CMF permeates from both trials
was relatively similar. As suspended particles predominantly
cause turbidit y in the wastewater, the membrane pore size
used in the trials (0.2 m) is suicient to remove all suspended
solids from the wastewater. Permeate quality for both streams
complied with NSW Food Authority Water Reuse Guidelines for
fit for purpose reuse in both unit operations (Table 5-3).
However, the main advantage of using a ceramic membrane
over a polymeric membrane was the ability to operate directly
on the hot and cold streams and to incorporate energy
recovery through heat exchangers. In this application,
the heat exchanger was located on the filtrate from
the ceramic membrane on the scald tank water (hot stream)
and upstream of the ceramic membrane on the spin chill water
(cold stream) (Figure 5-3C). This arrangement provided
a modest (approximately 5ºC) increase in feed temperature
on the cold stream which reduced viscosity and lowered
membrane operating pressure. A Sankey diagram analysis was
used to compare energy flows for the internal versus the end-of-
pipe water recycling options (Figure 5-5). This analysis indicated
that recovering both energy and water directly from the scalders
and chillers would reduce the gas supply inputs used to run the
scalders and chillers by 52% (431 to 208 kW) and reduce
the energ y associated with producing water for the scalders and
chillers by 60% (91 to 36 kW) (Figure 5-5).
This illustrates the importance of introducing circular economy
externalities, such as energy, when evaluating water recycling
schemes in industrial applications. For example, while it is not
possible to justify the installation of the ceramic membranes
on a cost of water basis due to dierences in the amor tized cost
of water produced by ceramic membranes (1.5-2 times higher
than cost of potable water), the energy savings associated with
the internal recycling system oset the cost of installing and
operating the membranes over the same period.
Figure 5-4 Membrane Filter Permeate Turbidity for Scald Tank and Spin Chiller in Poultry Abat toir over 30-Day Performan ce Test
(Source: Grant et a l., 2011)

96 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
3.1.2. Salt and Organic Removal in the Pulp and Paper
Industry
Recycling paper mill eluent by conventional water treatment
is diicult due to the persistence of salt and recalcitrant
organics. Recently a Kra paper mill in Victoria and a TMP mill
in New South Wales evaluated the performance of a range
of systems to remove dissolved organic matter (DOM) from
mill eluent including Ion Exchange Resin (IER), Granular
Activated Carbon (GAC), and Nanofiltration (NF) (Ciputra et al.,
2010). The removal eiciency of each treatment process was
analysed based on hydrophobicity, molecular weight, and
fluorogenic origin of the DOM fractions. The overall removal of
DOM for IER, GAC and NF treatments were 72%, 76%, and 91%,
respectively (Figure 5-6). While all three treatment methods
significantly removed the hydrophobic acid fractions, IER
removed a proportion of all fractions with 57% removal of
hydrophobic acids, 44% of transphilic acids, and 18% of
hydrophilic acids. Removal based on the molecular weight of
the DOM, IER, and GAC treatments removed the majority of
the high molecular weight fractions, whereas NF eectively
removed all molecular weight fractions. Qualitative analysis
of fluorescence excitation-emission matrices showed that
the fulvic acid-like fluorophores were more recalcitrant
among the various DOM fractions with a considerable amount
retained aer undergoing all the three treatment methods.
The three treatment methods diered considerably in terms
of removing dierent DOM fractions; however, a broad-
spectrum process like NF would be the most eective for
maximal removal. However, the deployment of nanofiltration
and reverse osmosis in paper production should be evaluated
cautiously as the trend towards using more recycled fibre
from used papers and magazines as a replacement to virgin
wood pulp comes with its own inherent risk (see Section 4.2
on risk below).
Figure 5-6 Dissolved Organic Removal Eicienc y in Paper Mill
Recycling by Ion Exchange, Activated Carbon and
Nanofilt ration (Source: Antony et al. , 2012)
Figure 5-5 Sankey Diagram Comparison of Energy Consumption for End-of-Pipe and Internal Recycling in Poultry Abattoir
(Source: Grant et a l., 2014)

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 97
3.2. System Evaluation
The example of using energy analysis to evaluate the merits
of internal water recycling in a poultry processing application
illustrates the need to adopt a broad range of measures
and analysis to assess the benefits of a circular economy
approach. In almost all cases, the unit cost of water from
the main potable supply is less than the unit cost of recycled
water. For example, the average water tari in Australia is
$1.10 (0.7USD)/m3 while fully amortized treatment costs of
recycled water range from $1.50 to $2.00/m3. Consequently,
it is necessary to factor in externalities through techniques
such as Triple Bottom Line (TBL) or Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA) techniques to capture additional advantages of water
recycling in the circular economy.
3.2.1. Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Evaluation of Socio-
Environmental-Financial Factors
Triple Bottom Line (TBL) analysis is a set of full cost
accounting techniques and sustainability reporting guidelines
developed by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), designed
for businesses and governments to undertake a holistic
assessment of operations across economic, environmental
and social criteria (Foran et al., 2005; GRI, 2013).
While TBL can be used as a tool to compare industries or
sectors of an economy (Foran et al., 2005), it can also be used
as a specific comparative modelling tool, to quantify
the impact of a range of changes made in an individual
operator, company, industry or sector.
TBL analysis is a comparative tool
and as such, a suitable benchmark
needs to be established before
comparison can be undertaken.
Benchmark values were based on
selected criteria obtained from
data collected from abattoirs,
following normalisation to a
per bird basis. TBL analysis was
conducted, and abattoirs were
compared to the national average
of each evaluated criterion to
observe trends (Grant et al., 2014).
The analysis used water and
power consumption data from
7 plants located in 4 states,
representing 28% of total national
production.
The results of the analysis are
presented in Figure 5-7.
The TBL analysis indicated that the benefits across
6 of the evaluated criteria increased as the percentage of
water recovered increased (Figure 5-7). Internal recycling
resulted in an overall improvement in energy use across
the average of all sites from 6.6% at 50% water recovery up to
15.2% at 90% water recovery, while equivalent greenhouse
gas emission (eGHG) were reduced by 1.7% at 50% water
recovery to 6.5% at 90% water recovery. Overall water
consumption was reduced by 13.5% at 50% recovery to 24.3%
It is necessary
to factor in
externalities
through techniques
such as TBL or
LCA techniques to
capture additional
advantages of
water recycling
in the circular
economy.
Figure 5-7 Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis of Water and Energy Recovery Technol ogy Implementation (Source: Grant et al., 2014)

98 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
at 90% recover y. Economic criteria showed an improvement
for all recoveries tested which was due to the cost savings
associated with a reduction in energy consumption in boilers
and ammonia chillers due to the water and energ y recovery
technologies. Water costs were reduced due to the reduced
demand on potable water and minimisation of wastewater
disposal charges. This translated into improvements in gross
operating surplus and water cost between 13.1% and 12.8%
at 50% recovery and 24.3% and 23.8% at 90% recovery,
respectively. Social factors such as employment and income
increased by 1.5% and 2.6% respectively while Government
revenue declined by 4.3% at 50% water recovery, up to 12.5%
at 90% water recovery, due to the savings made on water and
energy usage reductions (Figure 5-7).
3.2.2. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions (GHG) in Recycling Options
For a more detailed assessment of the environmental
impacts of water recycling technologies, a Life Cycle Analysis
(LCA) is an established tool that can be used to quantify
the environmental impact of plants, processes, businesses,
industries, or sectors. However, in order to ensure an accurate
and meaningful LCA, data from relevant operational data
from either pilot or actual operations in the industr y are
necessar y. LCA is governed by the ISO 14040-44 guidelines
(ISO, 2006), and is comprised of four major steps:
1. Goal and scope definition, which identifies the purpose
and objectives of the study, including the objects and
processes to be studied, and their system boundaries;
2. Life cycle inventory (LCI), which involves the systematic
collection of all relevant inputs and outputs of all process
included within the system boundaries;
3. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), where collected data
are grouped and assigned to specific impac t categories
and characterized using a suitable LCIA model that allows
for comparison; and
4. Life cycle interpretation, where the LCIA model is used to
draw conclusions and make recommendations
in the context of the original study goal, functional unit
and system boundaries.
Results from an LCA can be used to demonstrate the impact of
implementing new technologies and compare that to
the current technologies implemented. Reductions signify
an environmental benefit, whereas increases signify
an environmental cost.
In poultry abattoirs, an LCA was used to compare three
scenarios at a single poultry abattoir (Figure 5-8).
The scenarios included, business as usual (no recycling),
deployment of an internal recycling system with energy
recovery, and an external end-of-pipe recycling plant
operating on comingled streams. The external plant was
based on a standard advanced wastewater treatment plant
consisting of biological and dual membrane treatment.
A single impact factor, greenhouse gas emissions expressed
as kg CO2 eq/k of water recovered, was used to account for
inputs across 10 inventories. Water use in the scald tank for
broiler processing results in a greenhouse gas emission of
10.4 kg CO2 eq/k for the current arrangement compared to
7.4 kg CO2 eq/k and 14.2 kg CO2 eq/k for internal recycling
using ceramic membranes and external end-of-pipe water
recycling options respectively (Figure 5-8).
The increased electricity use in internal recycling was due
Figure 5-8 Life Cycle Assessment Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Emission for End-of-Pipe a nd Internal
Recycling in Poultry Abattoir (Source: Grant et al., 2014)

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 99
to the process requiring the use of recirculation pumping,
however, the energy consumption is partly oset by heat
recovery, reducing overall energy use. External water
recycling at an “end-of-pipe” advanced wastewater treatment
plant resulted in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions
compared to the current arrangement due to higher
electricity use and fugitive emissions of methane and nitrous
oxide from the biological nutrient removal process.
LCA comparison between internal water recycling
technology and external “end-of-pipe” water treatment plants
showed that while the potable water savings did provide an
environmental benefit, the energy savings associated with
energy recovery for the internal water recycling option were
more significant compared to that of “end-of-pipe” treatment.
Water and energy recycling internally using the ceramic
membrane treatment was environmentally beneficial in most
impact categories compared to the current arrangement,
particularly when applied to water recovery from specific unit
processes.
The external water recycling option did not provide any
environmental benefit compared to the current arrangement
but this option may still be considered due to other factors
that do yield some benefits despite its longer Return on
Investment (ROI) period.
04
Discussion
Although the cost of water,
TBL, and LCA are important
justifications for developing
industrial water recycling,
another important externality is
the level of autonomy
the schemes can provide to
businesses. In particular,
the circular economy enables
business to decouple growth
from finite resources. However,
the circular economy also
decouples growth from
constraints of finite capacity
of infrastructure and can
encourage innovative uses of
waste products. The following
section examines how water
recycling enabled a significant expansion of capacity at an
Australian brewery and enabled a vegetable processing
company to develop a new high margin product from
a waste stream. However, business risks do exist, particularly
when the use of one waste product, in this case recycled
fibre in paper production, can have a negative impact on the
performance of water recycling systems.
4.1. Business Outcomes
A beer brewer y in Yatala, Queensland is one of the largest
breweries in the country, with a production capacity of 450 m
per annum. In under two decades, the brewery has more than
doubled its production (140 m/year in 1993 to 330 m/year
in 2001), quadrupling its share of the Australian market
(5% to 21%) and halving its water requirements per litre of
product (5.5  to 2.3  per litre of product), which is among
the lowest globally (ISF, 2013). Unprecedented expansion and
resource optimisation were possible even during
the Millennium Drought of 2002 – 2008 with the use of on-site
wastewater treatment and recycling.
Upon expansion to the current capacity, the brewery faced
a costly dilemma. The local wastewater treatment plant was
only optimised for a residential load of 30,000-40,000 people,
while the brewer y alone would produce an equivalent load of
60,000 people in wastewater. The extra load from the brewery
on the municipal plant would render the brewer y liable to pay
the local government to increase the treatment capacity of
its treatment plant to accommodate the brewery’s eluent.
Alternatively, the brewery could install an on-site treatment
plant at Yatala. The local government was broadly supportive
of the brewery’s expansion to Yatala but the wastewater
The circular
economy also
decouples growth
from constraints
of finite capacity
of infrastructure
and can encourage
innovative uses of
waste products.

100 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
treatment infrastructure was unable to process such a scale
of industrial waste. An upgrade to the municipal plant would
have also accommodated a growing population in the region,
however, there were still two potential setbacks.
First, the expected municipal plant expansion time would
likely have been at least five years, in tandem with
the projected trends of population growth and second,
despite fronting much of the expense for the upgrade,
the brewery would not be guaranteed reception of all of
its treatment waste. Given these constraints, the brewery
opted for an on-site treatment plant, which granted them full
autonomy and discretion concerning the timing of upgrades
and treatment capacity. The plant went ahead with a budget
that was approximately similar to the contribution the
brewery would have made for the municipal plant upgrade of
3-4 million AUD in 1993 (5.5-7.5 million adjusted for inflation to
2018 dollars) (ISF, 2013).
In 2005, the brewery made another stride towards water
use optimisation in response to the Millennium Drought and
the closure of one of its breweries in Sydney. The closure
meant that Yatala would soon have to double its production.
Doubling production also meant doubling water usage and
waste production. During a time of intense drought,
this would leave the brewery liable to increasing water prices
and wastewater disposal charges, as well as headworks
charges if they opted to expand the municipal wastewater
treatment plant to accommodate the increased waste.
Taking another calculated risk to avoid these extra costs,
the brewery opted for on-site water recycling in addition to
on-site wastewater treatment Avoiding the increased cost of
water, wastewater disposal, and installation of headworks,
the brewery was able to oset oset the bulk of the expense
of building the new recycling facility (the plant cost
$6.5 million but saved the brewery $5.7 million in headworks
charges). The recycling plant, in turn, diused any potential
political sensitivity regarding water use in a time of immense
tension over the ongoing drought and spared the brewery
from water restrictions that would have been a hindrance
to production. Furthermore, on-site wastewater treatment
and recycling minimised the greenhouse gas emissions by
eliminating the need for transport of wastewater before
processing (ISF, 2013).
Other benefits of having on-site recycling processes
in breweries include the ability to treat feed water for quality
control purposes. For example, it is not uncommon to treat
town potable water before use in the brewer y to ensure that
the taste influencing, mineral quality of the process water
is kept consistent throughout the yearly production cycle.
Oen, reverse osmosis is used to treat the potable water,
which creates a residual stream of concentrate that needs to
be disposed to the sewer. However, alternative technologies
such as electrodialysis can also be used to increase the water
recovery of existing on-site systems.
Ultimately, taking calculated, research-backed risks,
in both 1993 with the installation of the WWTP and in 2005
with the addition of a water recycling plant, has led to
unprecedented growth for the brewery, all while increasing its
autonomy from the government in a time of increasing water
restrictions.
4.2. Risks to Specic Industries
There exist specific industries for which careful considerations
of water recycling practices need to be made. For instance,
using recycled fibre (RCF) in newsprint production reduces
the requirement for virgin fibres as well as the waste products
sent to landfill and cuts costs. RCF use allows production
to maintain profitability amid an increase in electronic
news consumption, which caused demand for newsprint
quality paper to decline. Measures to incorporate RCF also
substantially decrease greenhouse gas emissions per tonne of
paper, from 6.5 tonnes to 5.5 tonnes when mills operate with
30% RCF content, with a further decrease to 4.4 tonnes when
they operate at 60%.
However, recycling fibres is not as unambiguously
environmentally benign as it may appear, as the incorporation
of RCF at an industrial scale requires the use of chemicals to
brighten and de-ink the fibres. Such chemicals include sodium
hydroxide, sodium silicate, and surfactants. The inclusion of
these compounds means that the wastewater that remains
at the end of the paper recycling process accrues massive
amounts of sodium and silica, hindering its treatability by
membrane filtration. Thus, the recycling of paper impedes
the treatment of remaining wastewater aer brightening and
de-inking processes. A s the paper industry is the third-largest
industrial consumer of water in Australia, operating in a time
of increasing water shor tages and restrictions emphasises
the paramount need to reduce water requirements.
Balancing these two environmental and economic interests
ought to be carefully considered by businesses in the paper
and pulp industr y. One solution is to use a lime coagulation
pretreatment for the removal of excess sodium and silica,
before treatment by reverse osmosis and nanofiltration.
Recycling and treating recovered materials as part of
an industrial operation oers reduced costs for virgin
materials and lower greenhouse gas emissions, which
economically entices producers. However, in water-intensive
industries like pulp and paper, wherein equal or more
significant incentives to reduce water consumption exist,
careful evaluation of how these processes may aect one
another is critical. As in the case of using RCF in newsprint
production, oen a solution can be found.
4.3. Future Trends and Innovation
The proximity of Australia to the growing population centres
of South and South East Asia, par ticularly India, Indonesia,
and China, creates an opportunity for expanded export
markets, especially for food and beverages. Meeting this
demand with finite resources, including water, will necessitate
the use of a circular economy approach to the management

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 101
of raw material inputs and waste outputs. Consequently,
brewing, packaging, and food processing industries looking to
expand output without stretching demand on water supplies
beyond sustainable levels will look to both internal water
recycling and end-of-pipe recycling solutions.
This trend will result in increased use of compact treatment
solutions, such as moving bed bioreactors, membrane
bioreactors, reverse osmosis, and ultraviolet disinfection, that
have become common place in municipal water recycling.
Also, because the strength of industrial wastewaters is greater
than municipal wastewaters, there will be an increase
in the use of anaerobic processes, such as upflow anaerobic
sludge blanket combined energy co-generation to either
reduce or produce surplus power. The challenge for both
industrial end users and equipment manufacturers will be to
continue to innovate in the areas of process monitoring and
control to ensure comparable reliability and resilience
in the water recycling operation as well as the main
processing lines. Again, it will be critical to capture all data,
particularly power and water consumption across the
integrated plant to validate the whole of life benefits to justify
the project.
Other aspects of the circular economy that will become more
important will be the valorisation of waste. An example of
this comes from one Australian processor of canned fruits
and vegetables that has developed an innovative approach
to producing and marketing of a new premium product out of
its wastewater. Specifically, when fruit and vegetable juices
are reduced to concentrates to be expor ted and used to make
bottled, shelf-stable juices, most extracted and separated
water content becomes surplus to the process.
In most instances, the fruit and vegetable processors
discharge the surplus water, however, in one facility,
the waste is filtered, partially demineralised, and pasteurised
to produce treated water that meets drinking standards.
The treated water is packaged and marketed as a premium
water product called AquaBotanical, which is now served
in fine dining restaurants and lauded for its unique flavour
notes. It is an excellent example of innovation in industries
that are water-intensive but do not include processed potable
water as part of the core business. Given the increased
demand for processed fruit and vegetables, it is likely that
more value will be extracted from the wastewater streams
in order to manage limited supplies of water and minimise
the impact of wastewater discharge on the environment.
In the case of AquaBotanical, the valorisation of the waste
stream provides a new source of revenue to build into
the business case for its industrial water recycling system.
05
Conclusions
Many water-intensive industries,
such as pulp and paper, brewing
and vegetable and meat
processing are located in regions
where both water availability
and wastewater disposal
options impose constraints
on expansion and create
vulnerabilities in supply chain
logistics.
The impact of these constraints
on regional economies and
employment were highlighted
during the 2002 to 2008
Millennium drought. In response,
many businesses began
to explore water recycling
options. Before the drought,
the prevailing regulatory
environment governing both
public health and third party private sector par ticipation
in water services was fragmented and not conducive to
water recycling. In the absence of a national approach to
establishing guidelines and performance standards for
internal industrial water recycling, particularly in the food
industry, businesses operating in two dierent states were
subject to dierent standards and permits for projects
with comparable uses of treated water. The situation was
compounded if the industry had an export focus which
involved federal as well as state regulations.
In response, policy, laws and guidelines covering pricing,
investment and the protection of public health were gradually
revised to encourage investment in water recycling and
the adoption of a suite of technologies that enabled
an expansion of production capacity with reduced freshwater
demand and waste generation.
Policy, laws
and guidelines
covering pricing,
investment and
the protection of
public health were
gradually revised
to encourage
investment in water
recycling.

102 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the support and assistance of the Institute of Sustainable Futures, the Australian Water
Recycling Centre of Excellence, Dr Des Richardson (Norske Skog), A/Prof. Julian Cox (UNSW), Dr. David Grant (UNSW), Dr. Tony Pavic
(Birling Avian Laboratories), and Charlie Foxall (Yatala Brewery Queensland).
References
AgriFutures Australia. (2020). Chicken Meat.
Retrieved February 6, 2020, from https://www.agrifutures.com.au/rural-industries/chicken-meat.
Antony, A., Bassendeh, M., Richardson, D., Aquilina, S., Hodgkinson, A., Law, I. & Leslie, G. (2012).
Diagnosis of Dissolved Organic Matter Removal by GAC Treatment in Biologically Treated Papermill Eluents Using Advanced
Organic Characterisation Techniques. Chemosphere, 86(8), pp. 829-836.
Asano, T. (2005). Urban Water Recycling. Water Science and Technology, 51(8), pp. 83-89.
Asano, T., Burton, F. L. Leverenz, H. L., Tsuchihashi, R. & Tchobanoglous, G. (2007).
Water Reuse: Issues, Technologies, and Applications. 1 Edition, AECOM Company Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Government. (1997).
ACT Environment and Health Wastewater Reuse Guidelines. Edited by ACT Parliamentary Counsel. Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Australian Forest Products Association. (2018). 2018 National Pulp & Paper Sustainability Report.
Retrieved from https://ausfpa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/2018-National-Pulp-and-Paper-Sustainability-Report.pdf.
AWRCoE (Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence). (2015). Water Recycling - Trends, Challenges and Responses [Slides].
Retrieved from https://www.lgnsw.org.au/files/imce-uploads/48/1.Mark_ODonohue.pdf.
Bassandeh, M., Antony, A., Le-Clech, P., Richardson, D. & Leslie, G. (2013).
Evaluation of Ion Exchange Resins for the Removal of Dissolved Organic Matter from Biologically Treated Paper Mill Eluent.
Chemosphere, 90(4), pp. 1461-1469.
BOM (Bureau of Meteorology). (2020). Climate Change – Trends and Extremes.
Retrieved February 6, 2020, from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/#tabs=Tracker&tracker=trend-maps&tQ=map%3Drai
n%26area%3Daus%26season%3D0112%26period%3D1970.
Brewers Association of Australia. (2020). Beer: The Facts.
Retrieved February 6, 2020, from https://www.brewers.org.au/beer-facts.html.
Ciputra, S., Antony, A., Phillips, R., Richardson, D. & Leslie, G. (2010). Comparison of Treatment Options for Removal of Recalcitrant
Dissolved Organic Matter from Paper Mill Eluent. Chemosphere, 81(1), pp. 86-91.
Cresswell, I. D. & Murphy, H. T. (2017).
Australia State of the Environment 2016: Biodiversity, Independent Report to the Australian Government Minister for the
Environment and Energy. Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy: Canberra, ACT.
EPA Victoria. (2003). Guidelines for Environmental Management: Use of Reclaimed Water. EPA Victoria, 40 City Road, Southbank,
Victoria 3006, AUSTRALIA: Enviromental Protection Authority (Victoria), 101.
Foran, B., Lenzen, M. & Dey, C. (2005). A Balancing Act: A Triple Bottom Line Analysis of the Australian Economy.
Canberra, ACT, Australia: CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems: 112.
Retrieved from https://publications.csiro.au/rpr/pub?pid=procite:ef189bac-499a-46db-be4d-b391a3cb05dc.
FSANZ (Food Standards Australia & New Zealand). (2011).
Food Safety Practices and General Requirements ComLaw. 12 Canberra, Australia.
Grant, D., Pavic, A., Cox, J. & Leslie, G. (2011).
A Study into the Use of Ceramic Membranes for Water Reuse in Commercial Broiler Abattoir Operations. Oral Presentation at 6th
International Water Association (IWA) Specialised Conference on Membrane Technology. Aachen, Germany.
. (2013). The Safety and Quality of Recycled Scald Tank Water from Commercial Poultry Processing, Treated Using a Ceramic
Membrane System. Oral Presentation at International Association of Food Protection Annual Meeting 2013. Charlotte, NC, USA.
. (2014). Water Recycling and Energy Recovery in Commercial Poultry Processing - Spin Chiller Wastewater Treated
Using a Ceramic Membrane System. Oral Presentation at International Association of Food Protection Annual Meeting 2014.
Indianapolis, IN, USA.
GRI (Global Reporting Initiative). (2013). G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines - Reporting Principles and Standard Disclosures.
Edited by Global Repor ting Initiative. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Global Reporting Initiative, 94.
Retrieved from https://www2.globalreporting.org/standards/g4/Pages/default.aspx. .
Hoang, M., Bolto, B., Haskard. C., Barron, O., Gray, S. & Leslie, G. (2009).
Desalination plants: An australia survey. Water, 36(2), pp. 67-73.
ISF (Institute for Sustainable Futures). (2013).
Yatala Case Study; Building Industry Capability to Make Recycled Water Investment Decisions. Prepared by the Institute for
Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney for the Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence.

5 Industrial Water Recycling in Australia’s Circular Economy 103
ISO (International Standards Organisation). (2006).
Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and Guidelines. ISO 14044:2006.
Retrieved from http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=38498.
Jones, R. N. & Brooke, C. (2005). Adapting Australia’s Water Resources to a Changing Climate. CSIRO Atmospheric Research.
Laurent, A., Molin, C., Owsianiak, M., Fantke, P., Dewulf, W., Herrmann, C., Kara, S. & Hauschild, M. (2019).
The Role of Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) in Meeting the Sustainable Development Goals - Report from a Consultation of LCE
experts. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, pp. 378-382.
Negaresh, E., Antony, A., Cox, S., Lucien, F., Richardson, D. & Leslie, G. (2013).
Evaluating the Impact of Recycled Fiber Content on Eluent Recycling in Newsprint Manufacture. Chemosphere, 92(11), pp.
1513-1519. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.04.015.
Northern Territory Government. (2016).
Food Act 2016. Edited by Northern Territory Government Department of Health. Darwin, Nor thern Territory, Australia.
NSWFA (New South Wales Food Authority). (2008).
Water Reuse Guidelines, NSW/FA/FI0. 6 Avenue of the Americas, Newington NSW 2127: NSW Food Authority: 21.
Retrieved from https://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/_Documents/retail/water_reuse_guideline.pdf.
Queensland Government. (2014). Food Production (Safety) Regulation 2014.
Retrieved February 6, 2020, from https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/current/sl-2014-0197.
Radclie, J. C. (2007). Advances in Water Recycling in Australia 2003– 2007. In Khan, S. J., Stuetz, R. M. & Anderson, J. M. (eds.)
Water Reuse and Recycling 2007. Australian Water Association, Sydney, pp. 387–406.
Seah, H., Poon, J., Leslie, G. & Law, I. (2003).
Singapore’s NEWater Demonstration Project: Another Milestone in Indirect Potable Reuse. Water, 30(4), pp. 74-77.
South Australian Government. (2001).
Food Act 2001. 2001.44.UN. Adelaide, South Australia, Australia: South Australian Government, 54.
Tasmanian Department of Primar y Industries. (2002).
Environmental Guidelines for the Use of Recycled Water in Tasmania. no. 1. Hobart, Tasmania: Tasmanian Department of
Primary Industries, Water and Environment, 124.
Western Australian Department of Health. (2011). Guidelines for the Non-Potable Uses of Recycled Water in Western Australia.
Edited by Western Australian Government Department of Health - Water Unit.
Retrieved from http://www.public.health.wa.gov.au/cproot/2280/2/Guidelines for the Non-potable Uses.

©Javarman/Dreamstime.

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 105
6
Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices
in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy
Anas Tallou, Afaf Belabhir, Francisco Pedrero Salcedo, Ayoub El Ghadraoui and Faissal Aziz
Anas Tallou, Faculty of Science and techniques, Sultan Moulay Slimane University of Beni Mellal, Morocco.
e-mail: tallou.anas11@gmail.com
Afaf Belabhir, Semlalia Faculty of Sciences, University Cadi Ayyad, Morocco.
e-mail: belabhir93@gmail.com
Francisco Pedrero Salcedo, Department of Irrigation, CEBAS-CSIC, Campus Universitario de Espinardo, Murcia, Spain.
e-mail: fpedrerosalcedo@gmail.com
Ayoub El Ghadraoui, Semlalia Faculty of Sciences, University Cadi Ayyad, Morocco.
e-mail: ayoub.elghadraoui@unifi.it
Faissal Aziz, Semlalia Faculty of Sciences, University Cadi Ayyad, Morocco.
e-mail: faissalaziz@gmail.com/faziz@kth.se
Abstract
Many factors will challenge water users and stakeholders in the new millennium. Water shor tage is not a new phenomenon
in the African countries; but the problem resides in interference from other environmental challenges (climate change, population
growth, droughts, desertification…) that are rising every day, which can result in diicult situations all over the world.
Morocco, as the North African country of the Maghreb, is suering from water stress. This water shortage has important
implications for the management of water and explains the current Moroccan policy of seeking new unconventional resources
(wastewater reuse and desalination of brackish or marine sources waters). Moroccan water resources are unevenly distributed
over its regions and heavily dependent on climatic variations. Pollution from households, industry, and agriculture poses
an ever-greater threat. Increased demand for drinking water for tourism, industry and above all agriculture has led to the overuse
of water resources, with major implications for the country’s socio-economic development. In this respect, new technological
capabilities and innovative solutions to increase water sources are required. Many countries such as Morocco have included
treated wastewater reuse as an important dimension of water resource planning, using high-cost technology for urban areas
(activated sludge, membrane reactor…) and low-cost ones for the rural areas (natural lagoon, constructed wetlands…),
taking into consideration the eco-friendly vision. This governmental strategy has a target to cover agricultural needs (45%),
green spaces and golf courses (43%). A total of about 730 Million euros in investment will serve to increase the wastewater reuse
capacity from 38 Mm3/year to 325 Mm3 /year by 2030.
In this context, the present work is a review focusing on the best practices of treated wastewater reuse in Morocco, which targets
a circular economy concept and serves as a key tool to mitigate climate change impacts in the region.
Keywords
Wastewater treatment, reuse, agriculture, policies, circular economy

106 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
01
Introduction
Morocco, a country known for its rapid population growth,
urbanization and increasing economic growth, is suering
from water deficit and pressure on water resources.
One of the best alternatives to deal with this problem
is treated wastewater reuse especially in agriculture.
Wastewater contains some macro and micronutrients
in dierent quantities, but cannot cover all plant needs.
Wastewater reuse has been a benefic strategy in the last
30 years in the large urban areas and cities (Casablanca,
Rabat, Fez…), because of the arid climate of Morocco
(Aziz & Farissi, 2014). Generally, the entire Mediterranean
basin is considered the most water-scarce region in terms of
water availability in the world (Ezbakhe et al., 2019).
Reuse of wastewater in
agriculture, or in other
economic sectors could
protect our natural resources
from depletion and overuse.
Currently, the quality of
the wastewater is rarely
taken into consideration,
because almost 90% of this
wastewater is discharged
and dumped directly into
natural receivers (rivers,
basins, open lands…)
without any treatment.
Only a small quantity is
reused in agriculture.
Several authors worked on
the reuse of wastewater in
irrigation in dierent parts of Morocco, and reported that
many kinds of cultivated plants and crops can benefit from
this practice (vegetables, forage and grain crops) (Aziz &
Farissi, 2014). Forty-five percent (45%) of the total quantity of
wastewater issued from wastewater treatment plants (WWTP)
is now reused for agriculture in Morocco, which is a volume of
80M m3 and could irrigate 4,000 hectares in 2020. Wastewater
has several reuse applications as well, such as golf areas and
green zones, recycling and cleaning in industry.
Even with the interest and the eorts presented
by the Department of Agriculture for wastewater reuse in
agriculture, results are still insuicient regarding the gap
between experimentation and real field application
in Morocco. Therefore, there is a delay in acceptability and
realization of this concept within Moroccan society.
The implementation of the reuse of wastewater will certainly
benefit the entire suite of involved actors in Morocco (farmers,
scientists, policy makers and stakeholders) (Aziz & Farissi,
2014; Salama et al., 2014). The reuse of treated wastewater
in irrigation, instead of dumping it into to open lands, protects
water resources, especially in arid and semi-arid regions such
as Morocco where any water deficit could result in dramatic
damage. Treated wastewater reuse also mitigates and reduces
the high presence of dierent substances in wastewater
(macro and micronutrients) absorbed by plants. However,
reuse of wastewater without any treatment presents several
risks for environment and human safety (Chaoua et al., 2018).
At the same time, organizations and suppliers of wastewater
could invest in this direction and create positions for
unemployed people and obtain additional financial revenues.
For these reasons, government should guarantee treatment
of wastewater before any reuse, especially in agriculture.
Treatment should be in accordance with international
standards, for all types of treatment, to suit the nature of
wastewater and its components in terms of substances, heavy
metals, pathogens etc. The national water strategy (NWS),
adopted by the Moroccan government in 2010, considers
treated wastewater to have great potential in terms of facing
water scarcity and facing the increasing demand for water,
food and energy (WFE nexus) (Aziz & Farissi, 2014).
Reuse of
wastewater in
agriculture, or in
other economic
sectors could
protect our natural
resources from
depletion and
overuse.

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 107
02
Water Scarcity and Climate Change Impact
on Africa
The succession of periods of drought, the rapid increase in
population, rapid urbanization and megacity development,
increasing competition among water users, and growing
concerns for health and environmental protection are
examples of real challenges to overcoming water scarcity.
According to the International Report of the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
by 2025, 1.8 billion people will live in countries or regions with
absolute water scarcity (FAO, 2012). The term “absolute water
scarcity” means water availability of less than the 1,000 m3/
inhabitant/year that is necessary for domestic and industrial
use. This level of water availability is not suicient to maintain
the current level of per capita food production from irrigated
agriculture (Lazarova & Bahri, 2005). Today, most countries of
the southern Mediterranean basin (the Middle East and North
Africa) can be classified as having absolute water scarcity
because of their arid and semi-arid climate.
These data suggest that many countries will have to manage
water resources far more eiciently than they do now if they
are to meet their future needs.
In addition, interactions and interference between climate
change and other environmental problems is now
a significant challenge for Morocco as well as for African
counries (Aziz et al., 2020). Among the variables of interest
are environmental degradation, agricultural productivity,
food security, population growth and economic and societal
instability. So far, the majority of research articles have
focused on climate change and its interrelation with one or
two of the aforementioned variables (Bekkoussa et al., 2008;
Thomas, 2008; Lhomme et al., 2009; Sowers et al., 2011).
Water for agriculture is critical for food security.
Agriculture remains the largest water user, with about 70% of
the world’s freshwater consumption. According to recent
FAO data (FAO, 2012), only 30 to 40% of the world’s food comes
from irrigated land, comprising 17% of the total cultivated
land. In the future, water availability for agriculture will be
threatened by increasing domestic and industrial demand.
The demand and pressure for irrigation are increasing
to satisfy the required growth of food production,
because there is little growth in cultivated areas worldwide
(0.1%/year). Between 1961 and 1999, a two fold increase of
the total irrigated area in the world was observed, up to
274 million ha, whereas irrigated area per capita remained
almost constant at 460.7 ha/1,000 inhabitants (Lazarova &
Bahri, 2005).
Against this background, (Schilling et al., 2012) gave
an overview of the vulnerability to climatic changes of
the five Nor th African states Algeria, Egypt, Libya,
Morocco and Tunisia (Figure 6-1). The overview serves two
purposes: first, it allows us to discuss security concerns of
climate change which have been raised even prior to
the Arab spring in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya in 2011 (WBGU,
2008; Smith & Vivekananda, 2009; Iglesias et al., 2010).
Second, the overview enables us to identify countries that
are the most vulnerable to climate change. Morocco’s water
resources are especially vulnerable, particularly surface water
as it is the important water resource in the country,
Figure 6-1 Land use and population growth in North Africa.

108 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
due to its sensitivity to climatic changes (low rainfall, and high
evaporation).
Morocco, which is characterized by arid to semi-arid climate,
is among the countries where water is scarce. In fact,
the situation of its water resources is already critical and
the risk of it becoming a problem hindering any further
development is real. Precipitation in Morocco averaged
27.18 mm annually from 1901 until 2015. The annual volume
of precipitation is highly variable over the entire territory,
ranging between 50 to 400 billion m3, and estimated to
average 150 billion m3. Water availability is expected to
decrease due to climate change, creating a projected decrease
in rainfall (Abdelfadel & Driouech, 2008). Current per capita
availability is 760,000 /year, but that availability is expected
to fall to 560,000 /year by 2030 (Kurtze et al., 2015).
The renewable water resources are estimated in an average
year to be some 30 billion m3, of which only 20 billion m3
are accessible (FAO, 2005). The volume of renewable water
per capita is currently about 1,000 m3 per capita, situating
Morocco at the limit of poverty in water. Morocco’s water
availability is considered to be at the limit from which
pressures on water resources begin to manifest (World Bank,
2017). Water availability in Morocco has decreased from
3,500 m3 per person per year in 1960 to 645 m3 per person
in 2015. Even without any change in the available water
resources, an estimated population of about 44 million
inhabitants by 2050 would enhance a ratio of 510 m3 per
person per year by 2050, which is near to the “extreme water
scarcity” level of 500 m3 per capita (World Bank, 2017).
2.1. Irregularity of Rainfall and Inadequate Water
Surface Resources
Precipitation in Morocco is characterized by a wet season in
winter and dry conditions in summer. The rainy season,
which starts in October and lasts until April, has its maximum
in the months from December to February (Endlicher,
2000; Lionello et al., 2006). Additionally the whole region is
characterized by high inter-annual precipitation variability.
Precipitation in the southern region is irregular in space and
time and does not exceed 200 mm per year, which indicates
a significant water deficit both in terms of surface and
groundwater resources (DRSM, 2015).
2.2. Depletion and Overexploitation of
Groundwater Resources and Degradation of Its
Quality
Morocco is a predominantly arid and desert country despite
its Atlantic coast. The weather conditions make irrigation
a key technical requirement, from which economic and
social benefits are undeniable. The day aer the country’s
independence, irrigation was a privileged way of agricultural
development and has received special attention from
the authorities (Doukkali, 2005).
Today, the irrigation sector is the largest consumer of water
in Morocco. Indeed, it consumes nearly 88% of the volume of
water. Morocco has a total area of 446,500 km2; the cultivable
area is 8 million ha or 18% of the total land area.
The area for potential of perennial irrigation is currently
estimated at 1,364,250 ha, or nearly 16% of the utilized
agricultural area. Added to this perennial area, about
300,000 ha of seasonally irrigable land is available.
This large water deficit on the one hand, and increasing
demand for agricultural products on the other, are two factors
among others that are behind the development of irrigation
in all regions of Morocco. Scarcity and the limited potential
of natural water resources are limiting factors for
the development of irrigated crops. The national water
demand was estimated by 5.823 km3/an, but the water
withdrawal for irrigation was 11.010 km3/an (Frenken & Gillet,
2012). Considerable eorts are being made in the monotoring,
the mobilization and management of water resources
(Aziz & Farissi, 2014).
Chronic water scarcity is thus becoming a permanent
situation that can no longer be ignored when developing
the strategies and policies concerning the management of
water resources in Morocco. In this context and to support
the development of the country, Morocco has long been
committed to mastery of these water resources through
the implementation of 128 large dams with a total capacity
of around 17 billion m3 and thousands of boreholes and wells
capturing groundwater (Doukkali, 2005).
To face this serious situation, we have to tackle the following
questions:
• What are the challenges to be addressed to satisfy irrigation
demand under conditions of increasing water scarcit y
in both developed and emerging countries?
• What are the strategies to be developed to improve
the eiciency of water use through better water
management and policy reforms?

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 109
03
Reuse of Treated Wastewater as an
Alternative, Moroccan Situation
This critical situation of water resources has increased
the interest in reuse of treated wastewater in agriculture
as an alternative and the integration of non conventional
water in a planning and mobilization strategy and water
resources management within the river basin.
Indeed, the water deficit can be filled mainly by treated
wastewater; this resource is abundantly and continuously
available. It has many advantages, notably a reasonable cost
compared to desalinating seawater or digging wells.
The direct benefits for the inhabitants of the cities and centres
that will be rehabilitated by this program are estimated at
1.7 million € per medium-sized centre for access to an eicient
service.Indirect benefits to the health of the population and
the Moroccan economy will be converted into improving
the quality of sur face water and groundwater impacting
economic activities, in particular tourism, agriculture and also
the production of drinking water or water-using industries.
A summary economic evaluation thus made it possible to
calculate an Economic Internal Profitability Rate of 9%.
In addition to these benefits, treatment and reuse of
wastewater contribute to the protection of the receiving
environment (Aziz & Farissi, 2014).
3.1. Wastewater Potential in Morocco
During the 20th centur y, Morocco has experienced a very high
population growth resulting in the increasing of demand for
potable water in urban areas and, subsequently, the rate of
connections to the drinking water system and therefore to
the wastewater system as well. With the expansion of urban
areas and the expansion of sewerage networks, the annual
volume of wastewater discharged has increased (Jemali &
Kefati, 2002). According to the environment minestry,
in Morocco, the annual volumes of wastewater discharge have
risen sharply over the last three decades. They increased from
48 million to 600 million m3 between 1960 and 2005, reaching
700 million by the year 2010. These releases will continue to
grow rapidly, and are expected to reach 900 million m3
in the year 2020 (Figure 6-2).
3.2. Wastewater Treatment in Morocco
The National Liquid Sanitation and Wastewater Treatment
Program (PNA 2005 – 2030) is targeting general access to
the sanitation and wastewater treatment network.
Also, the PNA contributes to communicate and to reuse
wastewater aer treatment in Morocco. The main objectives
of the PNA are: 1) implementing and promoting the circular
economy concept in Morocco that could enhance
the sustainable development rate by protecting natural
resources, 2) identifying best management of wastewater,
which is available in large quantities, and 3) capacity state
improvement of basins, dams and water preservation
systems. In addition, this program aims to create new
job positions and opportunities in water engineering,
management and treatment in order to reduce wastewater
pollution by 60% and to improve the implementation of
wastewater treatment plants in the country by 80% in 2030.
It is also programmed to realize more than 300 wastewater
treatment plant projects in order to reuse a total volume of
325 Mm3 of wastewater by 2025 (World Bank, 2017).
The PNA is a very ambitious, real action strategy to control
and to manage wastewater in Morocco. Multiple projects have
been, and are currently being, implemented, including
18 projects to reuse wastewater in agriculture.
Figure 6-2 Trend of urban wa stewater volume produced i n Morocco
900
666
495
370
270
129
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
1000
800
600
400
200
48
2020
volume in m3
year
20300
846

110 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
These projects have resulted in 38 Mm3 total production
every year, and are now monitored and in operation.
They provide good wastewater quality to municipalities
in order to be used in parks and green spaces, a use that
accounts for 69.3%, followed by agricultural use at 13%, and
finally for transportation in the phosphate industry at 16.6%
(extraction of phosphate mineral consumes large quantities
of water for pipeline transportation and in the purification
process) (Alhamed et al., 2018).
The Green Morocco Plan was launched in 2008 by the
Moroccan government. It aims to face the environmental
challenges, especially water scarcity which a serious threat to
Mediterranean countries. The priority of the Green Morocco
Plan and the National Water Strategy (PNA) is to manage
water resources, to reduce pressure on freshwater and to
conduct new strategies in wastewater reuse in agriculture.
In this context, new technologies are also improved and
supported as well as desalination of seawater, reuse of
wastewater, biological, chemical and physical methods
to treat wastewater and to reduce pollution, coastal and
maritime strategy to preserve the water ecosystem and to
mitigate water scarcity (Aziz & Farissi, 2014; MAPM, 2011).
According to (Aziz and Farissi, 2014), wastewater treatment
processes require a consistent set of treatments performed
aer pretreatment, such as screening and degreasing.
There are both intensive processes, including activated
sludge, biological drives and trickling filters, and extensive
processes with lagoons and infiltration-percolation beds.
Since 1958, sixty wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) were
built in Morocco, but in 1994 the vast majority were down or
not connected to the network for various reasons: inadequacy
of the treatment system to meet local conditions, faulty
design of structures, lack of maintenance, management
problems (e.g. lack of budget, lack of competent technical
sta), lack of planning in the short and long term. In 2004,
only 8% of wastewater was treated, the rest was discharged
directly into the sea (52%), the surface freshwater system
(32%) and septic systems, causing serious pollution of
the coastline, rivers and groundwater. This wastewater
treatment rate was increased in 2012 to 28% (Rifki, 2013).
By 2009, over 100 WWTPs are installed, mainly in small and
medium size towns in the interior of the Moroccan country.
They used a variety of technologies such as activated sludge,
ponds, drainage and stabilization ponds and infiltration
filters (Figure 6-3). But the lagoon technology remains
the most used in the country due to their low cost, simple
maintenance and adaptation to climate conditions of the area
(Mandi, 2012). For these 100 WWTPs, more than half are not
functional for many reasons: technical, financial and human
(Mandi, 2012). This situation shows not only a delay that the
country has experienced in successful wastewater technology
deployment, but also contamination risks for the receiver
environment in general and water resources in particular.
Therefore, to protect water resources and reduce pollution,
a PNA has been developed to improve sewerage collection,
including the treatment of both industrial and domestic
wastewater, and to increase wastewater reuse.
Twenty-six WWTPs are equipped with tertiar y wastewater
treatment (disinfection step using chloride and
UV irradiation), allowing the reuse of treated water.
The largest WWTP in Morocco, which was built within the
framework of the PNA, is that of Fez which can treat
130,000 m3/day and has a tertiary treatment process similar to
that of the WWTP of Marrakech (120,000 m3/day).
The latter, inaugurated at the end of 2011, makes it possible
to meet the needs of 7 golf courses in addition to the various
green spaces. The WWTP manager (Autonomous Agency of
Distribution of Water and Electricity of Marrakech, RADEEMA)
has been able to conclude very specific commercial
agreements with existing and future golf courses (for house
garden’s and the golf grass), i.e 18 golf courses in total. with
the aim of providing them with a perennial water supply of
around 39 million m3/year (RADEEMA, 2009).
At the end of 2014, the total annual treatment throughput of
the constructed WWTPs reached 292 million m3.
The wastewater flow in 2015 was estimated at around
780 million m3. The treatment rate of collected water is thus
estimated at around 50%, with a connection rate to the
sewerage network set at 75% of the building in the country.
This rate coincides with the specific objectives set by
the program in 2015. In 2014, 6 pretreatment steps prior to
release via marine outfall were completed, for an annual
pretreatment volume of 321.24 Mm3. These units are built in
Tangier (82,000 m3/day), Tetouan (43,400 m3/day), Casablanca
El Hank (500,000 m3/day), Rabat (110,000 m3/day),
El Jadida (95,040 m3/day) and Agadir Anza (49,680 m3/day).
Three other pre-treatment units are scheduled from 2015 to
pre-treat the wastewater from Salé, Casablanca (North) and
Laarache. This resource is only pretreated which cannot be
used for irrigation.
77%
10%
2%
8%
3%
Aerated Lagoons
Natural Lagoons
Activated Slugde
Other techniques
Figure 6-3 D istribution of dierent kinds of wastewater treatment
technologies existin g in Morocco (Source: AZIZ & Faris si,
2014)

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 111
04
Impact of Wastewater Reuse on the Soil,
on Plants on the Water Ressources and
Consumer Health
Wastewater reuse is not a new strategy, but generally,
a lack of data, interference of several factors, dierences
in the nature and composition of wastewater make
the understanding and elaboration of a typical and unified
prototype for treating wastewater ver y diicult. It has been
reported that 7% of agricultural lands are irrigated with
untreated water and 10 % used treated wastewater.
Several authors used wastewater for crop irrigation, and
the results were highly positive in terms of crop production
yield and fruit quality, but the wastewater was applied only
aer treatment, in order to avoid pathogenic contamination
and high concentration of heavy metals (Intriago et al., 2018;
Nicolás et al., 2016; Pedrero et al., 2013).
The quality of wastewater is influenced by the type of
treatment technology (membrane filtration, electrochemical
methods, anaerobic digestion, adsorption, ion exchange
method, etc.) and can cover the crop needs (water and
nutrition) or even exceed it. Therefore, treating wastewater
should always be controlled and evaluated especially
before use as irrigation water (Sarode et al., 2019; Tallou et
al., 2020). Generally, all treatment methods lead to positive
results in terms of reducing phytotoxicity and pathogenic
contamination, and the wastewater can be used in agriculture
taking into consideration that it can meet over 75% of plant
nutrition needs. In Morocco, the majority of wastewater
treatment methods and technologies are not available
everywhere in the countr y. However, there are current
eorts at all levels of society to implement new technologies
and strategies (Aziz et al., 2019; Aziz & Farissi, 2014; Salama
et al., 2014). On the other hand, exceeding the macro and
micronutrients limits could negatively influence crop
production. Therefore, managing nutrients and choosing
the adequate type of treatment is essential.
Reuse of domestic water must be considered as a new water
resource and especially for irrigation but its use must also
consider the health risk, soil contamination and the eect of
those waters on crop growth. For example the chemical risks
of using reclaimed water for agricultural irrigation might occur
by consuming polluted crops and livestock, or by drinking or
being in contact with reclaimed water (Chiou, 2008).
4.1. Impact on the Soil
As compared to conventional irrigated soils, the results
revealed that wastewater could be a source of fertilizer since
it contributes potassium oxide (K2O) and phosphorus organic
matter (Castro et al., 2011).
The problem of soil contamination is a threat resulting from
wastewater reuse in agriculture, due to the presence of some
toxic constituents including high nutrients, heavy metals and
chemical fertilizers. The accumulation of these substances
in the soil leads to not only soil degradation, but also to
a decrease in crop productivit y, an increase in plants disease,
and an increase in salinity which causes soil and groundwater
pollution (Salama et al., 2014). Several factors, such as
the wastewater source and constituents, crop characteristics
and soil proper ties, can influence the eectiveness of
irrigation using wastewater. There are many dierences
between industrial, municipal, farm and commercial
wastewater, which can also dier in economic value and
environment impact.
Unfortunately, potential problems associated with recycled
wastewater in irrigation do exist. These problems include
increased salinity and relatively high sodium (Na) and
boron (B) accumulation in the soil. Especially problematic
is the significantly higher soil sodium adsorption ratio
(SAR) in recycled wastewater irrigated sites compared
with surface water irrigated sites. Sodium levels provide
reason for concern about possible long-term reductions
in soil hydraulic conductivity and infiltration rates in soils
with high clay content, although these levels were not high
enough to result in short-term soil deterioration (Abd-
Elwahed, 2019). Salt leaching becomes less eective when
soil hydraulic conductivity and infiltration rates are reduced.
These chemical changes may in part contribute to the stress
symptoms and die-o observed in some crops (Chaoua et al.,
2018).
Wastewater reuse in agriculture has now become common
in Morocco, but it has resulted in soil contamination
in some cases. A previous study has reported on
the accumulation of heavy metals (Copper (Cu), Lead (Pb),
Cadmium (Cd) and Zinc (Zn)) in wastewater reused for
irrigation in the Marrakech region (Chaoua et al., 2018) and
that the problem of wastewater contamination is serious and
could have negative impacts on natural resources and human
health. In this research paper (Chaoua et al., 2018),
the authors investigated and evaluated the transfer of heavy
metals from soil to crop, and they also calculate a health
index based on the concentration of heav y metals.
The results obtained show high contamination by heavy
metals and a health risk index (HRI) above the acceptable
limit. Therefore, the population that works on this farm,
and consumers of this crop product, are highly exposed
to contamination and pathogens. The authors highlighted
exceeded values for toxic elements and cautioned that
prevention should be taken in this case in order to avoid
human health risk and environment degradation
(Chaoua et al., 2018).

112 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
Best management practices, such as application of soil
amendments that provide calcium (Ca) to replace sodium
(Na); periodic leaching to reduce salt accumulation; frequent
aeration to maintain infiltration, percolation, and drainage;
regular soil and plant monitoring; and, selection and use
salt-tolerant crops, will be helpful in mitigating the negative
impact of wastwater irrigation to ensure success in using
recycled wastewater for irrigation (Qian & Mecham, 2005).
4.2. Impact on the Water Resources
Wastewater application has the potential to
aect the quality of groundwater resources
in the long run through excess nutrients
and salts leaching below the plant root
zone. Groundwater constitutes a major
source of potable water for many developing
country communities. Hence the potential
of groundwater contamination needs to
be evaluated before embarking on a major
wastewater irrigation program. In addition to
the accumulation of salts and nitrates, under
certain conditions, wastewater irrigation
has the potential to translocate pathogenic
bacteria and viruses to groundwater.
However, the actual impact depends on a host
of factors including the depth of the water table, the quality
of groundwater, soil drainage, and the scale of wastewater
irrigation (Hussain et al., 2002).
Wastewater reuse in Morocco could aect the quality of
available freshwater over the long term, for example by
accumulation of macro and micronutrient quantities.
Hence, more precautions and evaluations need to be done
in order to confirm the safety and quality of wastewater
for reuse in irrigation. In addition, pathogenic bacteria
and viruses can be transpor ted by wastewater if not highly
treated. In fact, the complexity of this concept resides in
interference among several factors (e.g. soil parameters,
soil contamination rate, wastewater parameters and safety,
climate of the region). Eutrophication is another serious
problem that can be caused by drainage runo aer irrigation
with wastewater. Eutrophication can aect the ecosystem and
human safety due to the presence of an excessive quantity of
nutrients in the water. It is clear that the impact of wastewater
on water resources and aquatic ecosystems is very negative
(e.g. impacts on the food chain). In addition, soil could be
also aected by an accumulation of heavy metals year aer
year due to illegal dumping of wastewater to open spaces and
natural resources. There are several factors that can aect
the relationship between wastewater and the ecosystem,
including soil parameters, rate of land use
(yield production), type of wastewater,
the type of irrigation system and climate
(Hussain et al., 2002).
4.3. Impact on plants
Wastewater irrigation aects not only physical
and chemical properties of the soils but also
plant yield and mineral content. According to
(Choukr-Allah & Hamdy, 2005), irrigation using
treated wastewater has given similar results,
and sometimes better results, than fresh water
irrigation in terms of yield. Table 6-1 shows
some examples. Wastewater has a high nutritive value that
may improve plant growth, reduce fertilizer-application rates,
and increase productivity of poor-fertility soils. It is suggested
that treated wastewater can be used to irrigate vegetables
that are eaten cooked, with continuous control of the eluent
quality to avoid contamination (Kiziloglu et al., 2007).
Reported results have shown that the growers can find
a long-term advantage in wastewater irrigation and,
at the same time, satisfy consumer demands for food
safety with continuous monitoring of wastewater irrigation.
Meanwhile, questions of the long-term eects on soil fertility
and protection of food chain are raised.
It is clear that
the impact of
wastewater on
water resources
and aquatic
ecosystems is very
negative.
Treatment
Crop
Chrysanthemum Melon Zucchini Eggplant Maize Bread
wheat
Durum
Wheat
Flower/plant T/ha Kg/plant Kg/m2Qx/ha Qx/ha Qx/ha
Fresh water 69 26.2 1.29 3.17 12.43 5.11 0
Tre ated
wastewater 80 34.6 2.18 3.41 12.62 48.69 31.83
Table 6-1 Comparison of the yield obtained by irrigation u sing treated wastewater and that obtaine d by using fresh water
(Source: Choukr-Allah & Hamdy, 2005)

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 113
4.4. Solute Accumulation from Irrigation with
Treated Wastewater
In arid regions, the low input of fresh water due to limited
precipitation means that accumulated ions are rarely
removed naturally from the soil profile by flushing or leaching.
Significant long-term problems for soil productivity can
occur if irrigation with slightly saline water continues without
additional water being applied to leach the solutes
(Carr et al., 2008). Irrigation by wastewater, with its large load
of salts and nitrates, confronts us with a quandary:
to apply just the water quantity necessary for cultivation
(and thus to increase the salinity of the soil) or to apply
a leaching fraction that will enable percolation of the nitrates
at depth, thus risking contamination of the groundwater.
It was hypothesized that, to meet 100% of the crop water
requirements, irrigation with treated wastewater would lead
to an increase in the solute concentration in the soil solution
as the number of years of irrigation with reclaimed water
increased. (Carr, 2011) indicated that the soil analysis results
suggest that irrigation does lead to the accumulation of plant-
toxic solutes, but soil analysis from farms which have been
irrigated with reclaimed water for several decades reveals
that solute accumulations have been avoided through water
management strategies on the farm.
The challenge will be to design and operate a new generation
of water management systems that are able to meet
the demand for food in a context of water scarcity, while
respecting the requirements of the environment
(Choukr-Allah, 2005). The role of leaching in maintaining low
soil salinity has been investigated at research sites
by comparing the salinit y of the soils irrigated with 100%
and 120% of the crop water requirement. It was expected that
the soils irrigated with 120% of the water demand would have
lower soil salinity than the soil irrigated with 100%, which
means that irrigation using more than the demanded quantity
would reduce the salinity of the soil, providing a good strategy
to overcome the soil salinity issue (Carr, 2011).
4.5. Impact on the Consumer Health
A research study in the Beni Mellal region in the center of
Morocco was done in order to assess the possible risk of using
wastewater without treatment in agriculture.
The study was conducted on 1,343 randomly selected children
from this region, where 603 children provided a reference
condition for communities that don’t use wastewater
in irrigation, compared to 740 children who consume
products irrigated with wastewater without treatment or
who are exposed and interact daily with raw wastewater.
The objective was to evaluate the rate of geohelminthic
infections. Aer analysis, using questionnaires and interviews
with parents and children, they found that people exposed
to wastewater reuse were aected by intestinal infection
caused by two parasites; Ascaris lum-Žbricoides and Trichuris
trichiura. In contrast, people who do not use wastewater nor
consume crops irrigated with wastewater were 5 times less
contaminated. The study highlighted that 20.3% of children
were contaminated with Ascaris lum-Žbricoides parasite in
are as that use wastewater in their daily life, while only 3.8%
were reported for the control. In contrast, no significant result
for Trichuris trichiura was found between the control and
children in areas exposed to wastewater.
The authors of this study repor ted that wastewater reused
in any field could present serious risk to the population, and
therefore wastewater must be treated before any approved
uses. In addition, demographic and social factors
(gender, age, education level and profession) had no impact
on the results obtained (Habbari et al., 2000).

114 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
05
Wastewater Reuse and Acceptance
Challenges from Moroccan Society
The implementation of wastewater treatment plants
should also take into consideration economic and social
aspects. For example, the location, proximity to population
habitations, roads and natural resources, agricultural lands
and agroforestry are ver y important to reduce the impact
of wastewater. These factors could increase the cost of
wastewater valorization in agriculture and the quality can
be evaluated easily and the persisting risks can be avoided
(Hussain et al., 2002). Some best practices for treated
wastewater reuse as a model of a circular economy are
described following.
In the last decade, Moroccan society, including scientists,
farmers, policy makers and stakeholders, have been aware
of the current situation of Morocco in terms of water scarcity,
climate change, rapid population growth, pressure on food,
the energy-water sector and other environmental challenges
that the country is facing today. This is reflected by
the new strategies and action plan that Morocco is leading
and establishing, and the Green Morocco Plan and
the National Wastewater Strategy for example.
Theoretically, the country will face extreme water scarcity
in the near future, while Morocco is depending on agriculture.
For this reason, wastewater treatment reuse in agriculture
seems to be the best alternative strategy to face water
scarcity and to reduce pressure on available freshwater.
On the other hand, there are many new projects to suppor t
and to promote innovative ideas for water solutions
in agriculture. For example, the Center for International
Cooperation on Agronomic Research for Development
(CIRAD), financed the Massire Project, which is a project
for supporting farmers and new solutions and ideas in
agriculture. The project funding is 1.7 million € financed
by the UN International Fund for Agricultural Development
(IFAD). It aims to identify and support small-scale innovations
in the water managementsector in rural areas, focusing on
successful small-scale farming irrigation applications,
for example, wastewater treatment technologies, drip
irrigation, new solar water pump technology and innovative
water governance metrics. The project objective is also to
identify any other agricultural practices with the potential to
improve Morocco’s mitigation eorts towards water scarcity
(Eliason, 2019).
It has been reported that the Massire project will help
small scale farmers with the main actors in sustainable
development such as agricultural cooperatives, international
organizations, irrigation companies, scientists and local
stakeholders in order to facilitate for them access to new
technologies for sustainable farming.
Water management is the key issue for Morocco as the
country regularly facesextreme environmental events
(droughts, desertification, water scarcity…). In 2016, a sudden
severe drought negatively impacted agricultural activity and
production, during which the countr y’s GDP decreased by
3.3%. According to the FAO, 83% of agricultural lands are not
irrigated in Morocco, which is a percentage that needs to be
reduced in the future. In addition, the country is suering
from significant variations in rainfall and droughts.
This vulnerability will rise as the rainfall is projected to be
reduced by 30% by 2050, which puts Morocco in an alarming
position (Eliason, 2019).
A wastewater treatment and reuse project is currently being
carried out under the PREM (Sustainability of Water
Resources in Morocco) Global Project funded by USAID
in partnership with the Secretariat State in Charge of Water
and Environment in Morocco.The various stages of
the project are established in collaboration with the Wilaya of
Greater Agadir, the rural municipality of Drarga, the Al Amal
Association and in on-going consultation with the regional
and multi-institutional committee for wastewater treatment
and reuse.The population concerned was also asked at all
stages to participate in the choice of scenarios concerning
the site of the treatment plant and those relating to reuse
options. This consultation is a good initiative to involve people
who certainly have gained great experience in this field.
The feasibility study, concerning the installation of
a wastewater treatment and recovery system
in the municipality of Drarga, demonstrated the positive
economic and environmental impacts of this action.
The location of the project in the municipality of Drarga is
justified by the presence of a sewerage network, by the fact
that this municipality does not belong to the Grand Agadir
Sanitation Network and by the existing suppor tive community
framework. The community framework has proven its worth
in other very significant ways, including the provision of
drinking water and the organization of various water raising
awareness campaigns. The municipality of Drarga is located
on the right bank of the Oued Souss (Souss River).The area is
generally suering from extreme water scarcit y with very low
rainfall and high evaporative capacity of the air and the soil.
The economic gain generated by the reuse of treated
wastewater compared to irrigation with conventional water is
reported to be very positive and attractive. This gain is due to
the supply of treated water as an alternative water resource
and to the nutrients provided by these waters.
A 100 mm clean water slide (1,000 m3/ha) would provide crops
with a fertigation equivalent of 40 kg of mineral nitrogen/
ha, 11 kg of assimilable phosphorus/ha and 28 kg potassium/
ha. In addition, the yield production will be at least doubled
or tripled for all crops to be promoted.The current low crop
yields are attributed to the lack of water, the high cost of
pumping water and the low rate of technical supervision of
farmers.Thus, it can be deduced that the project for the reuse
of reclaimed water, coupled with technical support from
the ORMVA of Souss Massa, will allow the farmers to achieve
yields much higher than those previously obtained (Institut
Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassane II, 2000).
In Ouarzazate city, the committee that manages

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 115
the wastewater treatment plant is called the Local
Technical Committee of the Project Super vision (CTLSP).
This committee was created in collaboration with the local
authorities and the Provincial Technical Depar tment (DPA).
Its role is to bring the members together to make decisions
and to release some of the eluent from the wastewater
treatment plant to farmers who request it. In the event of
an emergency related to a failure of the sewage system,
committee members are also asked to solve the problem.
The rural municipality of Tidili Mesfioua is located in the
province of El Haouz-Marrakech.Three of these villages,
or douars as they are called in Morocco, were the target of
a call for projects launched by the “Association Tissilte pour
le Développement (ATD)” itself supported by the expertise
of the “Centre National d’Etudes et de Recherche sur l’Eau et
l’Energie (CNEREE)” of Cadi Ayyad University. The objective
was then to acquire funds in order to improve the health
conditions of 2,100 inhabitants and to preserve natural
resources in this region.In 2011, funding was provided by
the American Cooperation Agency (USAID).The agency thus
financed most of the project in collaboration with
the municipality, which also had to contribute financially to
its implementation by the company INOVAR.
Today, the first four phases have been successfully
completed.The fih phase was the subject of a late feasibility
study carried out by the CNEREE and aimed at providing
dierent possibilities for reuse scenarios in irrigation.
It therefore now aims to establish an experimental phase as
well as to study the prospects for the sustainability of
the project (Legros, 2017).
Wastewater treatment plants funded by OCP Group for
phosphate extraction (Khouribga, Benguerir and Youssoufia
cities) in Morocco are using microfiltration and disinfection of
tertiary treatment and they are also using biogas technology
to produce electricity from sludge treatment (World Bank,
2017). It has been reported (Mandi & Ouazzani, 2013) that
wastewater treatment plants in Morocco can meet 45% of
the needs of the agricultural sector, while allocating 43% of
irrigation water to green spaces in cities and golf courses, and
also 6% for aquifer recharge. In order to increase
the wastewater reuse capacity from 38 Mm3 /year to 325 Mm3 /
year by 2030, a total of about 71 million € should be provided.
The new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) of Marrakech
city, which star ted in 2011, is considered to be the first
WWTP in North Africa to integrate in its system tertiary
wastewater treatment, biogas technology, electricity and heat
cogeneration, air treatment and wastewater reuse.
In this plant, a total of about 120,000 m/day of wastewater
are treated in four steps (pre-treatment, primary treatment,
secondary treatment with activated sludge, and tertiary
treatment using microfiltration by sand filter and disinfection
by ultraviolet lamp unit s). The tertiary process increases
the quality of the final eluent that will be reused for irrigation
of golf courses. The annual electricity consumed by
the wastewater treatment plant of Marrakech is about
30 GWh/year, while the electricity generated by
the cogeneration units is in total about 10.5 GWh/year.
The wastewater treatment plant of Marrakech city is one of
the best plants that made great progress in terms of
reaching a circular economy concept in order that Morocco
could treat 60% of wastewater generated in all of the country
(Mandi & Ouazzani, 2013). The cost of primary and secondary
treatment for the WWTPs of Marrakech is 0.2 €/m3, while
the cost of tertiary treatment, including costs for pumping and
transpor ting to the customers for reuse in irrigation,
is 0.3 €/m3 (Mandi & Ouazzani, 2013). In general, treatment
and reuse of locally available wastewater can be a sustainable
economic strategy to address water scarcity, which contributes
to environmental protection, natural resources preservation
and an important economic gain (World Bank, 2017).
5.1. M’Zar WWTP as a Case Study
The water master plan developed by the Souss Massa
hydraulicBasin Agency responds to the framework directive
of theintegrated water resource management in Morocco.
The driving forces are strong population growth and
urbanization; tourism and industrialization; globalization;
and climate variability and change leading to decreasing
precipitation and increasing frequency of droughts.
This situation has increased interest in recycling of treated
wastewater in agriculture and the integration of non
conventional water in a planning and mobilization strategy,
and water resources management within the river basin.
The river basin of Souss-Massa in Southern of Morocco is
the source of irrigation in this area, which is considered an
arid region. Intensive agriculture is stressing the available
water supply, especially the culture of growing some crops
that consume water in large quantities (e.g. watermelon).
However, pollution of water, extreme drought events and
the overuse of water by the local population are the main
challenges that threaten human safety and environment
resources. (Malki et al., 2017) investigated the impact of
wastewater reuse in agriculture in the Tiznit region
(in southern Morocco), where they reported that wastewater
is reused aer biological treatment based on anaerobic
digestion of organic substances by microorganisms in
anaerobic conditions and open lagoons. This treatment is
declared to be an eective technology that result in good
quality of wastewater (Malki et al., 2017; Tallou et al., 2020).
In this region, cereals, vegetables, fruits are the major crop
cultured and irrigated with treated wastewater.
The authors reported positive results obtained in terms of
safety, production yield, and fruit quality. In addition,
this concept of wastewater reuse presented several benefits
such as low-cost for installation, and preservation of natural
resources especially in this scarce region where 430 ha of
dierent crops were irrigated with wastewater from
the wastewater treatment plant in Tiznit, Morocco.
Many studies have focused on wastewater treatment and
the reuse in agriculture and green spaces in order to decrease
the use of conventionnal water and save it for drinking water.
Unfortunately, just a few studies have been carried out

116 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
in Agadir city (Mimouni et al., 2002; Alla et al., 2006; Eddabra
et al., 2011). Agadir region is situted in the southern part of
Morocco, and is characterized by an arid climate, and high
industrial and agricultural activities. The wastewater of
the greater Agadir region is currently being released
dierently in dierent regions:
• For the nor thern sector of Anza, on the coast, north of
the port of Agadir: without treatment;
• For the por t area by the sea, at the main jetty of
the Agadir port: without treatment;
• For the rest of Greater Metropolitan Agadir: primary eluent
treatment by anaerobic lagoon (up to 75,000 m3/day) and
by secondar y treatment using a sand infiltration process
with a capacit y of 30,000 m3/day then tertiary treatment
using UV lamps (RAMSA, 2016).
Despite the collection and treatment of much of
the wastewater in Greater Agadir, major problems remain
to be solved:
• Collection and treatment of wastewater from the northern
area of Agadir (port, urban and industrial Anza).
• Storm water: The threat posed by storm waters that flow
from external outlying areas to the urban perimeter,
and have consequences in terms of overflow to urbanized
areas and saturation of collectors and storm drains.
• Wastewater: discharges of water overloaded with organic
matter and brine from many industrialists in the agri-food
sector, promoting the emanation of hydrogen sulphide (HS)
in the network with release of foul odors and high salinity
at the exit of M’Zar WWTP (RAMSA, 2016).
5.2. Description of M’Zar Treatment plant
Currently, treated water, including UV disinfection, from
the M’Zar WWTP is used to water a golf course in Agadir city.
The M’Zar treatment plant is located in the south of Agadir,
Morocco (30°2028.1N, 9°3535.0W). It was built in 2002
inside the Souss Massa national park. The purification mode
includes three successive treatment stages, as summarized
in Table 6-2 following.
During the first stage of watewater treatment, the raw water is
sedimented for 3 days in the settling basins, with a treatment
capacity of 75,000 m3/day; during a second treatment stage,
decanted water is percolated in the sand basins, which
provide a treatment capacity of 30,000 m3/ day; and the third
stage, which has a treatment capacity of 30,000 m3/day.
Finally, the infiltrated water is disinfected by UV exposure
(RAMSA, 2002).
The total landscape area of Agadir city covers around 600 ha
with a need for irrigation water reaching 10 million m3/year.
With a daily flow of 50,000 m3/day, the treated wastewater
of the M’ZAR plant will completely fulfill this need.
The golf courses alone occupy 30.5% of the total area of
landscape in Agadir, with water consumption estimated to be
3,216,103 m3/year (Mouhanni et al., 2011).
Primary Treatment:
anaerobic decantation
Secondary treatment:
infiltration percolation
Tertiary treatment:
UV disinfection
Flow
75,000 m
3
/day
Flow 10,000 m3/day Flow 30,000 m3/day
Number of decanters 13 Number of filters 24 Pumps (number and
unit capacity)
6 + 1 Pumps—
270 m3/h
Length of decanter 115 m Filter surface 5,000 m2Reactors (number
and unit capacity)
6 Reactors—
5,000 m3/day
Width of decanter 35 m Sand thickness 2 m UV lamps:
Number per reactor 14 lamps
Depth of the decanter
at the deposit area 6.59 m Gravel thickness 0.5 m Wavelength 254 nm
Depth of decanter
at lagoon area 4.24 m Infiltration
speed 1 m/day Exposure dose 50 mJ/cm2
Total Volume of
decanter 210,000 m3Filter bottom
sealing material
1 mm thick of
HDPE eomembrane
Service life
Contact time 16,000 h 4 s
Table 6-2 Physical and geometrical characteristics of the wastewater treatment p rocess of the M’Zar WW TP (Source: RAMSA , 2002)

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 117
06
Wastewater Reuse Policy in Morocco
National data for Morocco reports the presence of 17
wastewater oices and services (public and private) in all
municipalities. Generally, these specialist services manage
112 networks in both large cities and small ones.
The population that benefit from these facilities is estimated
to reach 20 million and will continue to increase due to the
development of the country. Those centers are managed
by multiple authorities and oices (Ministry of Interior,
secretaries, National Oice of Electricity and Water (ONEE)
and some private companies) (see Table 6-3). These oices
and companies’ missions are the formulation of policy
and rules that organize the water sector, manage water
resources in Morocco, and provide and regulate services of
the communities (Alhamed et al., 2018).
The Ministry of Interior manages the dierent municipalities
and oversees water and sanitation facilities through its
water and wastewater direction (DEA). This direction plays
a crucial role in establishment, implementation, support
and organization of wastewater treatment plants and water
network infrastructure. The communal law chart indicates
that the responsibility of water and wastewater treatment and
management is a task for municipalities under the supervision
the Ministry of Interior. The Oice of water and wastewater
(DEA) provides financial suppor t and technical knowledge.
In the National Program of Wastewater (PNA) framework,
planning and financial support are provided by the Oice of
Water and Wastewater Network (DEA). In addition,
the Ministry of Finance and the Secretariat of State in charge
on Environment are also main actors and decision makers
for the national wastewater program in Morocco. DEA is also
responsible for monitoring of the sanitation network and to
fix the price for wastewater, while the Secretariat of State
in charge on Environment is responsible for policy
development and execution in the environmental field.
The tasks are the following:
Table 6- 3 Principal Authorities and oices managing water sector and resources in Morocco (Mandi & Ouazzani, 2013)
Authorities managing water sector Role
River Basins Agencies 9 agencies are managing the main hydraulic basins of
Morocco.
ONEP (national oice of drinkable water) Principal producer of potable water in Morocco.
Distribution oices Private organizations responsible for drinkable water
distribution in some big cities in the country.
Municipalities Responsible for irrigation of gardens and green spaces.
Rural Towns Providing drinkable water to rural populations.
ORMVA (agricultural oices) Responsible for the management of the big irrigated
perimeters in the country.
DPA (provincial delegations of agriculture) Management of the small hydraulic resources.
ONEE (national oice of electricity) Principal producer of electric energy including energy of
hydraulic origin (merged with ONEP).
Waters and forests administration Responsible for water resources management.
The provincial health delegations Health responsibility, hygiene and diseases especially
from water.

118 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
• In coordination with the dierent ministries responsible for
policy making in Morocco, they prepare and update
the national strategy of sustainable development according
to the national needs and new international standards.
• Suggestions for new laws and policies in the wastewater
treatment reuse sector in order to preser ve natural
resources and to valorize wastewater.
• Representation of the Moroccan government in
international events to follow the updates and impor t
experiences.
• Contribution in climate change and water scarcity
mitigation by adoption of the circular economy concept.
• Establishing and building new wastewater treatment
plants with good performance regarding location, climate,
wastewater properties, new applications and technologies.
• Environmental data collection especially in Morocco
where there is insuicient information about wastewater
treatment and reuse.
• New water resources prospects and assessment,
as well as seawater desalination, biological technologies
for wastewater treatment.
• Control of wastewater quality especially in agriculture.
The directors of the secretariat of state in charge of water
(local municipalities, water associations, academic and
stakeholders) administers the Morocco’s river basin agencies
which are semi-public and independent financially.
The responsibilities of water basin agencies are the following:
• Developing, a new plan for collecting water, especially
the collection of rainfall over a natural drainage area.
• Ensuring the control and monitoring of the water discharge
in convenable area and providing good quality of
wastewater.
• Elaboration of new techniques and technologies of
wastewater treatment in order to improve the treated
wastewater quality.
The communal charter of 1976 in Morocco gives
the municipalities responsibility of managing and distributing
freshwater and sanitation network. However, municipalities
assign the management of water and sanitation to some
private and public utilities. For example, ONEE is the main
actor in dierent Moroccan cities, in Casablanca, the private
concessionaire LYDEC, in Rabat (REDAL), in El Jadida (RADEEJ),
Tangier and Tetouan (AMENDIS), and Marrakech (RADEEMA)
etc. are the main providers and managers of water and
sanitation services (Alhamed et al., 2018).
In Morocco, the main legislative framework and articles
that manage and organize working in the water and
wastewater sector are:
• Article (84): It is prohibited to reuse wastewater
in agriculture if not treated and in accordance with
international standards and limits for nutrient and heavy
metals composition.
• Article (57): good and precise conditions of wastewater
reuse are imposed. Authorization to treat and reuse
wastewater can be supported financially and technically
from the government and national administration to
preser ve water resources against environmental challenges
and pollution.
• Article (51): The establishment of standards and values of
wastewater quality for irrigation are updated every ten
years by the Norms and Standards Committee.
• Article (54): Prohibition of discharging wastewater
into the open environment, agricultural lands and dierent
natural resources.
• Article (52): Discharging wastewater needs an authorization
from the Agency responsible aer investigation of
the receiving areas.
In Morocco, the problem of construction of wastewater
treatment plants refers to the financial funding required
for realization of these kinds of projects. The majority
of wastewater treatment plants are financed by credit
or partnerships within municipalities. The international
contribution also has a part in building these projects in some
cities but it is not enough to meet the needs of increasing
population and the quantity of wastewater generated.
Another diiculty of providing wastewater treatment services
resides in the installation of the sewerage network, which
requires huge funding. The cost of establishing a WWTP
depends on the technology used (e.g. the treatment process),
the source and type of wastewater, the quality targeted and
the final disposal method. For example, if the wastewater will
be reused directly, authorities require high quality for the final
product. In Morocco, there are no models or details outlined
for creating wastewater treatment plants because the cost
depends on several factors. However, some experience could
provide a general overview for the cost, for instance where
one m3 of wastewater treated by lagoon or filtration and
percolation technology costs 1 Euro (10 Moroccan Dirham).
For example, in Benslimane region in Morocco, wastewater is
sold aer treatment for golf irrigation at a cost of 0.18 €/m3,
while for the farmers the cost is 0.045 €/m3 which is a suitable
price. In addition, oices of agricultural development sold
treated wastewater to farmers for agriculture at an average
cost of 0.045 €/m3, while the cost of drinkable water is
between 0.18 and 0.72 €/m3. This is a positive solution for
farmers instead of paying the fees for pumping groundwater
at 0.13 €/m3 especially in water-scarce regions, such as
Souss-Massa in Southern Morocco. The price is always
an obstacle for farmers, especially in arid regions, therefore
this problem should be taken into consideration when
establishing wastewater treatment plants in order to
implement low cost and eective technology (Alhamed et al.,
2018; Salama et al., 2014).
According the law on water 10-95 (see below), the use of
untreated wastewater is banned. However, policy makers
should facilitate scientific research on wastewater treatment,
especially since very large volumes of water could be made
available through wastewater reuse.
Therefore, treatment and good management practices are the
right decision due to the fertilizing value of this by-product.
It has been reported also that the main problem in world
now is the gap between policy makers and scientists, and
this is due to the interference of dierent factors and drivers

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 119
(economic, environmental, social and political).
Some authors worked on epistemological problems and
limitations or conceptual challenges, but only few ones
presented the institutional metrics that could limit the
adoption of the wastewater reuse. Therefore, the complexity
could be visible and clear when using institutional and
academic way of thinking that makes environmental
challenges relevant. These metrics can establish new
governance legality in terms of eectiveness.
The wastewater reuse in agriculture should be considered
as a problem of legitimate policy objective if we want to be
precise within the institutional culture of the international
commissions and policymaking. Therefore, the orientation of
the global awareness should be in this direction of giving
the opportunities to the new strategies of mitigating
the climate change impact (Voelker et al., 2019).
In general, the policies and laws that organize the wastewater
sector in Morocco are illustrated below (Haité, 2011; Legros,
2017 ):
Law 10-95 on water
The Water Act 10-95 brought together the various existing
water laws and supplemented them in order to make them as
coherent and simple, and in a comprehensive legal text taking
up the dierent facets of sustainable water management.
The principles of this Act are:
• Ownership of water resources.
• Integrated and decentralised management at a basin
agency level.
• Authorisations for dierent water and wastewater reuse.
• Managing fees for the use of water resources and their
discharge.
Law Project on water 36-15
The aim of the proposed new Water Act is to eliminate
identified weaknesses and problems over the years
in the 1995 Water Act. These weaknesses include:
• Complexit y in the demarcation and allocation of water
available in the public domain
• Few provisions on stormwater and wastewater.
• Lack of provisions on flood protection metrics and
measurement.
• Lack of provisions on seawater desalination.
Due to the current situation for Morocco and the new climate
change challenges, these laws need to be updated.
Decree n°2-97-875 of 6 Chaoual 1418 (04 February 1998)
for the wastewater reuse
The objectives of this Decree are the regulation of
the application for authorization to use wastewater and
the conditions proposal for financial assistance available for
investments in wastewater treatment and for the installation
of pumping and supply systems.
Decree n°2-07-96 of 19 Moharrem 1430 (16 January
2009) that fix excising procedures for authorizations and
concessions relative to public water sector.
It is forbidden for anyone to use water resources available
in his land without permission from authorities. In cases
of non-compliance, the water police have the power to
intervene.
Joint Decree of the Minister of Equipment and of
the Minister in charge of Spatial Planning, Urbanism,
Habitat and the Environment No. 1276-01 of 10 Chaabane
1423 (17 October 2002) laying down standards for
the quality of water intended for irrigation
This Order consists here of a summar y document of
the standards quality for water destined for irrigation.
These standards are collected and reproduced in a document
of the SEEE (State Secretariat of State in Charge of Water and
the Environment) in order to make them accessible to all
public.
Joint Decree of the Minister of Economy and Finance, of
the Minister of Equipment and of the Minister of Agriculture,
Rural Development and Maritime Fisheries No. 548-98 of
21 August 1998 on water use charges for public water supply
for irrigation
The fees are calculated by consumption band using a mark-
up coeicient.For example, this coeicient will be 0.3 when
the intake is carried out directly by the user downstream
of a dam, while it will be 0.8 when the secondary or tertiar y
channels in the land have been carried out by the state
(the fees are raised due to the charges of investment in
channel construction).Additional costs may also be added to
cover the costs of pumping stations from which certain users
benefit, such as: pumping costs for gravity irrigation
(0.03 and 0.07 Dh/m) and pumping costs for sprinkler
irrigation (0.26 and 0.3 Dh/m). The tax collector is the Minister
of Finance.Nevertheless, the task can be carried out by
delegating it either to the wastewater treatment plants,
to the ONEP, to the Boards or to private dealers.
Dahir n°1-87-12 of 3 Joumada II 1411 (21 December 1990)
Promulgating law n°02-84 relation to agricultural water user
associations of wastewater reused in agriculture.
This Dahir aims to codify the functioning of wastewater
treatment plants. First, it focuses on defining the tasks
assigned to them which include: carr ying out works related to
the use of agricultural water, the maintenance of these works
in order to ensure its sustainability and the organisation of
water distribution for agricultural irrigation, and pay
the recovery of taxes and fees.

120 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
07
Conclusion
In this world, water is extremely important for our life, but
that precious resource is very limited in terms of availability.
Water is used in agriculture to produce food, where 70% of
the available water and 30% of energy are used in agriculture.
In addition, the global population is increasing (9 billion
estimated in 2050), which implies continued pressure and
high demand for water, energy and food.
Therefore, there is a need
for new strategies and
methods to manage water
in international and national
governance. In the last ten
years, due to water scarcity
and climate change impact,
this concept has become
very interesting to scientists
and policymakers. The large
quantities of wastewater
illegally dumped year aer
year into natural resources
could represent valuable
opportunities if the resource
is, instead, managed well.
The reuse of treated
wastewater can be
an important alternative
to the use of potable and
freshwater in the agricultural
sector, especially in a
country like Morocco where
irrigation uses up to 90%
of the water consumed.
Performance studies of
wastewater treatment plants in Morocco show that the
microbiological quality of water treated by the majority of
functional wastewater treatment plants does not meet
the irrigation standard, as is the case for most Nor th African
countries. This failure gives rise to treated water presenting
significant health and environmental risks, which becomes
an impediment to the strategy of reuse of wastewater
as the only way to overcome water scarcity in the region.
Wastewater is known to contain dierent microorganisms that
could be pathogenic (viruses, bacteria…) and it is diicult to
remove them aer the treatment process.
For this reason, wastewater reuse in agriculture can result
in dramatic scenarios, such as human health risk (diarrheal
and parasitic infections) and environmental degradation
(microbial water contamination and salinity eects on soil...
etc), especially in developing countries.
The complexity of the problem is not only in microbiological
contamination, but also chemicals present in wastewater
that come from industrial eluents or from the accumulation
of substances in soil aer using chemical fertilizers
and pesticides above the limits and standard values.
Contamination and the risk of intestinal nematode infections
can threaten human safety, including not only farmers but
also consumers of commercial produce (Salama et al., 2014).
Factors influencing the vulnerability of populations could,
firstly be the level awareness and consciousness of people
and their behaviors, in addition to wastewater quality,
harvesting and irrigation systems, the nature of the crop
and type of soil. But for protection of human health
from pathogenic microorganisms, pathogenic removal
technologies are required, which are in some cases expensive
and need daily control, since are high and advanced
technologies, such as nanofiltration and UV irradiation.
Therefore, scientists and policy makers must work together
in order to change our behaviours with respect to water,
energy and food consumption. Morocco, an arid region,
is continuing to develop its natural resources management
by establishing new strategies and technologies to reuse
wastewater in agriculture in the context of the Green Morocco
Plan and the National wastewater program.
Even though there has been progress in natural resources
management and wastewater reuse, Moroccan governance
should elaborate precise and clear instructions and laws that
organize and legalize wastewater treatment and reuse.
The reuse
of treated
wastewater can
be an important
alternative to the
use of potable
and freshwater in
the agricultural
sector, especially
in a country like
Morocco where
irrigation uses up
to 90% of the water
consumed.

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 121
References
Abdelfadel, A. & Driouech, F. (2008). Climate Change and its Impact on Water Resources in the Maghreb Region. Arab Water Council.
Abd-Elwahed, M. S. (2019). Eect of Long-term Wastewater Irrigation on the Quality of Alluvial Soil for Agricultural Sustainability.
Annals of Agricultural Sciences, 64(2), pp. 151-160.
Alhamed, H., Biad, M., Saad, S. & Masaki, M. (2018). Business Opportunities Report for Reuse of Wastewater in Morocco.
Alla, A. A., Gillet, P., Deutsch, B., Moukrim, A. & Bergayou, H. (2006). Response of Nereis Diversicolor (Polychaeta, Nereidae)
Populations to Reduced Wastewater Discharge in the Polluted Estuary of Oued Souss, Bay of Agadir, Morocco. Estuarine, Coastal
and Shelf Science, 70(4), pp. 633–642.
Aziz, F. & Farissi, M. (2014). Reuse of Treated Wastewater in Agriculture: Solving Water Deficit Problems in Arid Areas.
Annales of West University of Timisoara, Series of Biology, 17(2), pp. 95-110.
Aziz, F., El Achaby, M., Lissaneddine, A., Aziz, K., Ouazzani, N., Mamouni, R. & Mandi, L. (2019).
Composites with Alginate Beads: A Novel Design of Nano-adsorbents Impregnation for Large-scale Continuous Flow
Wastewater Treatment Pilots. Saudi Jounal of Biological Sciences.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2019.11.019.
Aziz, F., El Achaby, M., Ouazzani, N., El-Kharraz, J. & Mandi, L. (2020). Rainwater Harvesting:
A Challenging Strategy to Relieve Water Scarcity in Rural Areas. In Patnaik S., Sen S. & Mahmoud, M. (eds.) Smart Village
Technology. Modeling and Optimization in Science and Technologies, vol 17. Springer, Cham.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37794-6_13.
Bekkoussa, B., Meddi, M. & Jourde, H. (2008). Climatic and Anthropic Forcing on Groundwater Resources in a Semiarid Area:
The Case of the Ghriss Plain, North Western Algeria. Science et Changements Planétaires- Sécheresse, 19(3), pp. 173–184.
Carr, G. (2011). Water Reuse for Irrigated Agriculture in Jordan: Soil Sustainability, Perceptions and Management.
In Mithen, S. & Black, E. (eds.) Water, Life and Civilisation: Climate, Environment and Society in the Jordan Valley, pp. 415-428.
Cambridge University Press.
Carr, G., Nortcli, S. & Potter, R. B. (2008). Water Reuse for Irrigated Agriculture in Jordan: What’s Waste about Wastewater?
Bulletin of the Council for British Research in the Levant, 3(1), pp. 35-40.
Castro, E., Mañas, M. P. & Heras, J. D. L. (2011). Eects of Wastewater Irrigation on Soil Properties and Turfgrass Growth.
Water Science & Technology, 63(8), pp. 1678-1688.
Chaoua, S., Boussaa, S., Gharmali, A. E. & Boumezzough, A. (2018).
Impact of Irrigation with Wastewater on Accumulation of Heavy Metals in Soil and Crops in the Region of Marrakech in Morocco.
Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 18(4), pp. 429-436.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2018.02.003.
Chiou, R. J. (2008). Risk Assessment and Loading Capacity of Reclaimed Wastewater to be Reused for Agricultural Irrigation.
Environmental Monitoring Assessment, 142(1-3), pp. 255-262.
Choukr-Allah, R. (2005). Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in Morocco: Situation and Perspectives. In Hamdy, A., El Gamal, F.,
Lamaddalena, N., Bogliotti, C. & Guelloubi, R. (eds.) Nonconventional water use: WASAMED project, pp. 271-287.
Bari: CIHEAM/EU DG Research.
Choukr-Allah, R. & Hamdy, A. (2005). Best Management Practice for Sustainable Reuse of Treated Wastewater. In Hamdy, A., El
Gamal, F., Lamaddalena, N., Bogliotti, C. & Guelloubi, R. (eds.) Nonconventional water use: WASAMED project, pp. 191-200.
Bari: CIHEAM/EU DG Research.
Doukkali, M. R. (2005). Water Institutional Reforms in Morocco. Water Policy, 7(1), pp. 71–88.
DRSM (Direction Régionale de Souss-Massa). (2015). Présentation de la Région de Souss Massa.
Retrieved from http://www.hcp.ma/region-agadir/Presentation-de-la-region-de-Souss-Massa_a16.html.
Eddabra, R., Moussaoui, W., Prévost, G., Delalande, F., Van Dorsselaer, A., Meunier, O., Scheel, J. M. & Mimouni, R. (2011).
Occurrence of Vibrio Cholerae Non-O1 in Three Wastewater Treatment Plants in Agadir (Morocco).
World Journal Microbiology Biotechnology, 27(5), pp. 1099–1108.
Retrieved from https :// doi.org/10.1007/s1127 4-010-0556-7.
Eliason, M. (2019). ‘Massire’ Project to Promote Innovative Water Solutions for Farming in Morocco. Morocco World News.
Retrieved from https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2019/05/274592/massire-innovative-water-solutions-morocco/.
Endlicher, W. (2000). Mittelmeerländer. In Weischet, W. & Endlicher, W. (eds.) Regionale Klimatologie: Teil 2 Die Alte Welt: Europa,
Afrika, Asien, pp.153-182. Teubner.
Ezbakhe, F., Tallou, A. & Mabrouki, J. (2019). Addressing the Water-Migration Nexus: An Analysis of the Llinks between Water and
Migration in the Syrian Crisis.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation). (2005). L‘irrigation en Afrique en Chires – Enquête AQUASTAT 2005. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
. (2012). Coping with Water Scarcity: An Action Framework for Agriculture and Food Security. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
Frenken, K. & Gillet, V. (2012). Besoins et Prélèvements D’eau pour L’irrigation par Pays. FAO AQUASTAT Reports.
Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/BC824F/.

122 Decision-Making for Water Reuse
Habbari, K., Tifnouti, A., Bitton, G. & Mandil, A. (2000). Geohelminthic Infections Associated with Raw Wastewater Reuse for
Agricultural Purposes in Beni-Mallal, Morocco. Parasitology International, 48(3), pp. 249-254.
Haité, H. E. (2011). Traitement des Eaux Usées par les Réservoirs Opérationnels et Réutilisation pour L’irrigation.
Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines (Saint-Etiènne).
Hussain, I., Raschid, L., Hanjra, M. A., Marikar, F. & Van Der Hoek, W. (2002). Wastewater Use in Agriculture: Review of Impacts and
Methodological Issues in Valuing Impacts: With an Extended List of Bibliographical References. Iwmi.
Iglesias, A., Mougou, R., Moneo, M. & Quiroga, S. (2010).
Towards Adaptation of Agriculture to Climate Change in the Mediterranean. Regional Environmental Change, 11, pp. 159–166.
Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassane II. (2000).
Réutilisation des Eaux Usées en Agriculture. Programme National de Transfert de Technology en Agriculture (PNTTA). Rabat.
Intriago, J. C., López-Gálvez, F., Allende, A., Vivaldi, G. A., Camposeo, S., Nicolás, N. E., Alarcón, J. J. & Salcedo, F. P. (2018).
Agricultural Reuse of Municipal Wastewater Through an Integral Water Reclamation Management.
Journal of Environmental Management, 213, pp. 135–141.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.02.011.
Jemali, A. & Kefati, A. (2002). Réutilisation des Eaux Usées au Maroc. In Jemali, A. & Kefati, A. Forum sur la Gestion de L’eau.
Kiziloglu, F. M., Turan, M., Sahin, U., Angin, I., Anapali, O. & Okuroglu, M. (2007).
Eects of Wastewater Irrigation on Soil and Cabbage-plant (brassica olerecea var. capitate cv. yalova-1) Chemical Properties.
Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 170(1), pp. 166-172.
Kurtze, J., Morais, M., Platko, E. & Thompson, H. (2015). Advancing Water Management Strategies in Morocco.
Lazarova, V. & Bahri, A. (eds.). (2005). Water Reuse for Irrigation, Agriculture, Landscape and Turf Grass. Catalog no 1649, ISBN:
I-56670-649-I. New York, CRC Press.
Legros, N. (2017). La Réutilisation des Eaux Usées Traitées en Irrigation Comme Incubateur d un Processus de Pérennisation et de
Bonne Gouvernance des Infrastructures þÿd Assainissement: Cas Pratique de la Station D’épuration de Tidili au Maroc. Cadi
Ayyad University of Marrakech.
Lhomme, J. P., Mougou, R. & Mansour, M. (2009). Potential Impact of Climate Change on Durum Wheat Cropping in Tunisia.
Climatic Change, 96(4), pp. 549–564.
Lionello, P., Malanotte, P. & Boscolo, R. (eds.). (2006). Mediterranean Climate Variability. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Malki, M., Bouchaou, L., Mansir, I., Benlouali, H., Nghira, A. & Choukr-allah, R. (2017). Wastewater Treatment and Reuse for Irrigation
as Alternative Resource for Water Safeguarding in Souss-Massa Region, Morocco. European Water, 59, pp. 365–371.
Mandi, L. (2012). Research Background of the Objectives of Horizon 2020 (de-contamination of the Mediterranean). MIRA WP7
Survey, Experts Groups Inputs on National Normative, Technical and Social Program.
Mandi, L. & Ouazzani, N. (2013). Water and Wastewater Management in Morocco: Biotechnologies Application. Sustainable
Sanitation Practice.
MAPM (Ministère de l’Agriculture et de la Pèche Maritime). (2011). Plan Maroc Vert.
Mimouni, R., Alla, A. A., Anajjar, E. M., Finance, C. & Moukrim, A. (2002). Impact du Rejet des Eaux Usées sur la Qualité
Microbiologique des Plages de la Baie D’agadir (Maroc). Journal Européen d’Hydrologie, 33(1), pp. 115–123.
Mouhanni, H., Bendou, A. & Er-Raki, S. (2011). Disinfection of Treated Wastewater and Its Reuse in the Irrigation of Golf Grass:
The Case of Plant M’zar Agadir-Morocco. Water, 3(4), pp. 1128–1138.
Nicolás, E., Alarcón, J. J., Mounzer, O., Pedrero, F., Nortes, P. A., Alcobendas, R., Romero-Trigueros, C., Bayona, J. M. &
Maestre-valero, J. F. (2016). Long-term Physiological and Agronomic Responses of Mandarin Trees to Irrigation with Saline
Reclaimed Water. Agriculture Water Management, 166, pp. 1–8.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.11.017.
Pedrero, F., Alarcón, J. J., Nicolás, E. & Mounzer, O. (2013). Influence of Irrigation with Saline Reclaimed Water
on Young Grapefruits. Desalination and Water Treatment, 51(10-12), pp. 2488-2496.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.747654.
Qian, Y. L. & Mecham, B. (2005). Long-Term Eects of Recycled Wastewater Irrigation on Soil Chemical Properties on Golf Course
Fairways. Agronomy Journal, 97(3), pp. 717-721.
RADEEMA (Régie Autonome de Distribution d’Eau et d’Electricité de Marrakech). (2009).
Rapport de Traitement et Réutilisation des Eaux Usées de la Ville de Marrakech.
RAMSA (Régie Autonome Multi Ser vices d’Agadir). (2002). M’Zar Treatment Station.
In Water Supply Serv. Agadir (Régie Auton. Multiservices d’Agadir).
http://www.ramsa.ma/Accue il/EspaceTechnique/Assai nissement/Assainissementliquide/StationdetraitementMZar.aspx
(accessed 2015).
. (2016). website http://www.ramsa.ma/ (accessed decemeber, 2016).
Rifki, M. (2013). Programme National d’Assainissement Liquide et d’Epuration des Eaux Usées. Ministere de L’interieur, Direction
Générale des Collectivités Locales, Direction de L’eau et de L’assainissement.
Salama, Y., Chennaoui, M., Sylla, A., Mountadar, M., Rihani, M. & Assobhei, O. (2014). Review of Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in
the Morocco: Aspects and Perspectives. International Journal of Environment and Pollution Research, 2(1), pp. 9–25.
Sarode, S., Upadhyay, P., Khosa, M. A., Mak, T., Shakir, A., Song, S. & Ullah, A. (2019). Overview of Wastewater Treatment Methods

6 Wastewater Treatment and Reuse Best Practices in Morocco: Targeting Circular Economy 123
with Special Focus on Biopolymer Chitin-chitosan. International Journal Biological Macromolecules, 121, pp. 1086-1100.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.10.089.
Shilling J., Freier, K. P., Hertig, E. & Scheran, J. (2012). Climate Change, Vulnerability and Adaptation in North Africa with Focus on
Morocco. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 156, pp. 12– 26.
Smith, D. & Vivekananda, J. (2009). Climate Change, Conflict and Fragility. International Alert, London.
Sowers, J., Vengosh, A. & Weinthal, E. (2011). Climate Change, Water Resources, and the Politics of Adaptation in the Middle East
and North Africa. Climatic Change, 104, pp. 599–627.
Tallou, A., Haouas, A., Jamali, M. Y., Atif, K., Amir, S. & Aziz, F. (2020). Review on Cow Manure as Renewable Energy. In Patnaik S., Sen,
S. & Mahmoud, M. (eds.) Smar t Village Technology. Modeling and Optimization in Science and Technologies, vol 17. Springer, Cham.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37794-6_17.
Thomas, R. J. (2008). Opportunities to Reduce the Vulnerability of Dryland Farmers in Central and West Asia and North Africa to
Climate Change. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment,126(1-2), pp. 36–45.
Voelker, T., Blackstock, K., Kovacic, Z., Sindt, J., Strand, R. & Waylen, K. (2019). The Role of Metrics in the Governance of the Water-
Energy-Food Nexus within the European Commission. Journal of Rural Studies.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.08.001.
WBGU. (2008). World in Transition – Climate Change as a Security Risk. Earthscan.
http://www.wbgu.de/wbgu jg2007engl.html (accessed 12 December, 2010). P3.
World Bank. (2017). Managing Urban Water Scarcity in Morocco. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

©Nguyen Quang Ngoc Tonkin/Shutterstock.
III
Understanding Challenges
of Water Reuse

©Martin M303/Shutterstock.

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 127
7
Marginal Water Resources for Food Production
– Challenges for Enhancing De-growth and Circular Economy
in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries and Iran
Mohammad Al-Saidi and Sudeh Dehnavi
Mohammad Al-Saidi, Center for Sustainable Development, College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University, Qatar.
e-mail: malsaidi@qu.edu.qa
Sudeh Dehnavi, Institute for Technology and Resources Management the Tropics and Subtropics,
TH-Köln—University of Applied Sciences, Germany.
e-mail: sudeh.dehnavi@th-koeln.de
Abstract
This contribution reviews current eorts in the region, and compares reuse trends in Iran and Gulf Cooperation Council countries.
Agricultural production in the Gulf region is naturally constrained by water scarcity and alternative water sources are therefore
highly needed. The impacts of unsustainable water use on the limited, non-renewable groundwater resources are disastrous
in terms of declining groundwater table, increased salinity and farm closures. In Iran, water is more available but water scarcity
is increasing due to the rapid growth of economy and population, but also due to waste and overuse. Marginal water resources –
unutilized water of lower quality - such as urban wastewater, stormwater, as well as saline water, can provide important options
for sustainable local food production. Although some new water sources, such as treated wastewater, are being increasingly used,
the use in agriculture or other close-to-person uses are still not common. At the same time, dierent water sources can be used
or combined for food production, e.g. marine-terrestrial agriculture or the utilization of harvested or drained water. In this context,
this comparative review analyses the use of these marginal resources for food production as a way to enhance de-growth
and a circular economy in urban areas of the region. It first highlights the available marginal resources and conceptualizes the use
of these resources in the context of sustainability paradigms, such as de-growth and circular production. At the same time, policy
challenges are highlighted and this paper advocates the use and potential of new resources such as treated municipal wastewater.
For a wide use to happen, such new water sources need to be appropriately identified, treated, delivered and accepted by society
and end-users.
Keywords
Marginal water resources, treated wastewater, water reuse, de-growth, circular economy, Gulf Cooperation Council, Iran

128 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
01
Introduction
Water scarcity is a constraining factor for food production in
most riparian countries of the Persian/Arabian Gulf.
This is particularity true for the hyper-arid region of the Gulf
Cooperation Council countries (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar,
Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates). These countries,
which have a small cultivated land ratio of between 2-4%
in comparison to the global average of around 10%, are
increasingly impor ting most of their food supplies due to
rising populations and increasing food consumption per
capita (Al-Saidi & Saliba, 2019). Both the GCC region and Iran
face a similar challenge with regard to water supply security
threats due to growth, waste and ineective policies.
Further, all countries have a high rate of urban population of
more than 85% for the GCC region, and around 74% for Iran in
2017 – both above the global average of around 55% (World
Bank, 2019). Supplying the growing, and increasingly urban,
population with suicient amounts of food in decent quality
without causing a deterioration of water resources availability
and quality is an important challenge.
In Iran, water is more available but water scarcity is increasing
due to the rapid growth of economy and population, but also
due to other combined factors such as mismanagement,
overuse, economic sanctions, expansion of the cultivation
area in the context of the food suiciency policies
(Madani et al., 2016; Pirani & Arafat, 2016).
The high rate of food imports is expected to continue due to
local population growth, constraints of land, and the presence
of large numbers of expats who fuel markets for international
food (Kodithuwakku et al., 2016). At the same time, local
food markets are increasingly finding more attraction due to
societal demands for healthier food and political initiatives
to decrease the dependence on food imports (Alpen Capital,
2017). In addition, wastage by households and in the tourism
sector is also a major concern (Pirani & Arafat, 2016).
However, the environmental impact of local food production
is significant. Groundwater resources are largely used for
agriculture, which consumed 67-93% of total annual water
used in GCC countries in 2010, and have witnessed a steep
decline, leading to water quality problems, seawater intrusion
and many farm closures (Saif et al., 2014). Similarly in Iran,
the local agricultural sector, which consumes around 92%
of water, has been heavily subsidised, and, particularly aer
the Islamic Revolution in 1979, has achieved higher rates
of suiciency of more than 90% which also resulted cheap
food prices, increased food demands and the promotion of
consumerism culture (Amid, 2007; Saatsaz, 2019).
The water demands for agricultural in the Gulf region can be
partially met through the use of marginal water resources
(World Bank, 2019). These resources are defined here as
unutilised water resources of typically lower quality.
Marginal water resources such as urban wastewater from
domestic, commercial and industrial eluents, stormwater,
as well as saline water, can provide important options for
sustainable local food production. At the same time,
the use of these resources can reduce the need to desalinate
more water. The desalination increase to meet future
demands has raised several concerns about the future of
the Gulf water body, e.g. the deterioration of water quality
(e.g. through increased salinity) and an increase of supply
risks in the case of failures of mega desalination plants
(Al-Saidi & Saliba, 2019). Although some marginal water
resources such as treated sewerage eluents are increasingly
being used, mostly for non-edible agriculture (i.e. uses
and products not directly for human consumption such as
landscaping or forage cultivation), there are many other
unused resources. For example, treated wastewater is
an important emerging source of reused water for urban areas
due to the closeness of wastewater treatment plants to urban
areas. If these plants were to become more integrated with
urban agriculture, the beneficial uses of this water source
are numerous as it can replace earlier mentioned freshwater
use for non-edible agriculture. Fur ther, saline water and
wastewater can be used for combined marine-terrestrial
agriculture, while water harvested or drained water is oen
suitable for vertical farming.
In this context, this contribution aims to analyse the use of
these marginal resources for food production as a way to
enhance de-growth (a food economy characterized by
low-metabolism and high-reuse rates) in the cities of
the region, with a particular focus on challenges facing
the emerging use of treated wastewater. This study uses
recent academic reviews, primar y literature as well as policy
documents to highlight directions for marginal water use in
the Gulf region. It does not provide detailed national-level
analysis of technologies, projects or trends in marginal
water use per type and region since such data are largely
not available and/or consistent. In fact, academic research
on reuse trends, policies and constraints in the region is
limited, with only a handful of papers mainly on wastewater
treatment either in the GCC region or in Iran. We assume that
the comparison between Iran and GCC countries can provide
valuable insights. Both Iran and the GCC region have similar
economic characteristics (middle and upper-middle income
carbon economies with strong state involvement) as well
as water scarcity pressures (due to natural scarcity and/or
growing populations and economies).
At the same time, they dier in terms of hydrological
conditions as well as the technological advancement and
policies with regard to water reuse. The chapter first briefly
conceptualises the use of these resources in the context of
the sustainability paradigms such de-growth and circular
economy. Here, marginal water resources are seen as more
sustainable alternatives to the use of freshwater.
Therefore, they constitute an instrument to curb waste
of water, energy and produce through the use of local
production. This contribution also outlines current eorts
in the GCC countries and in Iran to utilise these resources.
Later, the main policy challenges are analysed in more detail
in order to outline recommendations for the potential use of
these resources for urban food production.

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 129
02
Marginal Water Resources,
Circular Economy and Degrowth
– Conceptual Remarks
2.1. Linking De-growth to Reuse and the Circularity
Idea
The need for, and benefits from, the utilization of marginal
water resources can be derived from broader sustainability
paradigms that oer generic recommendations for
a better (more sustainable) production, consumption and
resource utilization. Here, we are not concerned about these
paradigms as precise scientific ideas or political economic
propositions, but more as general, but useful, sustainability
frameworks and entry points for debates.
For example, we do not understand the de-growth idea as in
contrast to growth per se. In fact, de-growth resembles
a “banner” that rallies critics of uncontrolled growth – more
production and more consumption – that is evidently
crossing impor tant planetary or environmental boundaries,
thus becoming destructive and unsustainable (Latouche,
2009). In fact, although the idea of de-growth has been
around for a while, it has gained much attention in recent
years as a common demand by some scholars, activists and
policymakers for a transformative change towards a new era
in which growth is not an ultimate and absolute objective
(D’Alisa et al., 2015). The concrete implications of this concept
are oen captured in principles such as re-conceptualizing
(redefining desirable growth and development ideas),
restructuring (e.g. through structural change of industries),
re-localizing (e.g. local food), reducing (e.g. minimization of
waste), recycling or reusing (e.g. reuse of water) (Latouche,
2009). This is done through a downscaling of the physical
throughput in order to achieve a sustainable steady-state
(Büchs & Koch, 2019). We use this understanding of de-growth
and define it in the food sector as a steady-state in which
the food value chain (production, distribution, consumption
and disposal) is characterized by low-metabolism and reuse
is widely practiced in the food economy (e.g. water reuse for
agriculture, food sharing or donations). In this sense,
the de-growth idea cannot be eectively separate, nor should
it be, from other concepts such as the circular economy
narrative since both address the narrowing and slowing of
material flows and the importance of increasing circulation
of materials (Schröder et al., 2019). In fact, the core of circular
economy’s definition lies in the ideas of reduction, reuse and
recycling (3R framework) (Kirchherr et al., 2017), while most
of the concrete applications of such a concept are driven by
the business community or pioneer countries (e.g. Germany,
China) advocating low-metabolism economies and reuse
systems for valuable/scarce resources (Korhonen et al., 2018;
Geissdoerfer et al., 2017 ).
Sustainable production and utilisation of food/land as well as
water are prerequisites, as well as a means, for the fulfilment
of the de-growth premise while circularity of resource
utilization helps achieve this premise. De-growth, and some
circular economy concepts, can be closely associated with
the idea of strong sustainability which postulates that one
capital type should not be substituted by another one to
generate growth. Here, water and food policies are evolving
to incorporate strong sustainability ideas through the use of
ecosystems services, natural infrastructure and community-
based management approaches that utilise and protect
both water and land resources (Al-Saidi & Buriti, 2018).
Furthermore, both water and food are non-substitutable and
satiable, basic needs whose satisfaction should not be traded
against each other in a way that jeopardises the sustainability
and the long-term availability of the underlying resources,
e.g. destroying arable land or polluting/overusing water
resources (Büchs & Koch, 2019). In this context, the
transformation of the agricultural sector requires rethinking
current practices and their potential to contribute to a low
metabolism in line with the de-growth idea. Gomiero (2018)
explored de-growth criteria for the agricultural sector,
namely the availability of an “appropriate technology” for
creating jobs as well as the use of “convivial tools” such as
do-it-yourself tools and tools that increase productivity and
have an open-access character. Using these criteria, some
current practices, such as bio-tech agriculture or organic
farming, face limitations such as the lack of conviviality
for a large-scale and user-driven practice. Therefore, more
experimentation is needed to identify food practices that
correspond to the proclamations of de-growth in the
agricultural sector in terms of increasing local food self-
suiciency, reducing waste, recycling, using renewables, and
eliminating environmental damage caused by products such
as agrochemicals (Gomiero, 2018).

130 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
2.2. Marginal Water: Content and Examples
In order to implement better agricultural practices that
produce more local, healthy and environmentally friendly
food, water needs to be analyzed as the constraining input in
arid or water-scarce regions. In this contribution, we regard
marginal water resources as a key solution for such regions.
We define marginal water as water which is neglected or
underutilized in comparison to other water resource types.
Therefore, the marginality refers to the relational use pattern
of marginal water of oen lower quality (e.g. unutilized saline,
brackish, treated or storm water) in comparison to higher
quality water (e.g. to freshwater or desalinated water).
In this sense, the types of these marginal water resources are
site-specific, e.g. treated wastewater can be widely used in
some areas (e.g. Singapore) and therefore not considered of
marginal use there.
Utilizing commonly neglected water of lower qualit y can be
seen as an entr y point and a means for the dissemination of
de-growth ideas in the agricultural sector. For this to happen,
such marginal water resources need to be appropriately
identified, analyzed, treated, delivered and accepted
by the producers and the end consumers. These steps
represent serious challenges in the Gulf region.
At the same time, marginal water resources are being
discovered as a valuable and viable option, particularly
for rapidly growing urban areas of the region. In fact,
the potential use of a par ticular type of marginal water
resource diers from a region to another. Table 7-1 gives
some examples of the current uses of non-conventional
water resource types in the Gulf region, including some
sources having marginal use, namely treated, produced and
brackish water. This simplification applies specifically for
GCC countries, although the use pattern is very similar in
Iran expect for the fact that treated wastewater is not yet
systematically (e.g. through large public investments) used
for purposes such as groundwater recharge. This use in Iran is
rather bottom-up in certain regions as we will explain later.
Detailed analyses of the use/reuse patterns countries are
provided in other studies, e.g. (Brown et al., 2018; Aleisa &
Al-Zubari 2017; Zubari et al., 2017) for GCC countries, and
(Abulof, 2014; Charkhestani et al., 2016; Tajrishy, 2012)
for Iran. In GCC example in Table 7-1, it is noticeable that
desalination water is commonly accepted and widely used for
many purposes. In contrast, the use of treated wastewater is
confined to use purposes that are not close to persons due
to the relative novelty and concerns about the quality of this
marginal water type. The use of treated wastewater for forage
production and groundwater recharge is currently promoted
on a wide scale in the region (Aleisa & Al-Zubari, 2017). Further,
produced water – water as a by-product from oil and gas
productions – is largely not utilized despite the huge amounts
produced in the Gulf.
Water type
Use type Industrial Use Non-edible
agriculture Recreational Indirect
potable Reuse
Edible
Agriculture
Direct
potable Reuse
Tre ated
Wastewater
uses in district
cooling; road
projects
use for forage
cultivation
landscaping;
small artificial
lakes
recharge of
groundwater
aquifers
Produced
Water
reinjection
into oil and gas
fields
Brackish
Water
mangroves
parks; natural
reserves
aquaculture;
growth of fish
food
Desalinated
Water
high quality
water used in
industry
use generally in
agriculture in
the absence of
groundwater
aqua parks;
swimming
pools
livestock and
agricultural
production
Domestic
drinking water
BLUE commonly not used CYAN some uses exist GRAY widely used
Table 7-1 Water reuse sources for di erent reuse purposes in the Gulf region

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 131
03
Benecial (Re)Use of Marginal Water in Iran
and the GCC Region
- Wastewater Reuse as a Case
3.1. Iran
3.1.1. Potential and Use Patterns
Unconventional water resources of marginal utilisation
(marginal water resources) are being considered as a par t
of the solutions to the increasing scarcities and recurrent
shortages. In Iran, the use of these water types has only
started recently, but is still not suiciently highlighted as in
comparison to other water management problems,
e.g. the high leakage of water from potable water distribution
networks (unaccounted for water or UFW) of around 32%
(Saatsaz, 2019). The (re)use of marginal water resources in Iran
is beginning to emerge but is still far from its full potential.
The potential has been explored by Charkhestani, Ziri, and
Rad (2016) who reviewed reuse potential for agriculture,
industry and municipal consumption. Accordingly, the most
important reuse option in agriculture in Iran is related to
drainage water from irrigation, which can amount to around
30 billion cubic meters by 2021. This type of water can be
used in conventional or saline agriculture (e.g. irrigation
of halophytes which grow in low and moderate salinity
levels) as well as for livestock and restoring or sustaining
wetlands. However, the reuse of such water requires careful
management to match the cropping pattern to the quality
of the water, and also to introduce practices of integrated
drainage management that considers the overall drainage
system design together with the soil and water quality
aspects (Charkhestani et al., 2016). Other water reuse
options are related to the use of water provided by municipal
wastewater treatment plants for industrial parks, landscaping
in cities, construction of lagoons or even as indirect potable
water reuse if the reused water is mixed with other water of
better quality (Karandish & Hoekstra, 2017; Ministry of Energy,
2016; Ministry of Energy, 2010; Kayhanian & Tchobanoglous,
2016).
Table 7-2 provides some key data on water use and reuse
patterns in Iran, with a focus on treated wastewater.
According to oicial numbers by the NWWEC (National Water
and Wastewater Engineering Company, 2018), in 2017, 74%
of the collected sewage was treated in 194 wastewater
treatment plants. The number of wastewater treatment plants
in 2017 was 4.97 times higher than 2001. Another 109 plants
are under construction. The wastewater treatment plants
serve about 27% of cities and 48.90% of the urban population
in Iran. The cost for connecting the remaining population
is anticipated to be higher. Considering the total amount
of produced sewage in urban areas, full urban wastewater
treatment in Iran would create a potential of about 4.5 billion
cubic meters of treated wastewater per year for reuse.
In 2010, around 0.33 billion cubic meters of treated municipal
wastewater (this number was around 0.86 billion cubic
meters in 2012) was used for irrigation (AQUASTAT, 2019).
However, according to Tajrishy (2012), over 90% of the treated
wastewater in Iran is reused in some way although such reuse
is not systematically done, i.e. due to a lack of considerations
of adequate quality and reuse purposes. Further, while a high
amount of collected municipal water is treated, the collection
rate remains quite low (see Table 7-2). The treated wastewater
is mostly mixed with storm water or water in tributaries of
Groundwater
abstracted
a
Surface
watera
Desalinated
Water
b
Municipal
wastewater
Produced
d
Municipal
Wastewater
Collecteda
Municipal
Wastewater
Treateda
Treated
Wastewater
as % of
Collected
Wastewater
Reused
Water for
irrigation
purposesc
Iran 3,375 2,786 730 4,500 1,785 1,785 74% 328
a. Data for the Iranian year between 21 March 2017 to 20th March 2018, retrieved from (National Water and
Wastewater Engineering Company, 2018).
b. Exact year for this figure unknown, however published in 2019 and retrieved from (Tansim News Agency, 2019).
c. Reused water is defined here as the direct use of treated municipal wastewater for irrigation purposes.
It includes treated municipal wastewater applied artificially (irrigation) and directly (i.e. with no or little prior
dilution with freshwater during most of the year) on land to assist the growth of crops and fruit trees.
Treated municipal wastewater applied artificially and directly for landscaping and forestry also falls under this
category. This figure is for the year 2010 from the (AQUASTAT, 2019).
d. Data for the year 2010 retrieved from (Charkhestani et al., 2016).
Table 7-2 Key water use and reuse statis tics for Iran, in million cubic meters (MCM)

132 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
large water bodies before use mostly for irrigation of
low-value crops, particularly in the suburban areas.
In such a case, wastewater treatment plants would discharge
water to the environment, where it mixes with freshwater, and
is then withdrawn by unregulated users downstream (Tajrishy,
2012). In the same process, intentional groundwater recharge
happens around the major cities. In this case, the plants
release the eluent to recharge brackish water aquifers,
and then it is later used through springs and qanats by
downstream farmers for irrigation purposes (Tajrishy, 2012).
Moreover, transportation of treated wastewater directly to
the point of use is becoming more common. Farmers can
negotiate the right for direct use of treated wastewater
through special contracts. Dierent literature reports
direct use of par tially treated or untreated wastewater for
agricultural purposes (Jimenez & Asano, 2008; Tajrishy, 2012;
WHO, 2005). This raises concerns about monitoring of treated
wastewater quality for irrigation and health or soil related
problems. The untreated wastewater mixed with storm water
or small streams or tributaries of larger water bodies – in
order to allow for self-purification – is used for irrigation,
especially downstream of urban centers where wastewater
treatment facilities are inadequate. Increasing the capacities
for wastewater treatment and reuse could reduce the amount
of indirect use of untreated wastewater for agricultural
purposes.
3.1.2. Policies, Options and Constrains
Recently, the periodic development plans of Iran have
considered the use of marginal water resources, particularly
wastewater, although most of the current use for agricultural
purposes is unplanned and uncontrolled (Karandish &
Hoekstra, 2017). With regard to the use of wastewater,
the central government assumes the lead role for the
development of this water source. In Iran, water and
wastewater supply are highly centralised with the Ministry of
Energy and the National Water and Wastewater Engineering
Company (NWWEC) (under the latter ministry) supervising
a number of provincial urban, municipal and provincial
rural Water and Wastewater Companies (WWC). As most
wastewater eluents are currently not treated, the NW WEC
Vision 2021 foresees the increase of wastewater treatment
to 60% in urban areas, and 30% in suburban areas by 2021
(Ministry of Energy, 2016). Alongside wastewater use, there are
other types of marginal water that can be used in Iran such
as stormwater runo, rainwater harvested from rooops,
greywater (e.g. for uses in households e.g. for toilet flushing)
or saline water. However, up until now, most of these types
are not systematically used.
Environmental guidance for reuse of treated wastewater
was developed by the Ministry of Environment in 2011
stipulating the quality standards for dierent uses of the
treated wastewater. The main sectors that take in the treated
municipal waterare those of irrigation, landscaping and
forestr y near to urban areas. The use of treated wastewater
for aquifer recharge is a second priority (Ministry of Energy,
2010). In some major cities, seepage pits and eluents
from wastewater treatment plants are used to recharge
groundwater aquifers. The long-term goal is to use water
from these recharged aquifers and underground strata for
irrigation in some urban communities. At the same time,
despite concerns about water quality, treated wastewater can
be used directly for irrigation, to augment water supply and
reduce pressures in the case of droughts (e.g. in the city of
Mashhad) (Kayhanian & Tchobanoglous, 2016).
In fact, the options for incorporating marginal water resources
as a part of the sustainable water management in urban
settings are plenty, but they are largely not systematically
approached in Iran. For example, the integration of treatment
plants in closed loop systems with the water users – i.e.
water consumption sites lined directly to treatment plants
producing water for use again - can help deliver water at
dierent qualities for dierent purposes, and eluents
can be treated aer the use. The users can produce edible
agriculture, forage, or mix the water with other water types,
such as harvested water from rain or saline water, in order to
provide other products.
In order to encourage a wide use of treated wastewater in Iran
(i.e. higher collection, treatment and reuse rates),
there is a need to overcome the obstacles by creating
appropriate technologies for dierent reuse purposes,
decentralized wastewater treatment systems as well
as enhancing social acceptance (Rezaee & Sarrafzadeh,
2017). For example, a study by (Hamidi & Yaghubi, 2018)
shows that the availabilit y of high quality potable water
for irrigation purposes is the main constraint to the use of
treated wastewater in urban agriculture. Reuse of treated
wastewater could foster the use of the right water quality
for the right agricultural purpose. Furthermore, considering
that 7,505 hectares for urban and industrial landscaping
area exist in Iran, expanding the reuse of treated wastewater
for landscaping purposes could reduce the pressure on
water resources. In order to encourage water reuse, the
Expediency Discernment Council of Iran (an administrative
body appointed by Iran’s Supreme Leader) has outlined some
plans for recycling water nationwide. The proposed policies
and strategies include replacement of the agricultural water
right for fresh water with treated eluents, promoting reuse
of treated eluents, use of low quality water instead of high
quality urban water to create green spaces, and expand
relevant research projects (Tajrishy, 2012).

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 133
3.2. GCC Region
3.2.1. Wastewater Reuse as a Primary Option
In recent years, water reuse has been a key item
in the water strategies of GCC countries, with the reuse
of treated municipal wastewater expected to increase
significantly. Other marginal water types, such as drainage
water, treated industrial wastewater, produced water, or
harvested water, are much less used. While only around 50%
of total domestic wastewater is collected in the GCC region,
and around 40% of the volume collected is treated, the reused
wastewater was used to satisfy only 3% of water requirements
in 2010/2012 (Zubari et al., 2017). At the same time,
treated wastewater is largely used for gardening, parks,
highway landscaping and fodder production (Saif et al., 2014).
For all member countries collectively, the GCC targets,
by 2030, to collect 60% of municipal water and, by 2035,
to reuse 90% of treated wastewater (Zubari et al., 2017).
The eorts of the GCC countries regarding wastewater
treatment and reuse have been reviewed by Aleisa and
Al-Zubari (2017). The main sectors that take in the reused
wastewater are landscaping and for the irrigation of livestock
feed crops.
In some exceptional cases, the treated wastewater is used
for aquifer recharge through reinjections and the irrigation of
edible crops if higher water quality is produced (e.g. through
the use of reverse osmosis wastewater treatment).
Currently, treatment plants have units for primary, secondary
and tertiar y treatment, while some plants, e.g. in Kuwait,
also use reverse osmosis (RO) and ultrafiltration (UF) (Aleisa
& Al-Zubari, 2017). Other uses of treated wastewater such as
toilet flushing, firefighting, recreational purposes and crop or
fish production have been limited in the GCC region.
At the same time, the reuse of treated wastewater (largely
of good quality) has been lower than the policy aspirations,
with some of the excess treated wastewater stored in lakes or
discharged into the sea (Aleisa & Al-Zubari, 2017).
Considering the large per capita water use footprints in
GCC countries, the use of treated wastewater is expected to
generate impor tant quantities of additional water.
Table 7-3 indicates current use patterns. Although much
of the collected municipal water is treated, large amounts are
not used – note that the indicated reuse quantities in Table 7-3
do not exclusively originate from municipal wastewater.
At the same time, the treatment quality in some GCC
countries is quite high, i.e. at least tertiary levels of treatment.
Therefore, treated wastewater is used for agriculture but not
on a large scale. While some GCC countries have reported
some agriculture use for irrigating date palms and forage
crops or watering livestock, the wide-scale utilization of
treated wastewater is still hindered by the lack of integrated
and connected infrastructure for deliver y, the heavy
subsidization of other water sources, the weak appreciation
of treated wastewater benefits, the need for strict regulation
and monitoring of water quality, and the potential impact
on public health (Jasim et al., 2016; Jaar Abdul Khaliq et al.,
2017; Ouda, 2016). It is therefore not surprising that some of
the treated wastewater is collected in small lakes awaiting
customers willing to utilize it. More recent wastewater reuse
or food security strategies envision locating livestock or
forage projects in close proximity to wastewater plants in
order to benefit from the high-quality water.
GCC
country
Groundwater
abstracted
Desalinated
Water
Wastewater
Collected
Wastewater
Treated
Treated
Waste
Water as %
of Collected
Wastewater
Reused
Waterb
Reused
Water as %
of Collected
Wastewater
Bahrain 144 242 158 69 44% 39 25%
Kuwait 85 712 319 247 77% 96c-
Oman 1,084 280 68 67 99% 33 49%
Qatar 250d535 198 194 98% 97 49%
Saudi Arabia
21,595 1,947 2,503 1,604 64% 216 9%
UAE 3,536 2,005 724 711 98% 452 62%
a All figures are for the year 2016 from the source (GCC-STAT, 2016), except for figures with the notes c and d.
b Reused water is defined as any water received from another user with or without treatment. It includes treated wastewater
for further use, excludes water discharged into watercourses and recycling within industrial sites.
c Figure from the year 2010 from the source (Zubari et al., 2 017).
d Figure from the 2012 from the source (Zubari et al., 2017 ).
Table 7-3 Key water use and reuse statistics for G CC countries for the year 2016, in million cubi c meters (MCM)a

134 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
3.2.2. Reuse Constrains and Other Reuse Options
It is not only treated wastewater that constitutes a marginal
water source that can be utilised. Brown, Das, and Al-Saidi
(2018) reviewed several types of marginal water resources
that enhance sustainable agriculture in the Gulf region,
namely domestic wastewater, produced water, saline water,
marginal water for the production of microalgae, marine
aquaculture, and integrated seawater agriculture. The main
insights from this review can be summarised briefly here.
With regard to wastewater, it can be used for the production
of drought-tolerant plants (xerophytes) or other native species
that do not require much water, while irrigation and on-farm
monitoring strategies (e.g. high leaching fraction, monitoring
of heavy metals and salts) need to be deployed
in order to ensure safe use. Produced water
is generated during the extraction of oil and
gas and represents an important water type in
the Gulf region. This water might require more
sophisticated treatment due to high content
of salt, chemicals and hydrocarbons, but it can
be utilised for the production of salt-tolerant
crops or algae. Further, a promising option
for sustainable agriculture in the region is the
use of saline water for terrestrial agriculture
through the production of halophytes.
Halophyte species can be used in many
products, e.g. firewood, fresh vegetables,
oilseeds, grains, medicine, forage, biofuels etc.
Similarly, saline water can be used for the
production of microalgae which, due to its high
protein content, is a component of aqua-feeds
for aquaculture. Marine agriculture is another
promising alternative to counteract
the overfishing problem by producing high
value products such as finfish, shellfish,
crustaceans or shrimps. Aquaculture projects are spreading
across the GCC countries in close proximit y to coastal cities,
while these projects are tr ying to solve problems such as
a lack the local knowledge and capacities, high temperature
and salinity of the Gulf seawater and the selection of
appropriate species. Finally, aquaculture can be integrated
with high salinity agriculture where wastewater from
aquaculture can be enriched with nutrients and used to
irrigate halophytes or produce microalgae to be reused later
as fish feed.
3.3. Comparative Insights
Both Iran and the GCC region are increasingly interested in
developing marginal water resources for domestic, industrial
and agricultural uses as well as for other purposes such as
recreation and landscaping. However, some dierence exists
with regard to geography and the type of available marginal
water. First, despite the similar water scarcity pressures
(water availability in relation to current use) to the GCC region,
Iran has a higher rainfall and thus a higher natural water
availability, with annual rainfall ranging between 50 and 2,275
mm (the national average annual rainfall is 228 mm) and the
total renewable water resources per capita was estimated at
around 1,700 cubic meter in 2014 (AQUASTAT, 2019).
In contrast, GCC countries are hyper-arid with an average
rainfall of less than 100 mm, almost no surface water and
shallow groundwater aquifers as the only renewable water
source (Saif et al., 2014). Therefore, Iran possesses higher
quantities of certain marginal water resources, such as
stormwater, brackish water and water harvested from rain.
Second, with most of the major cities in the GCC cities located
in close proximity to the Gulf water body, saline water is
a convenient resource under consideration for utilisation for
the production of halophytes, fish or feed. Conversely,
the major cities in Iran are in the inner lands while the bulk of
aquaculture projects in Iran are concentrated
in the southern coastal parts of the country
(Hadipour et al., 2015). For the major urban
areas in Iran, the reuse of wastewater and
the recovery of drainage water constitute
the primary marginal water utilisation forms
under consideration, while other sources such
as stormwater and rain water have not been
systematically explored.
Another dierence is with regard to
the reliance on high technologies by GCC
countries to expand the reuse potential.
In the GCC region, the reuse industr y seems
to have gained strong momentum and to be
supported by ambitious government goals for
collection, treatment and reuse.
Wastewater treatment plants with higher
capacities and more advanced technologies
are producing more treated water than
the current capacities to use this water, i.e.
some high quality treated water is not used
due to the lack of demand, delivery infrastructure and/or
acceptance one can argue that the water treatment and reuse
industry in GCC countries exhibits higher levels of planning
and control while policymakers are still reluctant to use the
high-quality water for sensitive purposes, such as aquifer
recharge, edible agriculture or (indirect) potable use.
For example, in GCC states, the establishment of treatment
plants is carried out through public works authorities,
while the operators of the plants are in charge of finding
suitable users for the treated water in the short run (e.g. for
landscaping companies, district cooling plants or farmers).
Further, national water supply providers can engage in
major projects for aquifer recharge and infrastructure
development (e.g. construction of pipelines) for the transfer
of treated water for recharge sites. Despite this national-level
involvement, some quantities of treated wastewater are
le unused in treatment plants. This is due to acceptability
problems and safety concerns that are not necessarily
supported by evidence related to water quality (Aleisa &
Al-Zubari, 2017). Solving these issues can help advance the
current ambitious reuse policy goals. In contrast, some of
the treated wastewater in Iran is used spontaneously by
farmers in semi-urban areas or is used, in case of droughts,
to augment irrigation supply (Charkhestani et al., 2016;
Wastewater
treatment plants
with higher
capacities and
more advanced
technologies are
producing more
treated water
than the current
capacities to use
this water.

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 135
Kayhanian & Tchobanoglous, 2016). In the GCC region, farmers
might be reluctant to use treated wastewater since they
enjoy an easy and universal access to good quality and free
groundwater or desalinated water at highly subsidised prices.
In fact, the issue of the low water prices is a common problem
in the region and is a major impediment to eicient and
sustainable use of the scarce water resource in both the urban
and agricultural sectors (Al-Saidi & Dehnavi, 2019).
Since low water taris fuel high water consumption rates
in the Gulf region, such issues of pricing and demand
management need to be considered in any de-growth
discussion of a low metabolism society.
04
Directions and Common Challenges
for Urban Food Production
The common challenges for marginal water utilisation
extend from a lack of comprehensive strategies, inadequate
infrastructure, concerns about quality aspects, to public
acceptance and awareness. Some recommendations exist
for the GCC region and Iran in order to advance the use of
marginal water resources. For example, for wastewater reuse
in the GCC region, Aleisa and Al-Zubari (2017) stressed
the importance of adopting adequate legal frameworks,
reducing water consumption, awareness raising, finding uses
for sludge from sewerage plants and advancing the research
and development of wastewater treatment technologies.
Further, most GCC countries do not have national water
strategies that include clear investment targets (including
wastewater treatment), water reuse plans, or explanations
of roles and responsibilities. While some regulations on
wastewater quality exist, they are not specific with regard to
the dierent reuse purposes and processes. In fact,
it is important that the role of governments in setting up
the institutional frameworks for regulating wastewater reuse
goes beyond par tial regulations (e.g. focusing only on safety
and quality regulations) or the simple incorporation of
wastewater in sectoral policies (e.g. wastewater reuse as
a sub-target in food and environmental protection policies).
This has been the current practice so far. For example,
in Oman, the government has created regulations for the
protection of environment and public health and the use of
sewage wastewater for agricultural use and landscaping
(Jaar Abdul Khaliq et al., 2017). In Saudi Arabia,
the government has encouraged several initiatives for
the utilization of the large quantities of treated wastewater
produced through the National Water Company which
promotes the production, marketing and utilization of this
water (Ouda, 2016). In fact, similar initiatives exist in other GCC
countries, e.g. in Qatar where elements from its food security
plan are linked to the use of water from wastewater treatment
plants.
In Iran, various studies recommend an increase in the number
and quality of treatment plants, improvements to collection
networks, expansion of seawater desalination – to
accommodate additional potable water use demands,
improved monitoring networks, enhanced drainage systems
in irrigation, removal of regulatory barriers and increased
public acceptance through (religious) education (Kayhanian
& Tchobanoglous, 2016; Charkhestani et al., 2016). Some of
these regulatory barriers include the absence of guidelines
for the construction and operation of wastewater treatment
plants, the need for clear water quality standards for various
uses of marginal water including potable use, and the lack
of environmental monitoring regarding wastewater quality
and suitable uses of this water. Further, there are conflicting
responsibilities with multiple agencies working on water reuse

136 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
issues and no clear national guidance for mainstreaming roles
and enhancing cooperation (Kayhanian & Tchobanoglous,
2016).
At the same time, the use of marginal water for food
production brings along additional challenges related to
quality, infrastructure, cost and acceptance.
Some of these challenges lie in the ability to upscale the food
production using treated or saline water despite the low
cost of desalination and freshwater, i.e. low or non-existent
volumetric prices of water for domestic use and agriculture.
This low-cost water has been the norm in Gulf countries as
a part of the rentier states’ ideologies of providing free
benefits to citizens – a political-economic strategy towards
increasing regime legitimacy.
In recent years, water taris
have been reformed in
some GCC countries (Krane,
2018). However, water (and
electricity) taris remained
significant, especially
if the total water costs,
including environmental
externalities, are calculated.
Other challenges can
only be solved if public
trust and the perception
of wastewater quality
improves, e.g. through
concerted campaigns by
public authorities.
At the same time, some
alternative agricultural
production systems, e.g. the use of saline water or the
cultivation of microalgae, need some initial subsidisation
while some practices, such as microalgae, are still not
considered as a par t of agriculture (Brown et al., 2018).
Further, it is important to consider integrating treatment
plants with accompanying networks to deliver the right water
amounts with the right quality to the right place.
However, since much of the treated wastewater is not done
for potable use, it would be diicult to create dual distribution
networks and deliver treated wastewater everywhere.
Instead, the sites for use of treated wastewater need to be
carefully chosen – e.g. in the vicinity of wastewater treatment
plants, while some new distribution networks can be
constructed. This is especially important for the (re)use of
marginal water resources for urban food production since
such practice demands careful design with regard to space as
well as energy and nutrient supply.
International experience with the utilisation of marginal water
resources for urban food agriculture emphasises multiple
benefits of, and the need for, more integrated systems.
For example, with wastewater reuse in urban agriculture,
there is a good potential for nutrient recycling and the
reduction of carbon emissions (Miller-Robbie et al., 2017).
Further, integrating water and nutrient reuse systems
(i.e. reuse of nutrient-rich water in sanitation) with crop
production sites can be a viable resource recovery system
that enhances sustainable sanitation and urban agriculture
in arid regions (Woltersdorf et al., 2018).
Such coupled systems of wastewater and nutrients needs
also to monitor the salt flow in order avoid soil salinization
(Woltersdorf et al., 2016). While these systems seem plausible
and technically feasible for other regions, they might face
diiculties in the Gulf region due to the problem of poor
acceptance and the cautious approach of decision makers
regarding the water quality. In order to ensure high quality
water supply for urban agriculture, countries can invest
in advanced wastewater treatment technologies using
membranes as these tend to minimise unwanted constituents
in treated wastewater for urban irrigation (Bunani et al.,
2015). Furthermore, the utilisation of saline water for fisheries
through aquaculture has been expanding in urban and peri-
urban areas, for example in African cities exhibiting high
population growth rates (Miller & Atanda, 2011).
Aquaculture can also be developed using wastewater
and this specific use is rising globally (Bunting & Edwards,
2018). Finally, renewable energy is increasing in the region
for desalination – in order to face the rising energy cost of
high-quality desalinated water – and other applications
in the water-energ y-food supply infrastructure (Gorjian &
Ghobadian, 2015; Al-Saidi & Elagib, 2018; Al-Saidi & Saliba,
2019). This advancement, together with the energy recovery
capacity from treatment plants, can open up more
cost-eective ways to reuse water for urban agriculture.
It is important to
consider integrating
treatment plants
with accompanying
networks to deliver
the right water
amounts with the
right quality to the
right place.

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 137
05
Conclusions
Iran and the GCC region share major concerns related
to increasing incidents of water resources overuse,
the deterioration of groundwater resources, and the health
of the Gulf water body. Realizing the potential of water reuse
in augmenting supply and providing needed water to cities
facing rapid growth, Gulf countries are investing in their
capacities to utilise previously neglected water sources.
Marginal water resources for food production serve as
a useful instrument for sustainable agriculture in urban areas
and can help achieve the de-growth idea of a low metabolism
society. The bulk of eorts for the utilisation of marginal water
resources have concentrated on the expansion of wastewater
treatment and reuse capacities. Wastewater treatment is
capitalizing on the large footprints of water used in urban
areas. The set-up of treatment technologies able to process
water to advanced levels in terms of produced water quality
opens up several potential uses including irrigation of certain
crops such as forage or date palms.
While the reuse levels are still far from achieving the
ambitious future targets for municipal wastewater, large
water quantities are already produced. In light of the lack of
infrastructure, monitoring and regulations to ensure
that treated wastewater is delivered to the desired use
and users at the right time and quality, most current uses
are confined to landscaping or industrial uses (e.g. district
cooling, roads construction, firefighting etc.).
Other uses such as the recharge of vulnerable aquifers or
a wide-scale use in urban agriculture, or even for drinking
water, are contingent on public acceptance and
the commitment of public authorities to move beyond
experimentation and single reuse initiatives to full utilization.
While wastewater reuse
is a potentially significant
new water source, other
sources such as saline water,
greywater, rainwater, storm
water, or produced water are
not adequately considered.
Iran exhibits higher water
availability and a significant
potential for utilizing runo
water or drainage water
for irrigation. In contrast,
water reuse in the GCC
region is more ambitious,
technologically-driven and
planned, while water reuse
in agriculture is still limited
to some forage production
activities. At the same time,
there is a big potential
for food production using
aquaculture, algae, and combined marine-terrestrial systems
that can supply the coastal cities of the GCC region with high-
value fish products. For wide utilisation of marginal water
resources in Iran and the GCC region, coherent regulatory
and investment policies, as well as the right economic
and pricing incentives, are needed alongside better public
engagement and awareness. As this study did not compare
current national-level legal, regulator y and policy frameworks
for (marginal) water use/reuse in the region, future research
in this area is needed. Further, urban planning systems
that provide integrated infrastructure between the treated
water and nutrient sources to the suitable agricultural
production sites are needed. Finally, the practice of utilizing
marginal water resources for urban food production needs
a high degree of experimentation. A future research agenda
can include more site-specific analysis regarding the right
integrated system design, the quality and health impacts,
the acceptability of the end products by the consumers and
the integration of renewables components, such solar energy
and bioenerg y, in order to minimise the costs and negative
environmental impacts.
Marginal water
resources for food
production serve as
a useful instrument
for sustainable
agriculture in urban
areas and can
help achieve the
de-growth idea of
a low metabolism
society.

138 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
Glossary of Terms
• Vertical farming: The practice of growing crops in a vertical manner in order to optimize plant growth, minimize the need for
soil and save place. This include growing plants in not used cites, e.g. buildings or tunnels, or in controlled-environments such
as hydroponics, aquaponics and aeroponics.
• Produced Water: Water produced as a by-product in the hydrocarbon industry.
• Greywater: Water produced from any household sources other than toilets.
• Halophytes: A category of salt-tolerant plants that grow in soils or water of highly levels of salinity.
References
Abulof, U. (2014). Revisiting Iran’s Nuclear Rationales. International Politics, 51(3), pp. 404–415. DOI:10.1057/ip.2014.9.
Aleisa, E & Al-Zubari, W. (2017). Wastewater Reuse in the Countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC):
The Lost Opportunity. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 189(11), 553. DOI:10.1007/s10661-017-6269-8.
Alpen Capital. (2017). GCC Food Industry.
http://www.alpen-capital.com/gcc-food-industry-report_february-22-2017.pdf (accessed 21 May, 2019).
Al-Saidi, M. & Buriti, R. (2018). Ecosystem Infrastructure for Sustainability Policies in Brazil: Revaluating Nature through
Community-based Water and Land. In Bonnedahl, K. J. & Hikkurinen, P. (eds.) Strongly Sustainable Societies: Organising Human
Activities on a Hot and Full Earth, pp. 99–115. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Al-Saidi, M. & Dehnavi, S. (2019). Comparative Scorecard Assessment of Urban Water Pricing Policies—The Case of Jordan and Iran.
Water, 11(4), 704. DOI:10.3390/w11040704.
Al-Saidi, M. & Elagib, N. A. (2018). Ecological Modernization and Responses for a Low-carbon Future in the Gulf Cooperation Council
Countries. WIREs Clim Change, 9(4). DOI:10.1002/wcc.528.
Al-Saidi, M. & Saliba, S. (2019). Water, Energy and Food Supply Security in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries—A Risk
Perspective. Water, 11(3), 455. DOI:10.3390/w11030455.
Amid, J. (2007). The Dilemma of Cheap Food and Self-suiciency: The Case of Wheat in Iran. Food Policy, 32(4), pp. 537–552.
DOI:10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.11.001.
AQUASTAT. (2019). Main Database. http://www.fao.org/aquastat/en/. (accessed 20 May , 2019).
Brown, J., Das, P. & Al-Saidi, M. (2018). Sustainable Agriculture in the Arabian/Persian Gulf Region Utilizing Marginal Water
Resources: Making the Best of a Bad Situation. Sustainability, 10(5), 1364. DOI:10.3390/su10051364.
Büchs, M. & Koch, M. (2019). Challenges for the Degrowth Transition: The Debate about Wellbeing. Futures, 105, pp. 155–165.
Bunani, S., Yörükoğlu, E., Yüksel, Ü., Kabay, N., Yüksel, M. & Sert, G. (2015). Application of Reverse Osmosis for Reuse of Secondary
Treated Urban Wastewater in Agricultural Irrigation. Desalination, 364, pp. 68–74.
Bunting, S. W. & Edwards, P. (2018). Global Prospects for Safe Wastewater Reuse Through Aquaculture. In Jana, B. B., Mandal, R. N.
& Jayasankar, P. (eds.) Wastewater Management Through Aquaculture, pp. 55–72. Singapore: Springer.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7248-2_3.
Charkhestani, A., Ziri, M. S. & Rad, H. A. (2016). Wastewater Reuse: Potential for Expanding Iran’s Water Supply to Survive from
Absolute Scarcity in Future. Journal of Water Reuse and Desalination, 6(3), pp. 437–444. DOI:10.2166/wrd.2015.210.
D’Alisa, G., Demaria, F. & Kallis, G. (2015). Degrowth: A Vocabulary for a New Era. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
GCC-STAT. (2016). Water Statistics Report in the GCC Countries 2016. https://www.gccstat.org/images/gccstat/docman/
publications/205-WaterStatistics-En.pdf (accessed 12 November , 2019).
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P. & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The Circular Economy – A New Sustainability Paradigm?
Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, pp. 757–768.
Gomiero, T. (2018). Agriculture and Degrowth: State of the Art and Assessment of Organic and Biotech-based Agriculture from
a Degrowth Perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, pp. 1823–1839.
Gorjian, S. & Ghobadian, B. (2015). Solar Desalination: A Sustainable Solution to Water Crisis in Iran. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 48, pp. 571–584.
Hadipour, A., Vafaie, F. & Hadipour, V. (2015). Land Suitability Evaluation for Brackish Water Aquaculture Development in Coastal
Area of Hormozgan, Iran. Aquaculture International, 23(1), pp. 329–343. DOI:10.1007/s10499-014-9818-y.
Hamidi, K. & Yaghubi, J. (2018). Barriers of Urban Agriculture Development from Perspective of Agricultural Extension Experts in
Zanjan Province, Iran. Agricultural Extension and education Research, 11(3), pp. 59–68.
Jaar Abdul Khaliq, S., Ahmed, M., Al-Wardy, M., Al-Busaidi, A. & Choudri, B. S. (2017). Wastewater and Sludge Management and
Research in Oman: An Overview. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 67(3), pp. 267–278.
DOI:10.1080/10962247.2016.1243595.
Jasim, S. Y., Saththasivam, J., Loganathan, K., Ogunbiyi, O. O. & Sarp, S. (2016). Reuse of Treated Sewage Eluent (TSE) in Qatar.
Journal of Water Process Engineering, 11, pp. 174–182.
Jimenez, B. & Asano, T. (eds.). (2008). Water Reuse: An International Survey of Current Pratice, Issues and Needs. Scientific and

7 Marginal Water Resources for Food Production 139
Technical Report No. 20. London: IWA Publishing.
http://docshare04.docshare.tips/files/25777/257776745.pdf (accessed 6 November , 2019).
Karandish, F. & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2017). Informing National Food and Water Security Policy through Water Footprint Assessment:
The Case of Iran. Water, 9(11), 831. DOI:10.3390/w9110831.
Kayhanian, M. & Tchobanoglous, G. (2016). Water Reuse in Iran with an Emphasis on Potable Reuse. Scientia Iranica, 23(4),
pp . 15 94-1617.
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 127, pp. 221–232.
Kodithuwakku, S., Weerahewa, J. & Boughanmi, H. (2016). Food and Agricultural Trade in the GCC: An Opportunity for South Asia?
Review of Middle East Economics and Finance, 12(3), 473. DOI:10.1515/rmeef-2016-0010.
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A. & Seppälä, J. (2018). Circular Economy: The Concept and Its Limitations. Ecological Economics, 143,
pp. 37– 46.
Krane, J. (2018). Political Enablers of Energy Subsidy Reform in Middle Eastern Oil Exporters. Nat Energy, 3(7), pp. 547–552.
DOI:10.1038/s41560-018-0113-4.
Latouche, S. (2009). Farewell to Growth. Cambridge: Polity.
Madani, K., AghaKouchak, A. & Mirchi, A. (2016). Iran’s Socio-economic Drought: Challenges of a Water-Bankrupt Nation. Iranian
Studies, 49(6), pp. 997–1016. DOI:10.1080/00210862.2016.1259286.
Miller, J. W. & Atanda, T. (2011). The Rise of Peri-urban Aquaculture in Nigeria. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability,
9(1), pp. 274–281. DOI:10.3763/ijas.2010.0569.
Miller-Robbie, L., Ramaswami, A. & Amerasinghe, P. (2017). Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in Urban Agriculture: Exploring the
Food, Energy, Water, and Health Nexus in Hyderabad, India. Environmental Research Letters, 12(7), 75005.
DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/aa6bfe.
Ministry of Energy. (2010). Environmental Criteria of Treated Wastewater and Return Flow Reuse No.535, Islamic Republic of Iran.
https://abedi-koupai.iut.ac.ir/sites/abedi-koupai.iut.ac.ir/files/files_course/wastewater_applications-code535.pdf (accessed 6
November, 2019).
. (2016). The Data Collection Survey on Water Supply Sector in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12266953.pdf (accessed 20 May, 2019).
NWWEC (National Water and Wastewater Engineering Company). (2018). Water and Sewage Statistics Report.
https://www.nww.ir/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=M811NID5Nf8%3d&tabid=45&portalid=0&mid=524 (accessed 6 November, 2019).
Ouda, O. K. M. (2016). Treated Wastewater Use in Saudi Arabia: Challenges and Initiatives. International Journal of Water Resources
Development, 32(5), pp. 799–809. DOI:10.1080/07900627.2015.1116435.
Pirani, S. I. & Arafat, H. A. (2016).
Interplay of Food Security, Agriculture and Tourism within GCC Countries. Global Food Security, 9, pp. 1–9.
Rezaee, M. & Sarrafzadeh, M. H. (2017). Challenges and Opportunities for Wastewater Reuse in Municipal Consumptions:
A Case Study in Tehran Metropolis. Iran Water Resources Research, 12(4).
Saatsaz, M. (2019). A Historical Investigation on Water Resources Management in Iran. Environment, Development and
Sustainability, 22, pp. 1749-1785. DOI:10.1007/s10668-018-00307-y.
Saif, O., Mezher, T. & Arafat, H. A. (2014). Water Security in the GCC Countries: Challenges and Opportunities. Journal Environmental
Studies and Sciences, 4(4), pp. 329–346. DOI:10.1007/s13412-014-0178-8.
Schröder, P., Bengtsson, B., Cohen, M., Dewick, P., Hostetter, J. & Sarkis, J. (2019). Degrowth within – Aligning Circular Economy
and Strong Sustainability Narratives. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, pp. 190–191.
Tajrishy, M. (2012). Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in Iran: Situation Analysis. https://www.ais.unwater.org/ais/pluginfile.
php/356/mod_page/content/110/Iran_Paper%20Bonn%20%20version%202.1.pdf (accessed 6 November, 2019).
Tansim News Agency. (2019). “شیرین کردن آب دریا چقدر می تواند مشکل کم آبی را در کشور بر طرف کند؟.” Tansim News Agency,
April 19. https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/06/28/2099672/%D8%B4%DB%8C%D8%B1%DB%8
C%D9%86-%DA%A9%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%86-%D8%A2%D8%A8-%D8%AF%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%A7-
%DA%86%D9%82%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D9%85%DB%8C-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AF-
%D9%85%D8%B4%DA%A9%D9%84-%DA%A9%D9%85-%D8%A2%D8%A8%DB%8C-%D8%B1%D8%A7-%D8%AF%D8%B1-
%DA%A9%D8%B4%D9%88%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D8%B7%D8%B1%D9%81-%DA%A9%D9%86%D8%AF (accessed 6
November, 2019).
Woltersdorf, L., Scheidegger, R., Liehr, S. & Döll, P. (2016). Municipal Water Reuse for Urban Agriculture in Namibia: Modeling
Nutrient and Salt Flows as Impacted by Sanitation User Behavior. Journal of Environmental Management, 169, pp. 272–284.
Woltersdorf, L., Zimmermann, M., Dener, J., Gerlach, M. & Liehr, S. (2018). Benefits of an Integrated Water and Nutrient Reuse
System for Urban Areas in Semi-arid Developing Countries. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 128, pp. 382–393.
World Bank. (2019). World Bank Data. https://data.worldbank.org (accessed 12 May, 2019).
WHO (World Health Organization). (2005). A Regional Over view of Wastewater Management and Reuse in the Eastern
Mediterranean Region. http://applications.emro.who.int/dsaf/dsa759.pdf (accessed 19 November, 2019).
Zubari, W., Al-Turbak, A. S., Zahid, W., Al-Ruwis, K., Al-Tkhais, A., Al-Mutaz, I., Abdelwahab, A., Murad, A. A., Al-Harbi, M. & Al-
Sulaymani, Z. (2017). An Overview of the GCC Unified Water Strategy (2016-2035). Desalination and Water Treatment, 81, pp. 1-18.

©Lunamarina/Dreamstime.

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 141
8
SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation
in Southern Spain
Enrique Mesa-Perez, Alfonso Exposito, Rafael Casielles and Julio Berbel
Enrique Mesa-Perez, University of Cordoba, Spain.
e-mail: emesa@uco.es
Alfonso Exposito, Water, Environmental and Agricultural Resources Economics Research Group, Department of
Economic Analysis, University of Seville, Spain.
e-mail: aexposito@us.es
Rafael Casielles, Bioazul, S.L., Spain.
e-mail: rcasielles@bioazul.com
Julio Berbel, Water, Environmental and Agricultural Resources Economics Research Group, Agricultural
Economics, University of Cordoba, Spain.
e-mail: es1bevej@uco.es
Abstract
The EU project ‘Network for eective knowledge transfer on safe and economic wastewater reuse in agriculture in Europe
(SUWANU-Europe)’ aims to identify the limitations and factors of success in fostering the use of reclaimed water by the agricultural
sector in dierent European regions. This study shows the results of a SWOT (Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats)
analysis in the case of Andalusia (Southern region in Spain). The goal is to define a regional strategic plan to promote
the use of urban reclaimed water for irrigation purposes. The SWOT analysis carried out in this study has identified barriers and
challenges that still exist in the implementation of irrigation systems with reclaimed water. Among the main threats identified,
stakeholders’ perceptions and the higher cost of reclaimed water for irrigators (compared to alternative sources) play a relevant
role. Additionally, the excessive bureaucracy and long administrative processes are significant weaknesses to be considered.
On the other hand, technology availability and the increasing scarcity of conventional sources are seen as strength and
opportunity factors for the expansion of reclaimed water use for irrigation purposes.
Keywords
SWOT analysis, reclaimed water, water reuse, irrigation

142 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
01
Introduction
Water scarcity is a critical economic and environmental
problem in many regions of the world, as it is the case of
southern European countries. Water scarcity is a ‘long term’
imbalance between supply and demand where available
sources cannot satisfy the increasing economic and
societal priorities. Additionally, according to the European
Commission (2012), during the last forty years, drought
episodes in the EU have increased dramatically in frequency
and intensity. The number of areas and people aected by
drought events increased by almost 20% between 1976 and
2006. In that period, the economic cost of droughts recorded
in Europe was estimated at around € 100,000M and all this
in a context where water scarcity aects 11% of the European
population and 17% of the territory
of the EU (European Commission, 2012). In
southern Europe, the phenomenon of climate
change has increased temperatures, reduced
precipitation and changed the rainfall regime
(Valdes-Abellan et al., 2017). Consequently,
climate conditions have become unpredictable,
creating water availability tensions (Morote et
al., 2019).
Supply-side mechanisms have been
implemented by governments to avoid drought
eects and associated economic loses
(Berbel & Esteban, 2019). In some cases, like in
the Segura river basin, employing re-use water
for agricultural or urban irrigation allowed
the region to reduce the pressure on freshwater
resources and achieve a more sustainable use of
water (Morote et al., 2019). Specifically, the study
of Morote et al. (2019) concludes that the mixed-
use of water resources (e.g. by using reclaimed
water) could improve water availability in certain
regions of the world suering from critical water
scarcity.
Andalusia (in southern Spain) is a region with
severe water scarcity that leads to increasing
conflicts among dierent users (Expósito & Berbel, 2017,
2019). The region is technologically prepared to oer ter tiary
treatment that enables the reuse of reclaimed water for
irrigation (urban and/or agricultural) purposes. In fact, 33%
of the 2000 wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) operating
in Spain are located in Andalusia. Spain already reuses more
than 492 cubic hectometres of urban wastewater per year
(10.4 % of total treated urban wastewater). In the EU context,
the case of Cyprus constitutes a benchmark example of water
reuse for agricultural irrigation, where this water source has
a long tradition.
This research aims to identify and evaluate the relevance of
barriers and factors of success in implementing reclaimed
water as an alternative water source for the Andalusian
agricultural sector. To achieve this objective, a Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis has
been conducted in the frame of the “Network for eective
knowledge transfer on safe and economic wastewater reuse
in agriculture in Europe” project (SUWANU-Europe).
The SWOT analysis can support fur ther development of
a strategic management policy (Pickton & Wright, 1998).
Specifically, our analysis studies perceptions regarding
the strengths, weaknesses, oppor tunities and threats related
to the use of reclaimed water for irrigation, as expressed by
an interviewed group of experts and stakeholders involved
in the water and agricultural sectors, as well as from
other societal groups (e.g. consumers associations, public
institutions). With this aim, the analysis addresses a wide
range of aspects influencing and determining strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats for reclaimed water
reuse for irrigation purposes, including market-related,
product-related, social and governance aspects.
The SWOT analysis highlights the main
challenges to focus on future research to
facilitate the acceptance of reclaimed water
as an alternative water source for irrigation
purposes in Andalusia. In doing so, external
and internal barriers and challenges are
identified. Identified economic, social
and environmental benefits may also
be significant, thus facilitating the use
of reclaimed water. In fact, the cost of
reclaimed water supported by local agents
is close to 0.4 €/m3, which is significantly
lower than the cost of desalinated water
(0.6-0.8 €/m3) (Cabrera et al., 2019), thus
helping the economic viability of small farms
in coastal areas of Andalusia. Further, water
reclamation in coastal areas could provide
a net water contribution to southern water
basins by avoiding discharges to the sea,
thus improving water availability during
drought periods. Therefore, reclaimed
water oers a more environmentally
friendly water source alternative than
other non-conventional water sources (i.e.
desalination), capable of improving supply
reliability and mitigating climate change
impacts on the irrigation sector.
This paper is structured as follows. The next section describes
the Andalusian contextual characteristics in relation to
wastewater reuse. The SWOT methodology used in this study
is explained in Section 3. Results are explained in Section 4.
Finally, a brief discussion and some concluding remarks are
oered in Section 5.
Reclaimed water
oers a more
environmentally
friendly water
source alternative
than other non-
conventional water
sources, capable of
improving supply
reliability and
mitigating climate
change impacts
on the irrigation
sector.

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 143
02
Background and Case Study Description
This research is based on previous work done within the
framework of the EU funded project “Sustainable water
treatment and nutrient reuse options” (acronym: SUWANU1)
in 2012, where dierent aspects related to water reuse and
nutrient treatment were identified and evaluated in the EU
context (Michailidis et al., 2015). Further, the current project
SUWANU-Europe seeks to identify barriers and factors of
success in the implementation of reclaimed water use for
irrigation purposes, with special focus on certain EU regions,
such as Andalusia (southern Spain), with significant potential
benefits.
The use of reclaimed water is seen by many scholars and
policy makers as a means to implement a circular economy
and resource eiciency in the water sector, both by reusing
water and recycling nutrients embedded in the eluents,
as declared by the implementation of the Circular Economy
Action Plan by the EU. That Plan includes the implementation
of measures for waste water reuse as an essential part of
the global strategy (European Commission, 2015).
Recently, the EU published the “Proposal for a Regulation
of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum
requirements for water reuse” (European Commission, 2018).
Its aim is to foster the use of reclaimed water in agriculture
irrigation to reduce the use of common water sources (surface
freshwater and groundwater). For that reason, the final
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of
the Council (European Commission, 2018) aims to increase
the confidence in this type of water and minimise potential
risks through the establishment of high-quality requirements
in the whole EU. In the same sense, dierent studies agreed
about the suitability of reclaimed water as an alternative
water source to replace common water sources use (Morote et
al., 2019; Navarro, 2018). Areas with water scarcity like Israel,
California or Australia have already implemented projects
to reuse wastewater for dierent uses, such as golf course
irrigation, industrial uses or even tap water uses
(Mainali et al., 2011a). In the EU, the use of reclaimed water is
more common in the Mediterranean countries.
The case of Cyprus is the keystone, but also Greece,
or some regions in Spain are implementing the use of
reclaimed water as an alternative water resource
(Berbel & Esteban, 2019; Morote et al., 2019; Navarro, 2018;
Ter rado s et al., 2007).
Sea River Reuse Groundwater
Spain 33.5 55.8 10.4 0.2
Andalusia 58.0 36.1 5.9 0.0
Aragón
0.0 99.2 0.8 0.0
Asturias
21.7 74.5 3.8 0.0
Balearic Islands
59.6 7.3 33.0 0.0
Canarias 77.9 2.1 19.8 0.2
Cantabria 79.5 18.8 1.7 0.0
Castilla y León 0.0 99.1 0.9 0.0
Castilla-La Mancha 0.0 96.2 3.8 0.0
Cataluña 66.3 28.7 4.9 0.1
Comunidad Valenciana 16.5 33.6 47.5 2.4
Extremadura 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
Galicia 30.5 60.7 8.8 0.0
Madrid 0.0 97.7 2.3 0.0
Murcia 11.5 16.7 71.8 0.0
Navarra 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
País Vasco 67.7 31.4 0.9 0.0
La Rioja 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
Ceuta y Melilla 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8-1 P ercentage of wastewater accord ing to the point of discharge (Source: INE, 2 016. Authors’ elaboration)

144 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
The study of Mainali et al. (2011a) followed a SWOT analysis to
investigate which factors determine the success or failure of
dierent implementation processes of water reuse.
They concluded that public acceptance is essential to success
in the implementation of reclaimed water for potable,
irrigation, environmental restoration or industrial uses.
Moreover, societal agreement among all involved groups
and stakeholders constitutes a prerequisite for success,
and not allaying stakeholders’ doubts about health risks,
public opposition, political disinterest, and information
manipulation constitute the main causes of failure of
reclaimed water projects.
The region of Andalusia has an area of 87,268 km2.
Its Mediterranean climate is characterised by dry and hot
summers, warm winters and irregular rainfall.
The total annual rainfall varies according to the climate
area of the region. Average rainfall is 750 mm/year, though
the mountainous areas of Aracena, Cazorla-Segura and
Grazalema reach a higher average of 2,000 mm/year.
The main water sources in Andalusia are surface water (76.6%)
and groundwater (28.2%) (INE, 2016). Other alternative
sources, such as reclaimed water, do not register significant
figures (1.2% in 2016). Despite this fact, wastewater treatment
has followed a very positive evolution in Andalusia since
1984, from 55 up to 695 WWTPs in 2017 (Junta de Andalucía,
2017). The total population served is 7.2 million inhabitants,
although 12.40% of the total population of Andalusia still
remains without an appropriate wastewater treatment
service. The total volume of wastewater treated in Andalusian
amounts to 698 hm3/year, thus representing a significant
water source to reuse.
The use of reclaimed wastewater in Spain is regulated by
the Royal Decree 1620/2007 ‘Wastewater reuse standards’.
This Decree was approved at the national level during the long
drought event, which occurred in the period 2005-2008,
as a measure to facilitate the use of alternative water
resources. The Decree was based on existing regulations
in similar regions, for example in California (Berbel & Esteban,
2019). Despite regional dierences, Royal Decree 1620/2007
has represented an important advance to standardize
wastewater reuse practices (Iglesias et al., 2010). As shown
in Table 8-1, in 2016, Mediterranean regions like Murcia,
Comunidad Valenciana and the Balearic Islands reused 71.8%,
47.5% and 33.0% of the total treated urban wastewater,
respectively. These three regions represent 90% of total water
reused in Spain (INE, 2016). Andalusia, although located
in the southern Mediterranean area and with serious water
scarcity problems, only reuses 5.90% of the treated urban
wastewater.
The percentage of treated water reused represents 5.90%
in 2016, while in 2014 it was 7.83% and in 2013, it was 8.31%
(INE, 2016). Through an in-depth analysis about the uses of
reclaimed water, we found that in 2016, 69.20% of treated
water was used for gardens and golf courses, while only 2.50%
of the reclaimed water was used for agricultural irrigation
(INE, 2016).
03
Material and Methods
Existing literature concludes that SWOT is an adequate
method for strategic analysis in fields related to resource
management, such as water reuse (Mainali et al., 2011b),
solid waste management (Srivastava et al., 2005) or regional
energy planning (Terrados et al., 2007). This methodological
tool allows the identification of factors influencing
the development of a management initiative (Pickton &
Wright, 1998). In doing so, the SWOT analysis tool applied in
this study allows the identification of strategic factors that
should receive attention for the development of a regional
strategy for the use of reclaimed water (Houben et al., 1999).
This research takes the aspects identified by Michailidis
et al. (2015) to focus on all kinds of aspects influencing/
determining strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats for reclaimed water reuse, including market related
(economic, availability and market aspects), product-related
(technical and technological transfer aspects), and social
and governance (social awareness, regulation, management,
institutional, environmental) aspects. With the objective
of updating these aspects, a four-step process has been
followed: Firstly, in order to update the information, existing
aspects from SUWANU (2012) were analysed by ten Spanish
experts, who reconsidered their suitability and identified
new factors/aspects to take into account. This group of
experts comprised distinguished scholars, policy-makers and
business practitioners in the Spanish water sector.
They also evaluated if the roles assigned to the dierent
aspects was right, e.g. whether an aspect that was evaluated
as an opportunity actually represented an opportunity
in the current context or not. Secondly, once their comments
were received, the aspects identified were discussed
individually by the Spanish partners of the SUWANU-Europe
(2019) consortium in a working session, with the aim to
contrast all received information and decide whether
the dierent aspects included in each group (strengths,
opportunities, weaknesses and threats) were adequate to
ensure water reuse in Andalusia. Considering the comments
received from the 10 independent experts and those of
the members of the project consortium, the list of aspects to
be evaluated in each group was selected. The third step was
the development of a questionnaire to evaluate the relevance
of identified aspects in each group (see Appendix for a link to
the questionnaire in Spanish).
The questionnaire was tested by two external experts and
the consortium partners in order to produce the final version.
The questionnaire uses a Likert scale from 1 (not relevant) to
5 (very relevant) to assess the relevance of the SWOT factors/
aspects identified. The questionnaire permits respondents to
rank the dierent aspects within each group according to the
average relevance given by the consulted experts.
Finally, the fourth step consisted in sending the questionnaire
to a group of national experts and stakeholders.

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 145
The potential respondents were identified from the state-
of-the-art review made by all par ticipants in the SUWANU-
Europe project (SUWANU-Europe Deliverable 1.1, available on
the project’s website2) where relevant actors with an active
role in water reuse were identified. Selected respondents
were involved in a wide variety of organizations, both public
and private, representing dierent interests and views
regarding water reuse in Spain. Furthermore, relevant actors
and institutions (e.g. Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Spanish
Ministry for Ecological Transition, Consumers organizations),
which have an active role in decision making, were also
invited to participate.
04
Results
Twenty-two responses were received to the questionnaire
sent to a group of national experts. Among these
22 responses, the key actors that answered the questionnaire
belong to the following groups: researchers (7), members
of NGOs (5), members of utilities (4), users (2), public
administration (2) and agri-food firms (2). The following tables
show the classification of the dierent aspects on a scale from
1 (not relevant) to 5 (very relevant), as assessed by the group
of Spanish exper ts responding the questionnaire.
The reported results combine both the new aspects or factors
and those identified by the former SUWANU project (2012).
Results of the SWOT analysis are presented in a step-by-step
manner in order to facilitate its comprehension.
SWOT is an
adequate method
for strategic
analysis in fields
related to resource
management,
such as water
reuse.

146 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
4.1. Strength
A total of eleven strengths were identified in
the questionnaire following the process described in Section
3. According to the experts’ evaluation, the most relevant
aspects to consider are (Table 8-2): “Water availability
guaranteed even in drought periods”; “National and
European regulations are available to ensure the sanitary
and environmental quality of reclaimed water for agricultural
irrigation”; “The quality and safety of food crops irrigated
with reclaimed water has been scientifically documented
by numerous international projects”; and “Reclaimed
water use mixed with other water resources (surface water,
groundwater, etc.)”.
These aspects show how the use of reclaimed water for
irrigation allows access to a water resource despite
the existence of drought periods or climate change eects.
This aspect is supported by the European Union and
the Spanish national legislation to promote the gradual use of
this water for irrigation, although it also requires strict quality
controls to avoid potential health risks.
The average evaluation of most items has received an average
score of 4.3, as can be also obser ved in Figure 8-1.
This result shows the high relevance assigned by
the consulted experts to these strength aspects to promote
the use of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes.
No Strengths Item Explanation Score
F7 Increasing supply reliability Water availability guaranteed even in drought periods 4.7
F3 Legislation
National and European regulations are available to ensure
the sanitary and environmental quality of reclaimed water
for agricultural irrigation
4.6
F2 Quality perception
The quality and safety of food crops irrigated with reclaimed
water has been scientifically documented by numerous
international projects
4.5
F9 Mixed resources Reclaimed water use mixed with other water resources
(surface water, groundwater, etc.) 4.5
F1 Previous cases Numerous success stories are available on local water reuse
projects for agricultural irrigation 4.4
F5 Climate change adaptation
Reclaimed water oers a more environmentally friendly
water source alternative, capable of mitigating climate
change eects, than other conventional or sophisticated
water sources such as desalination
4.3
F4 Environmental Practice Irrigating with reclaimed water is considered as
an environmental practice 4.2
F8 Alternative resource in the coast
Water reclamation in coastal areas provides a net water
contribution to water basins, by preventing the irrecoverable
loss of freshwater discharged to the sea
4.2
F10 Groundwater support Reclaimed water can be used as an alternative source
(no mix at the source) 4.2
F11 Reclaimed water project support
Existence of projects that promote a better perception of
using reclaimed water with the support of the health systems
authorities
4.2
F6 Water nutrients
Reclaimed water provides a natural supply of nutrients
(nitrogen and phosphorus), in a very similar way to
fertirrigation.
3.9
Total average score 4.3
Figure 8-1 Strengths relevance
Table 8-2 Strength aspects

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 147
4.2. Weaknesses
As shown by Table 8-3, weaknesses related to “Wholesalers
and vendors of agricultural food crops have a very limited
knowledge about the implications and public health and
safety impacts of using reclaimed water for irrigation” and
“The quality of the wastewater treated eluents (inflows
to the water reclamation facility) does not comply with
applicable regulatory limits” are identified as relevant.
This last aspect refers to the WWTPs which do not comply
with the defined standards (EU Directive 91/271) before
this treated water enters the reclamation facility.
Special attention should be paid to the situation explained
in Section 2, since 12% of Andalusian population still lacks
adequate wastewater treatment service. Due to this fact,
the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg sanctioned
Spain at the end of July 2018. Despite the relevance of
the quality dimension of reused water, the most relevant
aspect identified by the respondents is the lack of interest
in the food-chain industry about the quality standards of
reclaimed water and the system of quality assurance (i.e. risk
assessment and quality monitoring plan) needed to secure
a high-quality water source.
Additionally, it is worth noting that the aspect “Reclaimed
water is too expensive for a significant part of the agricultural
sector” is highlighted as the second most relevant weakness.
Though the production of reclaimed water is less expensive
than desalinated water (0.4 vs 0.6 €/m3), this costs must
be supplemented with transport and storage costs, thus
discouraging its use by irrigators.
Finally, it seems interesting that several weaknesses have
been considered as less relevant (Figure 8-2), such as
the small size of many irrigation districts and the limited
supply of reclaimed water in certain irrigation areas.
This analysis has shown that main challenges to be addressed
by a future regional strategy would be: the promotion of
information among food-chain agents, the guarantee of
quality standards of reclaimed water, and cost aordability
by irrigators.
No Weaknesses Item Explanation Score
D19 Food chain lack of interest
Wholesalers and vendors of agricultural food crops have very
limited knowledge about the implications and public health
safety of using reclaimed water for irrigation
4.2
D12 Cost Reclaimed water is too expensive for a significant part
of the agricultural sector 4.0
D16 Deficient WWTP
The quality of the wastewater treated eluents
(inflows to the water reclamation facility) does not comply
with applicable regulatory limits
4.0
D14 Reclaimed water distribution from
WWTP
The distance between the water reclamation facility
(normally in an urban setting) and the irrigation areas
requires pumping of reclaimed water
3.9
D17 Reclaimed water storage Reclaimed water needs to be collected for seasonal irrigation 3.6
D13 Energy consumption deficient Control of the energy costs involved in water reclamation is
very diicult 3.5
D15 Scarcity of reclaimed water Reclaimed water is limited in numerous agricultural areas/
zones 3.2
D20 Agricultural sector size small
Agricultural irrigation with reclaimed water is a small activity
sector, unable to feel motivated for participating in large
innovation projects
2.4
D18 Few crops Irrigation Districts are small, made up of a limited number of
users 2.2
Total average score 3.8
Figure 8-2 Weaknesses relevance
Table 8-3 Weaknesses aspects

148 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
4.3. Opportunities
In the case of opportunity aspects, the most relevant seem
to be (Table 8-4): “The Royal Decree 1620/2007 (Spanish
legislation) oers assurance to farmers and consumers on
the potential public health impacts associated with the
consumption of food crops irrigated with reclaimed water”;
and “There is growing social concern about the eects of
future water droughts and scarcity episodes, associated with
the weather irregularity resulting from climate change”.
The existence of a European regulation (European
Commission, 2018) oering clear rules for irrigating with
reclaimed water and bringing security to stakeholders is
identified as the most relevant opportunit y aspect. Therefore,
the development of European and national regulations to
guarantee quality standards represent a powerful means to
promote confidence on the use of reclaimed water among
irrigators and general public. However, the EU regulation
on minimum requirements for water reuse, although it was
favourably voted by the EU Parliament in Februar y 2019, is not
yet in force and needs to complete the full legislative process3.
This situation might explain the contradictory perception of
respondents, who consider the existing policy framework
as an opportunity though the lack of compliance with the
regulatory limits also constitutes a relevant weakness.
In this sense, the development of an ecolabel and clear quality
standards at European level for reclaimed water, as a result of
being considered an ecological product, might also represent
a potential opportunity to foster its use. Other aspects,
such as water scarcity concerns, the limits to use surface
water for irrigation, as well as the occurrence of more frequent
and long drought periods, were identified as especially
relevant oppor tunity sources. Experts seem to agree on
the opportunity that the use of reclaimed water represents
for a region such as Andalusia in terms of higher water supply
reliability in a context of climate change with increasing water
scarcity.
No Opportunities Item Explanation Score
O36 Legislation
The RD 1620/2007 oers assurance to farmers and consumers
on the potential public health impacts associated to the
consumption of food crops irrigated with reclaimed water
4.6
O31 Water scarcity concern
There is growing social concern about the eects of future
water droughts and scarcity episodes, associated to the
weather irregularity resulting from climate change
4.5
O25 Limits to surface water
Limitations in surface water supplies for agricultural
irrigation (4,500 m3/ha-year) can be compensated by using
reclaimed water flows
4.2
O26 Droughts periods Increased urban water abstractions during drought periods
may limit the availability of water for irrigation 4.2
O34 Reclaimed water standards
The new European regulation oers clear rules for irrigating
with reclaimed water, on a European context, bringing
security to growers and consumers
4.2
O38 Groundwater salt level increase Reclaimed water oers a favourable option to counteract
increased salinity of groundwater 4.2
O23 Zero waste strategy
The growing interest in the "Zero Waste" option within the
circular and green economy is stimulating the consideration
of alternative water sources into the political debate
4
Figure 8-3 Opportunities relevance
Table 8- 4 Opportunities aspects

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 149
O30 Information availability Successful studies are available on the positive eects of
reclaimed water on cultivation of food crops 4
O29 Ecological agriculture The use of reclaimed water is a potential favourable feature
of organic farming 3.9
O32 Alternative water sources
Social concern for future water resources is promoting
the development of alternative sources of water,
such as reclaimed water
3.9
O33 Climate change concern
There is a growing social awareness of the need to seek
alternative sources of water in view of the irregular rainfall
associated to climate change
3.9
O37 Groundwater overuse The use of reclaimed water can significantly help in
mitigating over-exploitation of aquifers 3.9
O24 Conventional sources price increase
The cost of water reclamation may be lower than water
abstraction from other natural water sources, such as
groundwater
3.8
O28 50% of reclaimed water use How possible do you consider the possibility to reuse the
50% of water in agriculture 3.8
O39 Crops distance from cities
The proximity of agricultural areas to population centres
(source of reclaimed water) considerably helps in promoting
irrigation with reclaimed water
3.7
O22 Water cost distribution The cost of reclaimed water can be jointly covered by water
reclamation agencies and agricultural irrigation users 3.6
O21 Water license for irrigation Possibility to exchange freshwater license for reclaimed
water ones 3.5
O27 Tourist areas near the crops
Higher water consumption in tourist areas during the peak
season may limit the availability of water for agricultural
irrigation
3.5
O35 EU reclaimed water promotion
The EU is definitely interested in promoting the use of
reclaimed water (Directive 91/271/ECC, art. 12, and new
Regulation on irrigation with reclaimed water)
3.3
Total average score 3.9

150 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
4.4. Threats
Within the identified threats, (Table 8-5): “Wholesalers
of food crops reject agricultural products irrigated with
reclaimed water”; “Irrigation with reclaimed water lacks
public acceptance in Andalusia”; and “Excessive bureaucracy
needed for irrigating with reclaimed water” were identified
as main threats for the promotion of the use of reclaimed
water for irrigation in Andalusia. With excessive bureaucracy,
we refer to the long administrative process needed to obtain
the final use entitlement, including municipal and regional
permissions, as well as environmental impact assessments.
This result seems paradoxical, since the existing legislation is
also understood as a strength (referred to the national Royal
Decree 1620/2007) by providing confidence to farmers and
general public on public health impacts, though
the long administrative process and complexities set by
existing legislation are perceived as a serious threat.
Two of the most important threats are related to the lack of
acceptance of products irrigated with reclaimed water
by the food chain agents and the general public.
This result is related to one of the main weaknesses identified
previously, the lack of public acceptance. These findings are
similar to those found by Mainali et al. (2011a) in previous
reclaimed water implementation projects, where the lack of
public acceptance and participation in the reclaimed water
implementation process were considered the main cause of
failure. In this line, the quality standards (at European level)
and potential impacts on public health should be clearly
specified in order to promote public acceptance of reclaimed
water as a safe water source.
Threats received the lowest average score within the dierent
categories of aspects evaluated by the respondents. Similar
to the weaknesses group, this average score may reflect that
consulted experts consider that there are more positive than
negative aspects in fostering the implementation of reclaimed
water as an alternative water source for irrigation
in Andalusia.
Figure 8-4 Threats relevance
No Threats Item Explanation Score
A43 Food chain lack of acceptance Wholesalers of food crops reject agricultural products
irrigated with reclaimed water 4.2
A44 Lack of public support Irrigation with reclaimed water lacks public acceptance in
Andalusia 4
A45 Excessive bureaucracy Excessive bureaucracy needed for irrigating with reclaimed
water 4
A41 Low profits crops The low value of agricultural products in certain areas
prevents the use of reclaimed water 3.9
A48 Political lack of goodwill Lack of political goodwill to make reforms to promote
reclaimed water 3.9
A40 Reclaimed water cost
Reclaimed water use in irrigation has an high cost for a
significant part of the Spanish agricultural sector
(low value crops)
3.9
A46 Commercial issues aecting reclaimed
water use
The use of reclaimed water can be an excuse for unfair
trading of agricultural food crops 3.7
A47 Cities priority Urban and industrial uses will become priorities for
allocating available supplies of reclaimed water 3.4
A42 Excessive reclaimed water demand Water flows required for irrigation exceed reclaimed water
flows 3.2
Total average score 3.8
Table 8- 5 Threats items

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 151
05
Discussion and Concluding Remarks
This research aims to identify the barriers and factors of
success that determine the use of reclaimed water as
an alternative water source. The SWOT analysis performed is
part of a more ambitious planning process and constitutes
a step further in the regional diagnosis of the Andalusian
water reuse sector. This analysis leads to structuring and
prioritizing of the most relevant aspects identified in
the characterization of the Andalusian water reuse sector.
The SWOT analysis constitute the prior step to define specific
objectives and priority actions for Andalusia.
The participation of the dierent actors in the consulting
process has been essential to guarantee the co-creation of
strategies and consequently, to increase further acceptance
of reclaimed water as an alternative source. Therefore,
the knowledge gained in the SWOT analysis will culminate
in the preparation of a Regional Strategic Plan to promote
reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in
Andalusia.
Previous research has concluded that this
alternative water source facilitates climate
change adaptation in a context of increasing
water scarcity and drought events,
as it is the case in other parts of southern
Spain and in the Mediterranean region.
Successful initiatives in other regions of the
world (e.g. Cyprus and Israel) seem to confirm
that the use of reclaimed water might become
an adequate strategy to achieve higher supply
reliability for irrigation and mitigate water
scarcity conflicts. Nevertheless, special attention should be
paid to the weaknesses and threats identified in the specific
case of Andalusia.
The SWOT analysis carried out by SUWANU Europe and the
subsequent research analysis conducted above, have shown
that three main groups of aspects should receive special
attention: water scarcity, stakeholders’ perception and
administrative or legislative issues. Key consulted actors
mostly agreed on the relevance of these issues,
thus expressing the need to be considered in the design of
the regional strategy. Our SWOT analysis highlights
the main issues identified. Firstly, legislation is perceived as
a strength (existing norms), as well as an opportunity (future
legislation), since the awareness of increasing resource
scarcity is growing in society and the existence of strict
quality requirements could increase trust in this alternative
water source. On the other hand, the lack of interest by
the food distribution system is seen as a weakness, as well
as a threat (i.e. the non-acceptance of reused water in food
production). Similarly, the high cost of reclaimed water for
irrigators, compared to the current low cost of surface and
groundwater resources, is seen as a weakness that needs to
be addressed. Nevertheless, reclaimed water is less expensive
than desalinated water, which constitutes an opportunity to
decrease water cost for irrigators in the arid areas of eastern
Andalusia (e.g. greenhouse crops in Almeria). Additionally,
the excessive bureaucracy and long administrative processes
to obtain a water use entitlement are considered a threat
to be addressed. Reclaimed water licenses in Andalusia
are mostly focused in irrigating gardens and golf courses.
As previously explained in the region background section,
only 2.5% of total reclaimed water is used for agricultural
irrigation in Andalusia. In 2017 the Andalusian government
set the goal of 20 hm3 of reclaimed water to be allocated to
the agricultural irrigation sector though this goal has not be
fulfilled by the end of 2019. Lack of political will in
the facilitation of new reclaimed water entitlements and long
administrative processes could explain this delay.
Groundwater over-abstraction and the poor status of some
waterbodies can be eased with the introduction of alternative
water sources, such as reclaimed water. As previous literature
has shown, public awareness is a key factor to successfully
implement the use of reclaimed water in agriculture.
Information campaigns about the use of reclaimed water and
the quality assurance schemes for
the products irrigated with this water seem
crucial to increase interest and acceptance
by the food industry and general public.
Moreover, it is worth noting the relevance
of integrating reclaimed water into general
resources management. New supply sources
should not increase demand through larger
irrigated areas, but should reduce the pressure
on existing water resources under stress,
both surface and groundwater bodies.
With this aim, water management institutions
should guarantee an adequate control of water
abstractions and limitation of irrigated areas
as prerequisites to avoid the increase of water consumption.
The use of diversified sources (e.g. reclaimed, groundwater,
surface and desalinated water) should result in more reliable
and sustainable water use. Additionally, the use of nutrients
contained in reclaimed water should be considered as
an example of a circular economy in practice.
In summary, the low level achieved in the use of reclaimed
water in Andalusia, as deduced from the SWOT analysis
carried out in this study, can be explained by certain aspects.
Among them, the following aspects need to be highlighted:
lack of clear quality standards to guarantee acceptance
among food-chain agents and general public, deficient
performance of WWTPs, higher costs for irrigators (including
production, transportation and storage) and the bureaucratic
process to obtain use entitlements.
Public awareness
is a key factor
to successfully
implement the use
of reclaimed water
in agriculture.

152 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
Acknowledgements
This research is par t of the EU project SUWANU-Europe which is a thematic network funded by the EC under the H2020 programme
(contract number: 818088). The authors want to acknowledge the support of participating experts and partners throughout
the project and assume the responsibility for all airmations contained in this document.
References
Berbel, J. & Esteban, E. (2019). Droughts as a Catalyst for Water Policy Change. Analysis of Spain, Australia (MDB), and California.
Global Environmental Change, 58, 101969. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101969.
Cabrera, E., Estrela, T. & Lora, J. (2019). Pasado, Presente y Futuro de la Desalación en España. Ingeniería del Agua, 23(3),
pp. 199-214.
European Commission. (2012). Report on the Review of the European Water Scarcit y and Droughts Policy. Communication from
the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions. COM/2012/ 672 final. European Commission, Brussels.
. (2015). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Closing the loop - An EU action plan for the Circular Economy. COM/2015/0614
final. European Commission, Brussels.
. (2018). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Minimum Requirements for Water
Reuse. COM/2018/337 final - 2018/0169 (COD). European Commission, Brussels.
Expósito, A. & Berbel, J. (2017). Agricultural Irrigation Water Use in a Closed Basin and the Impacts on Water Productivity: The Case
of the Guadalquivir River Basin (Southern Spain). Water, 9(2), pp. 136-150. Retrieved from https://doi.org/103390/w9020136.
. (2019). Drivers of Irrigation Water Productivit y and Basin Closure Process: Analysis of the Guadalquivir River Basin (Spain).
Water Resources Management, 33(4), pp. 1439-1450. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-018-2170-7.
Houben, G., Lenie, K. & Vanhoof, K. (1999). A Knowledge-based SWOT-Analysis System as an Instrument for Strategic Planning in
Small and Medium Sized Enterprises. Decision Support Systems, 26(2), pp. 125–135.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(99)00024-X.
Iglesias, R., Or tega, E., Batanero, G. & Quintas, L. (2010). Water Reuse in Spain: Data Overview and Costs Estimation of Suitable
Treatment Trains. Desalination, 263(1-3), pp. 1-10.
Junta de Andalucía. (2017). Informe Medioambiental de Andalucía. Last consult, 11 November.
Retrieved from http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/medioambiente/vem/?c=Tabla/indicador/2799.
Mainali, B., Ngo, H. H., Guo, W., Pham, T. T. N., Wang, X. C. & Johnston, A . (2011a). SWOT Analysis to Assist Identification of the Critical
Factors for the Successful Implementation of Water Reuse Schemes. Desalination and Water Treatment, 32(1–3), pp. 297–306.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2714.
Mainali, B., Ngo, H. H., Guo, W., Pham, T. T. N. & Johnston, A. (2011b). Feasibility Assessment of Recycled Water Use for Washing
Machines in Australia through SWOT Analysis. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 56(1), pp. 87–91.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.007.
Michailidis, A., Papadaki-Klavdianou, A., Apostolidou, I., Lorite, I. J., Pereira, F. A., Mirko, H., Buhagiar, J., Shilev, S., Michaelidis, S.,
Loizou, E., Chatzitheodoridis, F., Restoy, R. C. & Lopez, A. L. (2015). Exploring Treated Wastewater Issues Related to Agriculture in
Europe, Employing a Quantitative SWOT Analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance, 33(15), pp. 367–375.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(15)01721-9.
Morote, Á. F., Olcina, J. & Hernández, M. (2019). The Use of Non-Conventional Water Resources as a Means of Adaptation to Drought
and Climate Change in Semi-arid Regions: South-eastern Spain. Water, 11(1).
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/w11010093.
INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadística). (2016). Water Statistics. Instituto Nacional de Estadística [National Institute of Statistics],
Madrid, Spain. Retrieved from https://www.ine.es.
Navarro, T. (2018). Water Reuse and Desalination in Spain – Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Water Reuse and Desalination,
8(2), pp. 153–168. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2166/wrd.2018.043.
Pickton, D. W. & Wright, S. (1998). What’s Swot in Strategic Analysis? Strategic Change, 7(2), pp. 101–109.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1697(199803/04)7:2<101::aid-jsc332>3.0.co;2-6.
Srivastava, P. K., Kulshreshtha, K., Mohanty, C. S., Pushpangadan, P. & Singh, A. (2005). Stakeholder-based SWOT Analysis for
Successful Municipal Solid Waste Management in Lucknow, India. Waste Management, 25(5), pp. 531–537.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2004.08.010.
Terrados, J., Almonacid, G. & Hontoria, L. (2007). Regional Energy Planning through SWOT Analysis and Strategic Planning Tools:
Impact on Renewables Development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11(6), pp. 1275–1287.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.08.003.
Valdes-Abellan, J., Pardo, M. A. & Tenza-Abril, A. J. (2017). Observed Precipitation Trend Changes in the Western Mediterranean
Region. International Journal of Climatology, 37(S1), pp. 1285–1296. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4984.

8 SWOT Analysis of Reclaimed Water Use for Irrigation in Southern Spain 153
Appendix
Online questionnaire can be found in the following link: https://forms.gle/PJqAYXRNEuGogYDa8 (In Spanish)
Notes
1. Grant Agreement number 319998.
2. Available at the SUWANU-Europe project website: https://suwanu-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/D1.1_Regional-
state-of-play-analyses.pdf.
3. European Commission press release, 3 December 2019. “Water reuse: Commission welcomes the provisional agreement on
minimum requirements for water reuse in agriculture”. Retrieved December 18, 2019 from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/
presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6652.

©Alucardion/Shutterstock.

9 Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 155
9
Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management
Practices in Nigeria
Emmanuel M. Akpabio
Emmanuel M. Akpabio, Department of Geography & Natural Resources Management, Faculty of Social Sciences, University
of Uyo, Nigeria.
e-mail: emakpabio@yahoo.com
Abstract
This paper explores wastewater production, reuse and management practices in Nigeria through a systematic review of literature.
Findings note that wastewater production in Nigeria comes from the residential, commercial, industrial and institutional places
as well as storm water run-o. Reuse is found in agricultural irrigation, landscaping irrigation, building and construction, industrial
recycling and reuse, and non-potable urban uses. Reuse has been useful as coping mechanisms against inadequate freshwater
supplies occasioned by population pressures, increased socio-economic activities and a corresponding rise in urbanization,
as well as climate change impacts. Most Nigerians in the low income categor y use untreated wastewater, and this is likely to
constitute environmental and public health risks. This lack of treatment calls for urgent organizational and regulatory frameworks
to guarantee environmental and public health and safety arising from wastewater reuse. This paper is expected to raise public
understanding of the public health perspectives of informal wastewater reuse, guide any future development of comprehensive
wastewater reuse policies and plans for Nigeria, as well as enhance further research.
Keywords
Wastewater market, wastewater economy, informal wastewater reuse, Nigeria, sub-Saharan Africa

156 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
01
Introduction
The practice of reusing wastewater
(treated or untreated) to complement the water
resources needs for domestic, agriculture,
industry and other purposes has intensified
since the beginning of the 21 century.
This trend is a result of competition for the use
of freshwater resources, as well as the growing
demand for an alternative economic vision built
around sustainable development and zero waste
tolerance. Wastewater production and discharge
are experienced at residential, commercial and
institutional places as blackwater (excreta, urine
and faecal sludge) and greywater (wastewater
produced in bath tubs, showers, handwashing
basins, laundry machines and kitchen sinks in
household, oices, schools and commercial
buildings etc). Relatively large-scale production
and discharge of wastewater come in forms
of industrial eluent, storm water and other
urban run-o; and discharge from agricultural,
horticultural and aquacultural activities
(Corcoran et al., 2010 p. 7). Their reuse is found
in agricultural irrigation, landscaping irrigation,
industrial recycling and reuse, groundwater
recharge, recreational/environmental uses, non-portable
urban and potable urban uses (see Adewumi & Oguntuase,
2016) (Table 9-1).
The rise in urbanisation and population growth leads to
a corresponding rise in demands for food, water, shelter,
energy, employment and pleasure, etc.,
which are all dependent on availability and
stable supplies of water. But freshwater
availability is becoming increasingly
threatened due largely to pressure from
competing uses as well as the impact of
climate change. Wastewater reuse holds
the prospect of complementing freshwater
needs, and aligns well with the sustainable
development and circular economy
principles, which aim to secure intra-
and inter-generational equity in access
and development benefits with minimal
tolerance for waste.
The UN sustainable development goal (SDG)
6 aims to ‘ensure availability and sustainable
management of water and sanitation for all’
by 2030. The sustainable management of
water resources is central to addressing
the growing threats to freshwater water
security. It resonates with other goals
including poverty elimination, zero hunger,
and good health and wellbeing (Goals
1, 2 and 3 respectively). It equally seeks
Domains of wastewater
Possible uses
Remarks
Agricultural irrigation Crop irrigation; commercial
nurseries
Widely used for urban farming and to complement
irrigation sources in drought-prone areas.
Landscape irrigation
Parks, school yards, freeway
medians, golf courses,
cemeteries, greenbelts and
residence
Complements landscape irrigation in contexts of
competitive freshwater demands
Industrial recycling and
reuse
Cooling, boiler feed, process
water and heavy construction
Treated, they are widely and commercially used in
the building/construction industry (block moulding and
brick laying), reinforcement of concrete structures.
Groundwater recharge Groundwater replenishment,
salt water intrusion control
This is a widespread practice in arid and semi-arid
regions
Recreational/
environmental uses
Lakes and ponds, marsh
enhancement, stream flow
augmentation, fisheries,
snowmaking
This is a widespread practice in arid and semi-arid
regions
Non potable urban uses
Fire protection, air
conditioning, toilet flushing,
irrigation
Reuse of treated/untreated wastewater in toilet flushing
is widespread in domestic and commercial places mostly
among low income population. They are also available for
use in areas experiencing water scarcity
Potable reuse
Blending in water supply
reservoir, pipe to pipe water
supply
A major source for augmenting water supply in water
scarce regions
Wastewater
recovery and
reuse will not only
ensure wastage is
minimised, it has
the potential of
complementing
the goal of
guaranteeing
water security for
human wellbeing
and socioeconomic
development.
Table 9-1 Wastewater reu se categories (Source: Adewumi & Oguntuase, 2016)

9 Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 157
to: improve the quality of education for the children (by
minimising the average time involved in securing daily water
supplies-Goal 4); secure gender equality (by reducing the
burden on women, oen saddled with the responsibility
of securing access to water for domestic use in developing
countries-Goal 5); guarantee sustainable economic growth
and cities (Goals 8 and 11); and secure life on land (Goal 15),
among others.
Securing adequate supplies of water in quantity and quality
is crucial to the SDGs agenda. Wastewater recovery and reuse
will not only ensure wastage is minimised, it has the potential
of complementing the goal of guaranteeing water security for
human wellbeing and socioeconomic development,
in addition to loosening excessive pressure on the available
freshwater resources necessary for ecological protection.
Global statistics on wastewater reuse is growing and par tly
facilitated by technological innovation (see Adewumi &
Oguntuase 2016 for a review). Rough estimates put one-
tenth of the world’s population as consuming food produced
through wastewater irrigation, and about 200 million hectares
of land in 50 countries are irrigated with raw or partially
treated wastewater (Abegunrin et al., 2016; UNESCO-WWAP,
2003; Kauser, 2007). At the countr y level, it is reported that
80% of the inhabitants in Pakistan are using untreated
wastewater for irrigation, and countries in arid regions (e.g.
Israel, Jordan, Australia, etc.) optimise their wastewater reuse
through innovative technological solutions.
How much wastewater is recovered and utilised in sub-
Saharan Africa? Literature is surprisingly mute on this.
Given the impact of climate change and the rising population,
the pressure on freshwater resources has been growing and
its withdrawal is estimated to increase by 50%
before 2025 (Alade, 2019). Nigeria, in particular, is said to have
the potential to irrigate about 3.1 million hectares of farmland
were wastewater incorporated in the supply mix (Alade,
2019, p. 29). This practice has, however, not been the case as
the country has no realistic policy plans or the capacity for
wastewater recovery and reuse. Without appropriate reuse
plans, wastewater is likely to be mismanaged by corporate
organisations and private individuals. This paper explores
the situation in Nigeria with the aim of improving awareness,
informing a policy agenda and influencing further research.
02
Nigeria’s Water Resources Availability and
Utilization Practices
Nigeria’s water resources availability naturally varies in space
and time relative to rainfall incident and the underlying
hydrogeology. The yearly mean rainfall ranges between
250 mm in the nor th and could rise as high as 4,000 mm
in the south, concentrating between March and October.
Nigeria is credited with about 267 billion m3 annual surface
water and an estimated 52 billion m3 groundwater resources
(see Akpabio & Udom, 2018, p. 1033; FGN, 2000).
Of these potential sources, only 15% of the surface water
is estimated to be utilized, with no available statistics for
groundwater use (ADB, 2007).
Over the years, Nigeria’s water resources system has
witnessed enormous pressure due to rising population
growth (over 200 million people), climate change impacts and
the absence of adaptive policy practices to harness the
available water resources to strengthen access for meeting
human, industrial, agricultural and recreational needs.
Currently, the country’s needs for daily water supplies come
from natural sources (rainfall, streams, ponds, rivers, wells,
etc.), private and commercial supply sources and limited
public water ser vices (urban and rural potable water schemes)
as well as occasional charitable water supply projects from
the non-governmental organizations. The total cultivable land
for Nigeria is estimated at 39,200,000 hectares (Alade, 2019, p.
28) and depends on water supply from direct rainfall, private
and commercial supplies (borehole, hand-dug wells, mobile
tanks) or untreated wastewater from domestic settlements
and industrial discharges. The lack of capacity to harness and
secure the available water resources for the population is
likely to aect our capacity to guarantee basic sanitation and
food security for the citizens.
Uncertainties in seasonal rainfall patterns over the years
have imposed excessive financial costs on access to water for
human domestic, agricultural and other needs.
As a form of coping, a large proportion of the population
resorts to all possible means to gain access to water to satisfy
their diverse needs. Wastewater becomes readily available.
According to the UN World Water Development Repor t
(UNESCO-WWAP, 2017, p. 10), globally about 5 to 20 million
hectares of land is irrigated with raw and diluted wastewater,
with China probably being the largest contributor in the range
of between 2 to 7%. The repor t noted that Sub-Sahara African
countries lack the financial resources to support wastewater
treatment and management facilities, in addition to
the absence of necessary data: ‘…32 out of 48 sub-Sahara
African countries have no data available on wastewater
generation and treatment’ (p.11). Absence of wastewater
facilities means the main mining, oil and gas, and
manufacturing industries in the sub-region discharge
wastewater into the environment with minimal or no

158 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
treatment. The UNESCO-WWAP (2017, p. 11) observed that
less than 10% of industries in Nigeria treat their eluents
before discharging into the environment. In southern Nigeria
with relatively heavy presence of oil and gas, and other
manufacturing industries, Alade (2019, p. 29) noted that,
apart from Port Harcourt city (serving only one percent of
its population), no other wastewater treatment facility is
available for the entire region. Similar obser vations have been
reported for other major regions of Nigeria including
the southwest and north west.
Urbanization and industrial activities have contributed to
the volume of wastewater produced in Nigeria: the annual
wastewater production estimate is conservatively put at over
500,000 m3 (Olonade, 2016, p. 235). Wastewater from domestic
dwellings, commercial places and oices is disposed through
channel pipes or concrete sewers into soakaway pits, septic
tanks and open drains; and stored in containers
(for subsequent reuse or discharge on open surfaces) without
treatment. Industrial wastewater discharges into open
surfaces and bodies of water are common among bigger
industrial establishments.
Interest in wastewater reuse in Nigeria is the outcome of
institutional factors. These factors are specifically related
to the privatization and commercialization of public water
services, and the consequent marginalisation of the poor and
low income households who find the cost of access to potable
water services increasingly unaordable.
Nigeria started the process of privatizing its public services
in the late 1980s (through Decree No. 25 of 1988) as a
consequence of the pressure from the international financial
institutions led by the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund (IMF). This Decree was implemented through
the structural adjustment programme (SAP). In 1999,
the government enacted the Public Enterprise (privatization
and commercialization) Act which created the National
Council on Privatization to evolve comprehensive
privatization policies and programmes for the countr y.
According to Estrin and Pelletier (2018, p. 70) although
Nigeria’s privatization plan had been one of the most
successful in sub-Saharan Africa in the 1990s, it was however
suspended in early 1995 in preference for a mass programme
of commercialization.
The World Bank has been at the forefront in promoting
the policy through financial assistance. According to Babalobi
(2005): “....so far, the World Bank has extended a loan facility
of US$173.2 million guaranteed by the Federal Government of
Nigeria (FGN) with a maturity period of 14.5 years
(from 1 August, 2008) with repayment dates on 15th October
and April at a rate of 5.59%. The World Bank also approved
a project called ‘privatization support project’ in 2000 worth
US$114.29 million. These two World Bank loans prepare
the necessary conditions to attract foreign multinational
water corporations through promotion of cost recovery taris
and promotion of private sector involvement.......so, we have
a right to ask questions because if the loan is not judiciously
expended and properly managed, our children and grand
children will repay the World Bank loan.”
The commercialization of public utilities eectively aected
the water services sector. The public water services landscape
was restructured with the transformation of public water
corporations to joint venture companies with the private
sector, with no clear operational legal framework.
The restructuring and transformation processes eectively
limited the activities of the existing water companies to cities
to enhance the full-scale commercialization of water services
to city dwellers. Public water taps have disappeared from the
urban streets over the past three decades, paving way for
the emergence of various forms of private and commercial
water services entrepreneurs (supplying water in tanks,
sachets, bottles, and other containers in addition to private/
commercial supplies from boreholes). This imposes high
economic cost on low income earners, creating the necessity
for unregulated and untreated wastewater reuse.

9 Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 159
03
Methods
This paper is a product of a systematic review of literature
and previous research experiences on water, sanitation and
hygiene (Akpabio & Udom, 2018; Akpabio & Udofia, 2016;
Akpabio, 2012; Akpabio et al., 2017). The review process
was conducted through google scholar. Three search topics
were inputted in google scholar as follows: ‘wastewater
reuse in Nigeria’, ‘institutional framework and wastewater
management in Nigeria’, and ‘regulatory and legal framework
for wastewater management in Nigeria’. The first search topic:
‘wastewater reuse in Nigeria’ (through 10 pages of google
scholar) returned 16 relevant articles aer careful screening
of the abstracts with interest on reuse practices. The second,
‘institutional framework and wastewater management
in Nigeria’, and third, ‘regulatory and legal framework
for wastewater management in Nigeria’, search topics,
respectively did not return any new and relevant article
aer 10 pages of google search and had to be discontinued.
References of the printed articles were further scrutinized,
which made it possible to generate another set of relevant
articles on the topic. Overall, over 30 useful publications
were generated and reviewed between December 2019
and February 2020. Besides looking through the abstracts
and results, the body of each publication was carefully
scanned for relevant information and data. Some articles
carried almost similar information on the subject matter,
and selection decisions were based on the criteria of depth,
rigour and originality of study and report. The paper equally
benefitted from my almost two decades of research on water,
sanitation and hygiene in Nigeria in particular and sub-
Saharan Africa in general.
04
Urban settlements and wastewater
Nigeria’s annual urbanization rate is projected at 4.4%, with
50.34% urban population as at 2018 (Plecher, 2020). The majority
of the urban set tlements enjoy very limited planning visible
at public residential and adminsitrative quarters, with limited
supplies of public sanitary infrastructure. Settlements located
outside the reach of public planning face di icult problems
due to the inability to access public water and sanitation
infrastructure. Currently, no city in Nigeria has a coordinated
sewerage system except for limited areas of Abuja and Lagos;
and that about 42% of the urban and semi-urban population
has access to safe water supplies and adequate sanitation (FGN,
2000; Akpabio & Udofia, 2016). Urban public water ser vices are
carefully and, to a large extent, commercially designed to serve
high income citizens found in high quality residential locations,
and on demand responsive arrangements. This long-standing
public policy practice emerged since the late 1980s in line with
the IMF/World Bank Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP),
and the consequence has reflec ted significantly on access and
management of basic services at homes including sanitation.
Akpabio and Udom (2018) repor ted for instance that the majority
of citizens in the low income category commit, on average,
20% of their monthly income for water and water-related s torage
facilities to support basic household activities such as cooking,
laundry, bathing and dishwashing, among others.
Wastewater produced from the domestic sources are stored
and reused for other household services such as for disposing
human excreta, cleaning of domestic features including
windows and doors, floor mopping, watering of plants, among
others. Kitchen and bath wastewater are regularly stored
in big containers (mixed or separate for dierent purposes),
and can be reused for flushing the toilet, cleaning the floor,
initial cleaning of some food items (depending on quality) as
well as watering outside plants. Wastewater reuse is not only
common in unplanned residential places, public estates with
access to public water and sanitation systems regularly reuse
untreated wastewater for toilet flushing and other domestic
services to cope with irregular public water supply.
Wastewater reuse is an everyday experience of slum dwellers
in Nigeria’s urban areas and communities experiencing
severe scarcity of freshwater supplies. Houses equipped with
in-house flush toilet systems run regular toilet flushing time
tables corresponding to calculations of daily wastewater
availability. Every member in the household is allowed to use
the toilet before flush. Two things are involved: a) such
a toilet is oen flushed once (at night) or twice in a day (mid-
morning and night) depending on the amount and availability
of wastewater generated for the day; b) as wastewater is
constantly produced, it is captured in big containers, where it
is stored for many hours to be used when needed.
In a typical Nigerian city, it is repor ted that about 35% of domestic
wastewater empties into the septic tank while the remaining
(65%) is channelled onto open ground surfaces to contribute
to the building up of stagnant pools (Idris-Ndah et al., 2013).
Wastewater
reuse is an
everyday
experience of slum
dwellers in Nigeria’s
urban areas and
communities
experiencing
severe scarcity
of freshwater
supplies.

160 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
05
Wastewater and Irrigation Agriculture
Wastewater from commercial, public and domestic
places, as well as stormwater generated from run-o, are
important sources of supply for agricultural and landscape
irrigation in rural, urban and peri-urban areas over the past
decades. Salad crop irrigation farming in northern Nigeria
depends on the reuse of untreated wastewater (Okafo et
al., 2003) as scarcity of freshwater supply severely imposes
diiculties for irrigation farming. Regular demand for water
to support irrigation activities has led to the emergence of
commercial market opportunities for untreated wastewater
to supplement household incomes. Commercial trade in
untreated wastewater has been a longstanding and popular
business and livelihood support for low income earners in big
Nigerian cities including Lagos, Kano, Kaduna and Katsina,
etc. In a study on reuse of wastewater in urban farming in
Katsina Metropolis, Ruma and Sheikh (2010) observed that
a number of the urban inhabitants earn their living from
wastewater trade to meet farmers’ demand for crop irrigation
in the context of rainfall uncertainty. Recently, there have
been repor ted instances of human urine for crop fertilizations
within the framework of ecological sanitation.
Though not widely used, ecological sanitation enables
source-separation of urine from faeces, with the urine used
as a source of organic fertilizer for crops e.g., the UNICEF
pioneered an ecological sanitation initiative in the riverine
communities of Odukpani, south-south Nigeria (Akpan-Idiok
et al., 2012).
06
Wastewater and Industries
Wastewater discharges from industrial and commercial
places are sources of pollution to water bodies, groundwater
and urban landscapes. Although very few industrial
establishments in Nigeria are credited with functional
wastewater treatment facilities, none has wastewater reuse
plans that are coordinated and functional (Adewumi &
Oguntuase, 2016; Adesogan, 2013; Mustapha, 2013; Odurukwe,
2012). The major petroleum refining companies in Nigeria
not only lack wastewater reuse plans, their wastewater
treatment and handling processes hardly meet regulatory
standards (Osin et al., 2017). The refineries make use of water
for distillation, hydotreating, desalting, steaming and cooling
processes (Osin et al., 2017). While these processes eventually
lead to wastewater production, studies demonstrate that
the liquid waste from the oil and gas companies did not meet
the necessary regulator y standard (see Al-Suhaili & Abed,
2008; Yu et al., 2017).
It is also reported that most of the wastewater treatment
plants of the oil and gas industries are less than optimal
in treatment eectiveness. A study from Nkwocha et al. (2013),
on the performance eectiveness of a wastewater treatment
plant of a petroleum refinery located in Nigeria’s Niger
Delta region, concluded that the plant’s average treatment
eectiveness was about 30-70% below the minimum required
treatment eectiveness of 50-90%. On a spatial note,
Odurukwe (2012), in a study on the absence of wastewater
management practices in Aba city, had documented
the growing incident of channelling and emptying untreated
wastewater from the sewers ser ving big, medium and small-
scale industries into the Aba river, posing existential public
health risk to the city population. Generally, the absence of
eective, coordinated and functioning wastewater treatment
facilities and reuse plans means that untreated wastewater
produced from industrial and commercial establishments
is discharged into available water bodies, drains and open
grounds.
Wastewater reuse in industries is largely at the informal and
small scale levels in the construction/building industries.
Reservoirs and blocked drains are receiving sites for
wastewater discharges from domestic and storm sources.
The stored wastewater is used in moulding blocks, laying
bricks and other concrete works to minimise the high
cost of freshwater supplies from mobile trucks and other
sources. The rise in urbanisation and small scale industrial
activities in Nigeria has engendered a rise in private and
public construction activities, with heavy demands on
available freshwater resources. Areas experiencing acute
freshwater scarcity are likely to witness a surge in wastewater
demand and reuse, providing market opportunities for low
income urban citizens who depend on wastewater trade to
supplement income.

9 Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 161
07
Practical and Institutional Challenges of
Wastewater Reuse in Nigeria
Over 95% of wastewater reused for various purposes
in Nigeria is untreated, and originates from domestic,
commercial and institutional sources as well as from
the chemical, petroleum and brewery industries, among
several others. The typical composition of wastewater
according to Metcalf and Eddy (2004, cited in Adewumi
& Oguntuase, 2016, p. 21) includes a range of potential
contaminants, including conventional (i.e. total suspended
solids, colloidal solids, biochemical oxygen demand,
total organic carbon, ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, total
nitrogen, phosphorus, bacteria, protozoa and viruses),
non-conventional (e.g. refractory organics, volatile organic
compound, surfactants, metals, total dissolved solids) and
emerging (e.g. prescription and non-prescription drugs, home
care products, veterinar y and human antibiotics, industrial
and household products, sex and steroidal hormones and
other endocrine disrupters). Olonade (2016, p. 236) has
categorized some contaminating and harmful chemical and
biological agents contained in wastewater produced from
dierent sources (Table 9-2).
Nigeria has no clear legal and regulatory framework for
managing/reusing wastewater. However, relevant institutional
authorities exist for waste management which, in almost
all cases, boils down to solid waste management (Table 9-3).
Several legislations broadly touching on environmental
management, impact assessments and river basin
management provide guidelines, standards, duties and
responsibilities for managing the environment, of which
water resources are a sub-set. Specific legislations on water
resources focus on pollution control, which aim to protect
the sources of water supplies mostly from streams and rivers,
with no provision for wastewater reuse. Legislative provisions
as detailed in Table 9-3 are not significantly dierent from
the colonial legislative instruments, framed to protect
available water bodies from polluting substances in the
interest of public health.
Public health protection was the cardinal motive of
the colonial laws related to water resources management,
which was mostly to serve the interest of the colonial oicials
resident in cities. Few legislative additions and modifications
during the postcolonial period happened in the context of
petroleum resources exploration (e.g. the petroleum, eluent
limitations, EIA and related legislations). These and related
laws only sought to control pollution and regulate eluent
discharges into open waters. For instance the national
guidelines and standards for environmental pollution control
issued by the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) and
revised in 2002 approved the prohibition of the discharge
of wastewater from crude oil extraction activities onto
onshore environment designated as ‘zero discharge zones’
in preference for oshore locations (about 12 nautical miles
away from the shoreline and of depth not less than 200 ).
There was an alternative provision for the re-injection of
the produced water into reservoirs. But Osin et al. (2017) has
observed that these prohibitions are commonly breached by
the petroleum resource industries since treated wastewater is
still being discharged in the surrounding environment.
In all these instances, there are no specific legal instruments
and standard for wastewater reuse.
Nigeria has
no clear legal
and regulatory
framework for
managing/reusing
wastewater.
However, relevant
institutional
authorities
exist for waste
management.

162 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
Table 9- 3 I nstitutional authorities for wastewater management (Source: Adapted from Akpabio & Udom, 2018)
Institutional authoritiesreuse
Provisions
Remarks
National Policy on Environment, 1989
This was launched to provide
guidelines and strategies for achieving
the Policy Goal of Sustainable
Development
This policy has not been revised to
account for norms of zero waste
tolerance and reuse of wastewater.
A substantial aspect of this policy
is reproduced from the provisions
contained in colonial and some
post-colonial regulations.
The Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) decree/Act 1992 & 2004
EIA covers a broad range of issues
including the disposal of wastes
Nigeria lacks the necessary institutional
capacity and transparency to address
a wide range of environmental
and public health issues (including
wastewater treatment and reuse)
in every EIA document
National Guidelines and standards for
Environmental pollution control (1991);
National environmental standards
and regulations enforcement agency
Act 2007 (NESREA ACT); National
Environmental Sanitation and Wastes
Control Regulations, 2009
Specified duties also cover
enforcement of standards on waste
disposal procedures and practices
Same comments as above
National Eluent Limitation Regulation
1991
Regulated duties include prescribing
a maximum limit of eluent
parameters allowed for discharge and
penalties for contravention
This has no provision on how treated
wastewater should be managed.
No reported cases of punishment for
breach of regulation.
Sources Possible contaminants
Domestic/kitchens
(households) and oices Decomposable and indecomposable organic materials
Pharmaceutical industry Anti-biotics, lipid regulators, anti-inflamatories, anti-epileptics, tranquilizers and cosmetic
ingredients with significant amount of oil and grease
Soap and detergent Heavy metals including lead, zinc and manganese. They are contaminated with organic
compounds which contain significant amount of oil and grease
Paper mill Sugars and lignocellulose
Fertilizer plant Toxic waste rich in ammonia-nitrogen, urea, nitrate-nitrogen orthophosphate-phosphorus
Textile mill eluent
Heavy metals, starch, waxes, carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), polyvinyl alcohol (PVA),
wetting agents, sodium hypochlorite, NaOH, H2O2, acids, surfactants, (NaSiO2 sodium
phosphate, sodium hydroxide, cotton wax, reducing agents, oxidizing agents, acetic acid,
detergents, wetting agents, pastes, urea, starches, gums, oils, binders, cross-linkers,
reducing agents, alkali
Brewery industry High in carbohydrates, ammonia
Tannery industrial eluent Chromium
So drink eluent Acidity with a pH of 6.6 ±1.2
Chemical industry Hydroxylbenzene (phenol), chlorobenzene, methylbenzene (toluene) and
dimethylbenzene (xylene)
Palm oil mill
Organic carbon, nitrogen content (0.2 g/) as ammonia nitrogen and 0.5 g/ total nitrogen,
various suspended components including cell walls, organelles, short fibres, a spectrum
of carbohydrates ranging from hemicellulose to simple sugars, a range of nitrogenous
compounds from proteins to amino acids, free organic acids and an assembly of minor
organic and mineral constituents, dark colours
Table 9-2 Wastewater so urces and possible contam inating elements (Source: Olonade, 2016, p. 236)

9 Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 163
08
Discussion and Concluding Remarks
Wastewater reuse is widely embraced by the Nigerian
populace and, through largely informal mechanisms, serves
to cope against inadequate freshwater supplies occasioned
by population pressures, increased socio-economic activities
and a corresponding rise in urbanization, as well as climate
change impacts. The capacities of available freshwater
resources and public infrastructure to address the competing
needs of water for human, energy, industrial,
agricultural and other socio-economic
activities becomes inadequate. Costly private
and commercial supplies do not equitably
fill the gap between supply and demand.
Reclaiming and reusing untreated wastewater
to complement supplies becomes a viable
alternative for a large segment of the Nigerian
population in the low income category.
Greywater from domestic, commercial and
institutional buildings is stored in containers
in cities and used for various purposes,
including urinal and toilet flushing. Wastewater
from the bathroom and laundry machines is
occasionally used for cleaning floors and other
household items. Outdoor use of greywater
is common in irrigation, washing of windows,
doors, vehicles, block moulding and other
concrete works. Storm water in puddles,
ponds, and drains have also been used in
toilet flushing, outdoor cleaning, irrigation and
concrete work.
The intensity and frequency of wastewater
reuse vary relative to socio-economic
capacities, seasonal changes and spatial/
ecological circumstances. Drought-prone
northern Nigeria depends on untreated
wastewater to complement domestic,
agriculture and other supply needs.
Urban, semi-urban and rural areas depend
on wastewater reuse to mitigate the social
and economic costs of accessing limited
freshwater. Southern Nigeria, with a relative
abundance of freshwater resources, faces relative scarcity
during the dry season, necessitating frequent indoor and
outdoor use of untreated wastewater for toilet flushing,
irrigation of compound farms, cleaning and building/concrete
works, among others.
Well over 95% of wastewater reused is untreated, which raises
important environmental and public health questions related
to food safety, the potential for the spread of infectious
diseases and contamination of the soils, water and air, among
others. Nigeria does not have organized and coordinated
wastewater reclamation, treatment and reuse policies and
plans. Available legislative frameworks on wastewater are
old, not comprehensive and do not address the question of
reuse. More so, enforcement of available laws on wastewater
production and discharge remains weak. Consequently,
industries have taken advantage of weak regulations to
discharge untreated or partially treated wastewater to
the environment.
With growing population pressure and the possible impact of
climate change, as well as a lack of necessary technological
and institutional capacities to harness and optimize
the utilization of available freshwater resources, the use
of alternative sources of supplies is likely to intensif y, with
wastewater reuse becoming a crucial necessity.
In most African countries, freshwater
withdrawals are projected to increase by
50 percent before 2025 to meet the current
challenges imposed by excessive demand
(Alade, 2019). Intensified freshwater
withdrawal will impose enormous pressure on
available sources of supply.
Reusing wastewater not only fits with the
circular economy principles of optimising
resource use with zero waste production;
it has become a natural response available
for cushioning the eect of climate change
and costly neoliberal policies on freshwater
availability and access for low income citizens.
In conclusion, wastewater reuse has
contributed to a reduction in the demand for
freshwater in rural, urban and semi-urban
areas of Nigeria as well as reducing water
shortages during the dry season. Wastewater
reuse has sustained urban farming, landscape
irrigation, concrete works and a range of other
socio-economic activities. It is equally
a potential alternative for coping with
the anticipated consequences of climate
change-induced water scarcity for Nigeria.
As the review has demonstrated, most
Nigerians in the low income category use
untreated wastewater, and this is likely to
constitute environmental and public health
risks (Abegunrin et al., 2016; Adewumi &
Oguntuase, 2016). This lack of treatment calls
for urgent organizational and regulatory
frameworks to guarantee environmental and
public health and safety arising from wastewater reuse.
This paper is expected to raise public understanding of
the public health perspectives of informal wastewater reuse,
guide any future development of comprehensive wastewater
reuse policies and plans for Nigeria, as well as enhance further
research.
Reusing
wastewater not
only fits with the
circular economy
principles of
optimising resource
use with zero waste
production; it has
become a natural
response available
for cushioning the
eect of climate
change and costly
neoliberal policies
on freshwater
availability and
access for low
income citizens.

164 Understanding Challenges of Water Reuse
References
Abegunrin, T. P., Awe, G. O., Idowu, D. O. & Adejumobi, M. A. (2016). Impact of Wastewater Irrigation on Soil Physico-chemical
Properties, Growth and Water Use Pattern of Two Indigenous Vegetables in Southwest Nigeria. Catena, 139 pp. 167-178.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2015.12.014.
ADB. (2007). Nigeria: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Sub-programmes in Yobe and Osun States, Appraisal Report.
Water and Sanitation Department (OWAS).
https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Nigeria_-_Rural_Water_Suply_and_
Sanitation_Program_-_Appraisal_Report.PDF (accessed 30 January, 2020).
Adesogan, S. (2013). Sewage Technology in Nigeria: A Pragmatic Approach. Environmental Engineering Research, 2013 pp. 1-9.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331096409_Sewage_Technology_in_Nigeria_A _Pragmatic_Approach (accessed 21
April, 2020).
Adewumi, J. R. & Oguntuase, A. M. (2016). Planning of Wastewater Reuse Programme in Nigeria. Consilience: the Journal of
Sustainable Development, 15(1), pp. 1-33.
Akpan-Idiok, A. U., Udo, I. A. & Braide, E. I. (2012). The Use of Human Urine as an Organic Fertilizer in the Production of Okra
(Abelmoschus esculentus) in South Eastern Nigeria. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 62, pp. 14-20.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.02.003.
Akpabio, E. M. & Udom, E. S. (2018). ‘Borehole Race’ and the Dilemma of Governing the ‘Ungoverned’: Understanding the Urban
Political Ecology of Groundwater Exploitation in Nigeria. Society & Natural Resources, 31(9), pp. 1030-1044, DOI:10.1080/0894192
0.2018.1475586.
Akpabio, E. M., Udofia, E. S. & Takara, K. T. (2017). The Nexus of Water and Socio-spatial Inequality in Sub-Saharan Africa: Legacies,
Strands and Agenda for Research. Waterlat-Gobacit Network Working Paper, TA 3, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 41-77.
Akpabio, E. M. & Udofia, E. S. (2016). Unsafe Water, Sanitation and Hygiene in Nigeria’s Public Spaces: The Political Economy Angle.
International Journal of Water Resources Development, 33(2), pp. 310-325. DOI: 10.1080/07900627.2016.1189814.
Akpabio, E. M. (2012). Water Meanings, Sanitation Practices and Hygiene Bahaviours in the Cultural Mirror: A Perspective from
Nigeria. Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, 02(3), pp. 168-181.
Alade, A. D. (2019). Water Resources and Sub-Saharan African Economy: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Wastewater, and
Sustainable Development in Nigeria. Canadian Social Science, 15(9), pp. 25-33.
Al-Suhaili, R. H. & Abed, M. A. (2008).
Evaluation of the Performance of the Dora Refinery Wastewater Treatment Plant. Journal of Engineering, 14(4), pp. 2030-3036.
https://www.iasj.net/iasj?func=fulltext&aId=24135. (accessed 27 January, 2020).
Babalobi, B. (2005). Water is Life. An Address Delivered at a Media Briefing to Mark World Water Day. Civil Society Coalition against
Water Privatization in Nigeria (CISCAWP Nigeria). Lagos.
Corcoran, E., Nellemann, C., Baker, E., Bos, R., Osborn, D. & Savelli, H. (eds.). (2010). Sick Water? The Central Role of Wastewater
Management in Sustainable Development. A Rapid Response Assessment. UNEP/UNHABITAT.
FGN. (2000). National Water Supply and Sanitation Policy. Department of Water Supply and Quality Control, Federal Ministry of
Water Resources. Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Estrin, S. & Pelletier, A. (2018). Privatization in Developing Countries:
What are the Lessons of Recent Experience? The World Bank Research Observer, 33(1), pp. 65-102. Oxford University Press.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkx007.
Haruna, A., Uzairu, A. & Harrison, G. (2009). Monitoring of Sewage Quality for Small-scale Irrigation: Case Studies in Some Fadama
lands in Zaria City, Nigeria. Continental Journal of Applied Sciences, 4, pp. 8-17.
Idris-Nda, A ., Aliyu, H. K. & Dalil, M. (2013). The Challenges of Domestic Wastewater Management in Nigeria: A Case Study of Minna,
Central Nigeria. International Journal of Development and Sustainability, 2(2), pp. 1169-1182.
Kauser, S. (2007). Water Use in Vegetable Production in District Faisalabad (MSc Thesis). Department of Environmental and
Resource Economics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan. In: Abegunrin et al., 2016, p. 167, op. cit.)
Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F. L. & Stensel, H. D. (2004). Wastewater Engineering Treatment and Reuse.
Metcalf and Eddy Inc 4th edition. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Mustapha, H. B. (2013). Management of Industrial Eluents: A Review of the Experiences in Kano, Northern Nigeria. International
Journal of Advanced Research, 1(4), pp. 213-216.
Nkwocha, A. C., Ekeke, I. C., Kamen, F. L. & Oghome, P. I. (2013). Performance Evaluation of Petroleum Refinery Wastewater
Treatment Plant. Journal of Science and Engineering Investigations, 2(16), pp. 32-37.
Odurukwe, N. S. (2012). Wastewater Non-management in Aba city, Nigeria. Newsletter. Federal University of Technology, Owerri.
Imo State.
Okafo, C. N., Umoh, V. J. & Galadima, M. (2003). Occurrence of Pathogens on Vegetables Harvested from Soils Irrigated with
Contaminated Streams. The Science of the Total Environment, 311(1), pp. 49-56 .
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(03)00057-3.
Olonade, K. A. (2016). A Review of the Eects of Wastewater on Reinforced Concrete Structures in Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of
Technology, 35(2), pp. 234-241.

9 Wastewater Production, Reuse and Management Practices in Nigeria 165
Osin, O. A., Yu, T. & Lin, S. (2017). Oil Refinery Wastewater Treatment in the Niger Delta, Nigeria: Current Practices, Challenges and
Recommendations. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(28), pp. 22730-22740. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-0009-z.
Plecher, H. (2020). Urbanization in Nigeria 2018. Statistica.
Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/455904/urbanization-in-nigeria/.
Ruma, M. M. & Sheikh, A. U. (2010). Reuse of Wastewater in Urban Farming and Urban Planning Implications in Katsina Metropolis,
Nigeria. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 4(1), pp. 28-33.
UNESCO-WWAP. (2003). Water for People, Water for Life. The United Nations World Water Development Report. UNESCO-World
Water Assessment Programme (WWAP), Barcelona. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000129556.
. (2017). Wastewater, the Untapped Resource: Facts and Figures. UNESCO World Water Assessment Program (SC-2017/WS/6).
Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247553.
Yu, L., Han, M. & He, F. (2017). A Review of Treating Oily Wastewater. Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 10(2) pp. S1913-S1922.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2013.07.020.S

©Putu Ar tana/Shutterstock .
IV
Water Reuse
and Key Stakeholders

©Pikoso.kz/Shutterstock.

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 169
10
Market for Reclaimed Water through
Private Water Tankers
– Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas
Chaya Ravishankar and Manasi Seshaiah
Chaya Ravishankar, Base of the Pyramid Solutions, Xylem Water Solutions India Pvt Ltd., India.
e-mail: chaya.ravi84@gmail.com
Manasi Seshaiah, Centre for Urban Aairs, Institute for Social and Economic Change, India.
e-mail: manasi@isec.ac.in
Abstract
Bengaluru’s urban peripheries have a dual challenge. One is over abstraction of ground water resources for non-potable uses by
residential dwellings and small commercial units. The second is disposal of excess treated water from private Sewage Treatment
Plants (STP), which remains even aer reusing some of it for toilet flushing and gardening by apartments. The study proposed
addressing this challenge through formalizing private water tanker supply of the treated water from apartments to individual
residential dwellings and commercial units for non-potable purposes, thereby reducing groundwater consumption and ensuring
eicient and reliable allocation of water through a circular economic model from source to user and user to source and giving
water true value.
Tankers are currently supplying 2.5 million litres per day of fresh water. The tanker operators were interviewed to understand
their motivation to sell reclaimed water. Out of 25 tanker suppliers inter viewed, 15 are willing to invest in new tankers to supply
reclaimed water, provided their revenue is not aected. From the 350 end users surveyed, 1.9 million litres per day is used for
non-potable purposes. This non-potable demand could be met through supply from tanker vendors while not raising challenges
posed by other conventional interventions, such as dual piping or distribution system and storage.
Keywords
Reclaimed water, water tanker, non-potable demand, water use behaviour

170 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
01
Introduction
1.1. Background of the Study
The 2030 Agenda’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6
for ‘Water and Sanitation’ comprehensively looks at drinking
water quality, sanitation and hygiene, scarcity and water
use eiciency to promote environmentally sustainable and
healthy communities. The target of goal 6.3 under SDG
6 aims specifically at improved wastewater treatment and
an increase in water reuse. For creating liveable cities,
a long-term vision and need for rethinking the approach
are essential to augment water resources, not only from
conventional sources (i.e. surface water and groundwater) but
treated sewage (reclaimed water) use. This non-conventional
source is an important solution to solve water scarcity issues
across the globe (Tortajada & Ong, 2016) and has been put
into practice successfully in many cities like Singapore
(Lee & Pin Tan, 2016); Namibia (Lahnsteiner et al., 2016);
and Israel (Friedler et al., 2006). There is enormous growth
in the body of literature and case studies demonstrating
reclaimed water as a viable alternative source, even for
drinking purposes (UN Water, 2017; Khan & Roser, 2007).
Rethinking sewage treatment plants more as ‘resource
factories’ requires transforming a linear model of water
management, which takes water from source, to supply and
discharge, oen rendering it unfit for use by subsequent users
and society. Instead a circular economy approach closes
the loop from source to user, and user to source, by giving
it true value. Water by nature follows a circular path; hence
human intervention should aid in regenerative practices and
circulate water back at its highest value by eliminating
the concept of waste (Ellen Mac Arthur Foundation, 2015).
With this backdrop, this paper focuses on a peri-urban area
in Bengaluru, India. The paper is structured as follows:
the next section identifies challenges related to water;
a rationale for choosing the study location is discussed next,
along with the methodology to assess water demand;
findings from the survey and recommendations are then
presented.
No Challenges Global India Peri-urban areas and Bengaluru
periphery
1Water scarcity
By 2025, two-thirds of
the world’s population
could live under water
stressed conditions
(UN water scarcity, 2014).
Per capita water
availability is 1,720 m3
in 2007; < 1,700 m3 is
water stressed. India
estimates a forecast of
about 1,340 m3 per capita
in the year 2025.
Farmers find it lucrative to sell
groundwater from their own
borewells, using tankers changing
the occupational characteristics of
farmers to water sellers
2
Distance of water
withdrawals
and augmenting
water supply to
meet the growing
demand
Cities moved 504 billion
litres/day a distance of
27,000±3,800km.
(Mc Donald et al 2014)
The distance between
a city and its water
source (in km) are: Delhi
(320 km), Mumbai (120),
Chennai (200), Hyderabad
(100), Bhopal (70)
Using groundwater as the main
source of water to quench urban
thirst increases water insecurity.
Bangalore withdraws water from
Cauvery River, which is at
a distance of 120 km
3Unaccounted
water loss
Worldwide, leakage loss
rates of up to 50% are seen
in urban potable water
distribution systems. Some
250 to 500 million m of
drinking water is lost in
many mega cities each year.
Losses in metropolitan
cities (percent): Kolkata
(50%), Chennai (20%),
Delhi (26%) and Mumbai
(18%).
There is no accounting for water
demand, or metering. Bangalore
ranks fourth with 30% (Raj, 2015).
Revenue losses of 90 crores
4Ground-water
stress
India abstracts about 245
billion cubic meters (BCM)
of groundwater per year,
which represents about
25% of the total global
groundwater abstraction
making it the largest user
globally.
There are approximately one lakh
or more bore wells dug, which
includes private and government
bore wells. 7,000 borewells are
dug by Bengaluru Water Supply
Sewerage Board (BWSSB) drawing
water to supply 35 – 70 million litres
per Day (MLD) through 22 water
tankers in the core area of the city.
Table 10-1 Water related challenges (Author’s compilation)

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 171
1.2 Water in peri-urban areas
The water-related challenges in context of peri-urban areas
can be classified into the six challenges listed in Table 10-1.
These challenges are interlinked and specifically in the peri-
urban region, the water and sanitation challenges are more
complex to address due to a lack of institutional frameworks.
To identify entities and factors to be included in the circular
economy, it is vital to think of peri-urban developments
as ecosystems in such a way that good quality freshwater
is equitably distributed and pragmatic solutions are
implemented to treat wastewater as a valuable resource for
water, energy, and nutrients.
1.3. Rationale for the Study
Bengaluru city is chosen for this study. Greater Bengaluru
formed in 2007 when 110 villages in the periphery were added
to the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).
The core city is 245 km2 and the 110 villages are an
additional 225 km2, referred to as the peri-urban areas in
this paper. These villages have emerged as major urban
regions accommodating the workforce population who
have migrated from other cities. This has led to the creation
of a middle income neighborhood but the infrastructure
development did not take place at the same pace as the
housing and commercial establishments. Water and sewerage
infrastructure in these localities are poor to almost nil.
Figure 10-1 depicts the development stages of the only
surface water source, the Cauver y River, to meet the demand
of growing Bengaluru since 1974. The Cauvery water supply
scheme (CWSS) stage-I was commissioned in the year 1974 to
augment the supply by 135 MLD. Consequent CWSS Stages-II,
III, and IV followed in the years depicted in brackets in Figure
10-1. CWSS Stage- IV Phase II was commissioned in 2012 to
further augment supply by 400 MLD. Currently the Bengaluru
Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) is withdrawing
about 1,470 MLD water from the Cauvery River to meet the
city’s demand.
These schemes have not met the complete demand of
the population. The water utility is planning to augment
the supply through Cauvery Stage V to the 110 villages for
which connections are being laid under funding from
the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
Will this linear model of augmenting Cauver y through Stage VI
for rapidly growing 110 villages be reliable?
Figure 10-1 Cauvery Water Supply ser vices in the BBMP area (in MLD) (Source: BWSSB, 2017)

172 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
As we see from the Table 10-2, groundwater abstraction has
been excessive and unsustainable, leading to many bore
wells drying up. Forty percent of the Bengaluru population is
dependent on groundwater. Water consumption by
Bengaluru (based on metered connections as of March 2015
for each division) shows that the Southern Division of
the city consumes 133 lpcd which is equivalent to the Ministry
of Urban Development (MoUD) norms, while the rest of the city
seems to be either under-supplied with water or dependent
on other sources, primarily groundwater.Moreover in the 110
villages, bore wells installed by the BBMP are going dry in
the wake of increasing demand for informal water (through
tankers). This demand for tanker water has not only made
their business lucrative but is also creating unrest in
the public as these tanker operators are taking advantage
of the situation causing delays in making water available to
users and charging higher rates due to the higher demand.
Bengaluru takes credit for being a proactive city by setting
up centralized sewage treatment plants. Table 10-3 depicts
the sewage treatment plant (STP) infrastructure developed
and planned until 2031 as per a Revised Master Plan (RMP)
for 2031 for Bangalore. We notice there is a gap of 475 MLD of
untreated water at present and by 2031 it will only be reduced
to 378 MLD in spite of so many STPs being constructed.
However, only three fourth of the installed capacity is being
utilized to date to treat the waste water of the city.
In addition to existing STPs, there are 11 STPs with an overall
capacity of 339 MLD under construction and another 8 STPs
with an overall capacity of 550 MLD under tendering process.
To meet projected demand for 2049, BWSSB has proposed to
construct another 207 MLD capacity of STPs at 16 locations.
Overall, once these systems are built, about 1,817 MLD of
treated waste water will be available for reuse.
In addition to central municipal sewage treatment plants,
the Zero Liquid Discharge law was enacted in 2006 by
the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) to
control water pollution and encourage fresh water savings.
The rules mandate that apartments with more than 50 units,
or a total constructed area greater than 5,000 m2 in the
unsewered areas of BWSSB, must have their own STP.
The legislation has been successful in the city, at least in terms
of the number of installed STPs in apartments. Bengaluru
possibly has the highest number of STPs for any Indian city,
with a total treatment capacity of about 141 MLD (Evans et al.,
2014), which is about 10% of the total wastewater generated
in the city. Figure 10-2 shows the growth in capacity of
treatment in private STPs in apartments. A vast majority treat
their wastewater to tertiary levels and about 70% employ
activated sludge process (ASP) for secondary treatment.
Sl.No Head Units 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031
1Population No. 9,044,664 11,071,055 13,551,445 16,594,465 20,320,805
2Water Supply @135 lpcd MLD 1,221 1,495 1,829 2,240 2,743
3Sewage MLD 977 1,196 1,464 1,792 2,195
4Treatment capacity MLD 721 721 1,060 1,610 1,817
5Gap in Treatment infra MLD 256 475 404 182 378
Table 10- 3 Sewage Treat ment infrastructu re gaps for domestic s ector (Source: BWSSB a nd RMP 2031 Analys is as cited in Revised BDA M aster plan 2031)
Water
Supply zone
River
water (MLD)
No. of
Deep wells
Groundwater
Withdrawal
(MLD)
Central 69 7,20 6 39
North 210 16,126 87
West 185 27,6 25 149
East 169 9,346 50
South 133 32,593 176
South-east 105 12,555 68
Tot al 869 105,451 569
Figure 10-2 Figure 10-2 Cap acity of Private Sewage Treatme nt
Plants insta lled from 2009 to 2015 (Sou rce: BWSSB, 2017)
Table 10-2 Water supply and groundwater withdrawal (as of year
2013) by Water Supply Zone (Source: BWSSB, 2017)

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 173
A formal market is established to sell reclaimed
water to industries and to the international
airport of Bengaluru.
The following tables provide details of the
quantity of water sold (Table 10-4) and the
major recycling units with sale price.
Accelerating and scaling up this market to 110
villages in the peri-urban areas of Bengaluru
will aid in reducing ground water abstraction
and to assess if the communities will accept
reclaimed water use to implement allocation
of fit-for-purpose water. Since, these peri-
urban areas do not have formal water supply
coverage by the BWSSB, there is no data to
assess the water demand. Hence, primary
surveys were administered to assess the actual
demand for water, as discussed in Section 5
following.
In 2019, a similar initiative was extended to
residential areas in core area of Bengaluru
through tankers as shown in Figure 10-3.
However, this study was conducted specifically
for
peri-urban areas in 2016 and 2017 and the
findings were presented as part of the author’s
Ph.D. research.
The research had two stages – stage 1 was to
examine
the feasibility of having a formal market for
provision of reclaimed water service through
tankers for non-potable water uses. Further,
in stage 2, we examined how formal provisions
can be made if there is social acceptance for
tankers to deliver reclaimed water.
Figure 10-3 Source BWSSB portal, https://www.bwssb.gov.in/
images/upload/pdfs/Notification06-08-19.pdf
Month - Year Quantity (MLD)
Nov-15
0.20
Dec-15 2.30
Jan-16 6.33
Feb-16
6.25
Mar-16
6.44
Apr-16 7.76
May-16 7.23
Tot al 36.51
Table 10- 4 Quantity of reclaimed water sold (Source: sur vey
response by BWSSB oicial, Note that t he table reports
the only months of data that were available from
government sources)

174 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
02
Research Objectives
2.1. Research Objectives
The research embarked on an empirical investigation in
a groundwater dependent peri-urban ward of Bengaluru city
in India with the following objectives:
i. To evaluate actual water demand for dierent uses
within the ward
ii. To identify non consumptive uses which can be catered
with reclaimed water through tankers (fit for purpose
mapping)
iii. To determine if private water tankers are willing to supply
reclaimed water to the identified non potable demands
(allocative eiciency mapping).
2.2. Conceptual Framework for Blue Circular
Economy
The framework for the study is embedded in the fundamental
principle of circular economy comprising of four pillars:
demand quantification; assess allocative eiciency for non-
potable uses; social acceptance and formalizing private water
vendors through policy modifications. The approach used to
arrive at the circular economy principle was through
the System of Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA)
which comprises of accounting for water and wastewater
flows within a system boundary. The system boundary is
a spatial extent in which the economy and environment
interact in three stages. The system boundar y chosen here
is a ward which is an administrative region and the level
of geographical disaggregation within this ward for water
accounting can be done for each locality (L) as shown
in the schematic Figure 10-4.
Within each system boundary, L, we have considered the
groundwater resource flow in 3 stages using SEEA. Each
of these stages has a demand component (D), uses (U) of
required quality (Q) which can be supplied back by reclaimed
water (R) from the last stage i.e., flows from the economy to
the environment as depicted in Figure 10-5.
Allocative eiciency will be achieved when apartments with
STPs and the centralized STPs supply the desired quality of
water for respective end users in a reliable and sustainable
manner.
Flows from the environment ( Demand -D)
Groundwater resource
Households supplying to construction activity.
Treated water from STPs discharged
to agricultural/ vacant lands
Tanker purchasing from borewells and supplying
Flows within the economy
and between the economies (Uses - U)
Septic system, grey water flowing
through open storm water drains.
Overland flow.
Flows from the economy to the environment (R)
L1
Layout with
High water
demand
L2
intermediate
demand seasonal
variation
L3
intermediate
demand seasonal
variation
L4
Surplus
Supply
L5
Self sustaining
layout with low
demand
Figure 10-5 Stages and Processes for attaining blue circular
economy
Figure 10-4 Schemati c representation of a Ward with localities of
varying demands

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 175
2.3. Study Area
Out of the 110 villages, the study area Bellandur ward is
the second largest ward in the city and is comprised of
10 villages, which have been the unit of analysis. From Census
2001 to Census 2011 we see population growth rate of 11%
and using standard projection methods, we can observe that
in the year 2051, Bellandur ward will have a population of
0.15 million and consequent water demand.
The piped supply of surface water (from the Cauvery River) is
only supplied to 11% of the household connections of
the ward’s residential population. There are three modes of
supply for groundwater, namely BBMP borewells, tankers,
and private (own) borewells. The largest mode of supply is
through tankers (around 25%), followed by 24% through own
borewells dug by residents, followed by BBMP borewells
servicing 18% of the residential units. The remaining 21%
of supply is through a combination of Cauvery plus tanker;
tanker plus borewell; Cauvery plus own borewell.
03
Methodology
As seen in the map (Figure 10-6) of Bellandur ward, there
are 14 localities in this ward. With practical considerations
of time and budget, systematic random sampling was used.
A map was used to identify streets, housing density, high to
low income areas, source of water supply and geographical
features like lakes in each of these localities.
The population in each locality was obtained from BBMP
property tax collection records for the year 2015 and Census
2011 was used with the size of each locality to come up with
a sampling strategy. Larger localities were broken down to
smaller clusters which were segmented further based on
the source of water supply and presence of informal
settlements to encompass a range of socio- economic and
environmental conditions that is broadly representative of
the total ward.
Figure 10-6 Sample distribution based on the mode of supply of water (Source: BBMP map, modified by author)

176 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
3.1. Survey Tools
The determination of sampling size for the implementation
of research was based on commonly utilized statistical
equations (Walpole & Myers, 1985). Practical considerations
of time and budget limited the survey to 350 samples spread
across 14 localities.
The questionnaire was designed considering the three
consumer groups of dierent sources of water supply: 1)
public water utility dependent communities i.e. Cauvery
water; 2) bore wells – both public and private; 3) private
informal water supply (i.e. tankers). Two questionnaires were
developed for the study: one to collect the household-level
and commercial unit data and another to collect the Tanker
vendor data. (See Appendix A for questionnaire used for
tanker vendors).
The month preceding the field work was used to identify these
consumer groups. The questionnaires were also field tested
and revised aer confirming the dierent housing types,
tenure of housing, income groups and source of water supply.
During the survey, an advertisement issued by BWSSB in
February 2015 (Figure 10-7) was used to create a hypothetical
market for residential users and tanker vendors to assess if
they were aware of this provision and willing to buy at
a quoted price of 15 INR/KL. A wide range of socio-economic
variables and environmental conditions such as age,
family size, education level, income, access to water supply,
quantity of household wastewater generated and discharged,
etc., were considered.
The ward was analyzed by considering dierent types of end
uses, such as commercial or residential, which were further
classified as shown in Table 10-5. From Table 10-5, we can see
that end uses are not very uniform. BBMP provided the data
for all types of properties except commercial units.
Hence these commercial units were randomly picked to
represent all t ypes which require water and the type of source
they depend upon.
The survey was carried out for 162 individual households,
44 Paying Guests1 (PG), 2 slums (refer Table 10-5),
38 commercial establishments were chosen, of which 18 have
their own bore wells and 10 depend on BBMP. A door to door
interview was carried out with a response rate of 90%.
3.1.1. Selection of Water Tanker Operators as
Respondents
The study findings are based on a primary sur vey carried out
with tanker operators. Survey and discussions with
Tanker owners were conducted to understand the dynamics
of supply versus demand in terms of areas of operations,
delivery schedule and delays, demand assessment
by dierent types of end users (largely domestic and
construction) and seasonal variations.
The tanker operators were interviewed for various aspects
like the motivation to start their business, how they operate
in terms of distance covered, localities they cater to, source
of water supply, quality issues, customer complaints and
satisfaction with respect to the deliver y time, operation and
maintenance and economics of investment.
3.1.2 Findings
During the survey, it was observed that not all apartments
are 100% dependent on tanker supply. Individual apartments
had groundwater wells which catered to some percentage of
actual demand, while the balance was being met by tankers
with varying capacities. Generally, for sampled apartments
within each locality, tankers with capacities of 6,000 litres
and 12,000 litres supplied water. The average tanker capacity
was determined based on these two tanker volumes and
the number of apartments sampled within each locality, to
arrive at an estimate of water demand met by tankers alone.
This average tanker capacity was multiplied by the supply gap
encountered due to insuicient supply through groundwater
wells, to arrive at the approximate total number of tankers
that are required/supplying water to all the existing
apartments in each locality within Bellandur ward.
No in
the
ward
(BBMP)
Sample
size
Percent
of
survey
sample
Residential
Individual
homes 22,795 162 46%
Apartments 281 77 22%
PG 112 44 13%
Commercial
IT 23 51%
Recreational
Center/ Malls
4 2 1%
Slum 2 2 1%
Shops NA 38 11%
Hospitals 6 6 2%
Hotels 17 14 4%
Table 10- 5 Percentage distribution of dierent water users within
the Survey Sample (Source: Author’s calculation)

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 177
3.2. Allocative Eciency Mapping
Allocative eiciency is an economic concept as defined in
a technical brief by Global Water Partnership (GWP Technical
Brief 4) that relates to the distribution of factors of production
(i.e. the resources used to produce particular goods and
services) and to the distribution of the goods and services
produced within an economy. From a water perspective,
in this study, the concept covers the allocation of the available
water resources among competing “uses” within domestic
use i.e., potable versus non potable uses. The allocation is
considered to be “eicient” when the net benefits gained
from the use of water in these various ways are maximized.
Improving allocative eiciency therefore means examining
how water can best be allocated and used to achieve,
in a balanced way, a multitude of society’s goals.
Allocative eiciency mapping is a method to quantify input
water, essentially freshwater coming out as black and grey
water which, aer treatment, can be appropriately used for
non-potable uses that are competing now for freshwater
use. The survey included such apar tments where their own
STPs are recycling water for toilet flushing, landscaping or
gardening. Excess treated water, which is a disposal problem,
can be allocated or supplied to nearby dwellings and
commercial units for the same non potable uses.
Figure 10-7 BWSSB Advertisement for selling reclaimed water (Source: The Hindu Newspaper)

178 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
04
Findings
4.1. Actual Water Demand
The Phase I survey responses indicated a lack of knowledge
among the respondents about their actual water usage
levels as their usage is not metered at the household level.
Quantification of the actual water demand for potable and
non-potable uses are tabulated in Table 10-6.
The 38 commercial units that were administered with the
water demand questionnaire are categorized in Table 10-7.
The drinking water was purchased in the form of water cans.
The tankers supplied water which would be collected in
the sump or Overhead Tank (OHT) and used for toilet flushing
and washing. The drinking water accounts only for 6% of
the demand. Auto garage and salons/ spa facilities require
approximately 5,000 litres of water per day and are the largest
users of water.
The demand estimation also posed certain challenges which
were overcome by using cer tain approaches tabulated
in Table 10-8.
4.2. Fit for Purpose Allocation of Reclaimed Water
Aer accounting the total non-potable uses, our study
accounted for specific non -potable uses relevant to study
region and southern India, which are few in the literature.
Every household has a cultural practice of washing the front
yard every day to put Rangoli2. Washing is extended to streets
for dust suppression. As seen in Figure 10-8, the surveyed
sample in the ward uses 296.5 kilo litres per day for street
washing.
Type of supply per day Total demand in lpd
Type of Commercial unit
in each Locality
Total number of
shops/units Water can Tan ker s
Stationery 0
Hardware 130 030
Bakery 8240 01,920
Auto garage 7210 500 4,970
Supermarket 6180 100 1,680
veg and fruit vending shop 6180 01,080
Parlor/Salon 7210 500 4,970
Garments 130 030
Fancy/Novelty 260 0120
Tot al 38 1,140 1,100 14,800
No End users Water demand
(lpd)
Wastewater
generated % treated Volume requiring
treatment (lpd)
1Residential Units 171,000 136,800 0136,800
2Apartments 8,764,000 7,011, 200 95 350,560
3Hospitals 638,100 510,480 20 408,384
4Hotels 93,780 75,024 20 60,019
5Restaurants 57,750 46,200 046,200
6IT parks 1,863,000 1,490,400 70 447,120
Tot al 1 1,587,6 30 9,270,104 1,449,083
Table 10-7 Total water demand in the s ampled commercial unit s (Source: Author’s sur vey)
Table 10- 6 Water demand and wastewater generated by dierent end users (Source: Author’s calculation)

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 179
Figure 10-9 To the ex treme le of the image, we see a lady drawing
Rangoli and a nother lady washing the front yard of her hou se.
The entire st reet ahead will be washed every day to suppress
dust using at least 20 to 30 lit res per day using a hosepipe
(Source: Auth or, photo captured in study area)
Figure 10-8 Every day, mud streets are washed to s uppress dust
using a hosepipe from own borewell (Source: Author,
photo captured in study area)
Table 10- 8 Challenges for estimating demand of non-consumptive uses (Source: Author’s construction based on survey)
No Activity Challenges to quantify exact demand Our approach for demand estimation
1Car
washing
Number of cars - owned cars could be obtained by
survey but taxi cars or private cars could not be
assessed.
Questionnaire survey of 285 households,
with no. of cars. The property tax information
collected from BBMP gives us the car parking
area details from which we could work out
an estimated number of cars.
Frequency of washing.
Survey interaction included car owners,
cleaners to identify method, frequency of
cleaning.
No uniform method for car washing.
For bucket wash, 25 litres of water quantity is
assumed. For spray wash, mechanic shops have
air spray.
2SStreet
washing
Mode of washing used varies.
Some users use a hose pipe and others use
buckets. The purpose also varies, either for dust
suppression alone or for application of Rangoli.
(see footnote next page)
Observtions were recorded during
erly morning when commercil nd
residentil estblishments use/spry
wter to suppress dust.
Spatial factor: the area washed cannot
be limited to the surrounding space and
cannot be demarcated or measured.
Seasonal variations
Cultural factors: During festivities, washing is
more periodical
People were asked to come out with the motive
behind this; responses claimed that it was
mainly for one of the following three reasons:
i. Religious practices
ii. Dust suppression
iii. Habitual reasons or the influence of
others who practice it.
3OHT
overflow
Period of overflow varies. The sampled
households show the period of overflow ranging
from 15 mins to 2 hours. Some residences have
overflow throughout the night. This issue is
primarily behavioural and negligence as water is
a free good for them.
Whenever overflow was observed, we
requested respondents to permit us to measure
the flow rate. The time taken to fill one bucket
was noted and that gave us the flow rate.

180 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
4.3. Analysis of Tanker Water Supply
There are various dimensions of anonymit y observed while
estimating the number of private tankers getting into
the business as there is no formal registration or licensing in
place to trade the right quality and quantity of water.
First it was observed that the tankers can be classified based
on the end users they cater to and sources of supply, as shown
in Table 10-9.
Tankers withdraw water from borewells. Borewells can be
further classified as: i. borewells owned by tanker companies;
ii. Borewells dug by BBMP; iii, purchase from borewells owned
by individual property occupants. Table 10-10 shows the
estimate of water withdrawn from own borewells is largest
quantity of 23 lakh litres.
To understand the growth of this business in this ward, Table
10-11 shows the number of companies which have got into
this trade over the past 15 years and has flourished since
the advent of Special Economic Zones (SEZ) and residential
development over a decade.
There are 423 tankers supplying for the sample size of
350 dwellings of which 336 tankers (79%) cater to apartments,
108 (26%) cater to the households and 15 (4%) tankers were
supplying to the shops. The total volume of supply is 25 lakh
litres per day. The dierent capacities of tankers are listed in
Table 10-12. The price for supplying one load of full capacity
depends on the radius of operation and type of land use
tabulated in Table 10-14. The price increases with every
10 km increase in radius of operation. The apar tments and IT
parks get into annual contracts with the tanker vendors with
an agreement on a fixed price and number of loads of supply
throughout the year (Table 10-13).
Thirty-six percent of tanker suppliers do not check the quality
of water nor do the consumers ask about the quality. But
respondents of household have acknowledged that the water
is not of the same quality with respect to the color. At times it
is muddy brown in color and has a lot of particles which they
simply accept as there is no other option.
Table 10-13 Cost per tanker load supplied to d ierent land use
types (Source: Author’s survey findings)
Types of
consumers
No of tanker
suppliers
Total volume of
water supplied
per day
(in Litres)
Apartments 3744,000
Independent
villas 3186,000
Commercial
establishments 2150,000
Oice/IT parks 11 1,801,000
Construction
sites 3354,000
Colleges/
Recreation
center
2132,000
Slums 2156,000
Tot al 25 3,391,000
Types of supply No of tankers
Quantity
supplied
(lakh li tres per day)
Own borewells 34 2,397,000
Purchase from
private borewells 11 1,558,000
BBMP Bore wells 4228,000
No
No of
tanker
companies
Capacities
(in Litres)
No of
tankers
No of
loads
Quantity
supplied
(per day)
123,000 2 8 24,000
224,400 3 5 22,000
366,000 12 111 1,716,000
417,50 0 11 23 405,000
5312,000 22 53 1,224,000
Tot al 50 200
Type of land use Selling price
(Rs)
per load
Apartments 600-1,000
Commercial 800
Construction 800-900
Coorporate firms 1,000-1,250
Slums 200
Independent houses 500
No Years of operation
No of sampled
tanker
companies
No of
tankers
11 year 2 4
22-5 years 14 9
35-10 years 8 5
410 – 15 years 1 2
Table 10- 9 Classification of tankers catering to dierent consumers
(Source: Author’s computation based on survey data)
Table 10-11 Classificat ion based on years of star ting the business
(Source: Author’s survey findings)
Table 10-10 Classificat ion of tankers based on source of water
supply (Source: Author’s calculation / survey findings)
Table 10-12 Classification based on type of capacities or volume of
water (Source: Author’s survey findings)

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 181
4.4. Willingness of Tanker Vendors to Supply
Reclaimed Water
To recommend tankers as a formal reclaimed water service
provider, tanker operators were asked if they were willing to
supply reclaimed water, as tabulated in Table 10-14 and
Table 10-15. Four factors were considered that might influence
the tankers to operate the business of reclaimed water supply,
i.e. revenue, quality assurance, consumer willingness to buy,
pro-environment. A combination of factors influenced the
responses by tanker operators and the factors presumed by
tanker operators for not buying water (Table 10-15).
Question number 12 of the Questionnaire for private water
supply tanker vendors (see Appendix A) asked,
“Do you think that the taker business will be sustainable
in the long run?” All the vendors admitted that water is scarce
and they will soon run out of business. Then they were shown
the advertisement (Figure 10-8) and informed about
the alternative arrangement they could make.
They were asked, with BWSSB selling non-potable water as
an alternative, would they be able to invest in a separate
tanker just to supply reclaimed water and sell it to the same
customers who buy freshwater from them. The responses
were as shown in Table 10-14 and Table 10-15.
Behavioural, economic and operational challenges have
been identified in this study that hinder the development
of mechanisms that incentivize the reduction of fresh
water usage for non-consumptive uses and promote reuse.
(Ravishankar et al., 2018a)
Factors for
buying BWSSB
water at 15Rs
per KL
Percentage
of Tankers
supplying
from their own
borewells.
Sample size
indicated within
brackets
Tankers
supplying by
purchasing
from borewells.
Sample size
indicated within
brackets
Revenue 33% (4) 17% (1)
Revenue, BWSSB
giving quality
assurance
17% (2) 0%
Consumer
willingness to
buy
33% (4) 50% (3)
pro-
Environment,
revenue
17% (2) 33% (2)
Tot al 4 8% (12) 24% (6)
Factors for not
buying
Tankers
supplying
from their own
borewells
Tankers
supplying by
purchasing from
borewells
Consumer won’t
accept buying
reclaimed water
13% 50%
No provision for
people to store 13% 17%
Quality Concern 50% 0%
Tanker
investment and
maintenance
25% 33%
Tot al 32% 24%
Table 10-14 Willingness of Tanker vendors to buy reclaimed water
(Source: Author’s survey)
Table 10-15 Reasons for n ot buying reclaimed water by Tanker
vendors (Source: Author’s survey)

182 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
4.5. Associations between Water Demand and
End User
Water demand is influenced by the type of end user due to
the presence or absence of a kitchen and bathrooms and,
in commercial units, demand depends on the type of toilet
facilities (either urinals or toilets). The current water use
in apartments and IT parks constitutes 92% of the Ward’s
demand. The non-potable demand for commercial units
ranges between 40% to 70%.
The survey response indicates a lack of knowledge among
respondents about their actual water usage levels if their
usage is not metered at the household level and not
a priced commodity. Twenty-four percent (24%) of the sample
surveyed have water as a free good.
Other major determinants which have shown a positive and
significant impact on water usage are household size and
income level. Ownership of the house also increased
the water usage, more for non-potable usage due to cleaning
their front yard and street to suppress dust. In addition to
these determinants, the attitudinal variables, like having
concern for environment and cultural habits of street
washing, significantly impact the usage. Water scarcity
in the ward is influencing the demand by reducing the usage
during non-supply hours. The influence of water demand
for all outdoor uses is not a function of income, with one
exception. This exception pertains to high end apartments
that irrigate turfgrass and keep gardens.
4.6. Awareness of Treatment and Reuse
Out of 38% of residents who were aware of treatment,
47% were willing to use reclaimed water as they reside in
apartments with STPs and are currently using it for flushing.
The remaining 52% were not willing to use reclaimed water.
These residents reside in independent houses and water is
a free good for them through their own dug borewells.
The 23% of tenants who are dependent on tankers were ready
to buy reclaimed water as they found it to be economical
compared to the purchase of tanker water.
4.7. Precedence of Mode of Supply for Community
Acceptance
The mode of water supply influences the attitude for
acceptance. In particular, one of the modes, own borewell, is
free, reliable, and has a regular alternative source of supply.
The mode of supply also brings in an element of disparity
with respect to aordability. BBMP borewell users are using
water as a free good and those using tanker supplied water
are paying a price for water. Tanker users were more aware
and receptive to the idea of the use of reclaimed water.
Acceptance of reclaimed water use was lower among
the BBMP borewell users and Cauvery users.
Tanker communities and communities using Public Stand
Posts would be early adaptors for reclaimed water use.
BBMP borewell and Cauvery dependent communities should
be a separate target group to be educated and informed
about the reuse concept and options.
Three aspects emerged out of this study that position
the results in the context of previous studies and explore
inferences in accounting for water use and improving
eiciency in groundwater-dependent peri-urban areas:
firstly, how water demand fluctuates amidst various socio-
economic and land use typologies by conducting a primary
survey of actual water demand; secondly, bifurcating
the demand to potable and non-potable uses and looking
into the feasibility of use of reclaimed water; and third,
drawing relations between community acceptance to use
reclaimed water with the present modes of supply (which is
more significant than the socio-economic characteristics of
the sample). The understanding of user behavior, financial
incentives and allocation of best fit water are essential,
hence the recommendations following can be scaled up to
any peri-urban area.
The understanding
of user behavior,
financial incentives
and allocation of
best fit water are
essential, hence the
recommendations
following can be
scaled up to any
peri-urban area.

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 183
05
Recommendations
5.1. Rigorous Categorization of Outdoor Uses
There is need for detailed categorization of outdoor uses as
there are several practices where reclaimed water can be
used.
It was observed in this study that 15 litres per day is used on
average for car washing alone. This volume is less than
the usage restrictions in Netherlands which is 60 to 70 litres
per car. An average of 30 litres per day is used for washing
streets using hose pipe. Commercial shops use 10 litres per
day for dust suppression on streets among the sampled data.
The auto garages sampled in the study area exhibited
5,000 litres per day of demand supplied by tankers which
could be potentially supplied with reclaimed water.
The demand assessment revealed that the land use planning
is an overlooked factor which needs to be of paramount
importance. For eicient allocation of reclaimed water,
metering the water usage is to be mandated for all residential
and commercial dwellings.
5.2. Regulating Tanker Supply for Reclaimed Water
- A Reliable Supply Provision
There is a formalized process already in this informal water
provision, as noted by Ranganathan (2014). The groundwater
abstraction and water supply through tankers is not going to
be eliminated even aer commissioning Stage V of Cauvery
in 2023. Hence addressing the groundwater withdrawal and
regulating tankers should be the first step to address
the issues. Rao, Hanjra, Drechsel, and Danso (2015) propose
aquifer recharge as a business model which can be beneficial
to tanker operators. This study recommends a similar
business model approach to supply reclaimed water.
Rao et al. (2015) suggests the process of formalization is to
emphasize regulator y simplification and address integration
of water supply management between water utilities
and informal water vendors. Hence this study strongly
recommends the formalization of tanker vendors.
Since our concern is to encourage the growth of a market for
reclaimed water, the required degree of private initiative is
summarized in Table 10-16.
The findings have shown that there are fixed routes for water
supply tankers for known target consumers and known water
demand. To build on the existing informal arrangement,
a pilot operation with a separate set of tankers can supply
treated water from STPs to assess the following:
• Route optimization which will aid in allocating the number
of tankers to meet the immediate needs;
• Return on Investment estimation for the non-potable water
demand that is to be met by these tankers and the STPs
to come up with moderate pricing for users and incentives
for suppliers;
• An online mechanism may be set up wherein users
requesting water for specific purposes is logged by
the BWSSB. If this process is done for a few months, it would
provide data to forecast trends in demand and consumption
of various types of non-potable water demand.
This can ser ve as an interim measure until dual piping
(see following) is set up in new localities.
Responses from tanker vendors reveal their interest
in the business to supply reclaimed water is revenue
generation. Hence the tanker dependent communities are
paying more and many individual dwellings are using free
water from their own borewells. The study recommends to
devise proper pricing to have all users pay for the water they
use to overcome inequity in the way water is supplied and
associated costs.
Support from BWSSB and
Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB)
Mandates to be followed
by tanker vendors
Train and upgrade skills of
workers.
Utilizing the skills and
education will create
awareness and eiciency
in maintaining water
supply and quality.
Provide flexibility to
tankers for operation and
logistics.
Give authority to collect
penalties or inspect and
complain if they find
systems not working.
Build a sense of ownership
by empowering them
might ensure larger health
and safety compliance.
Extend facilities like labs
to check quality and
accreditation system. The
charges may be included in
the water supply
Registering, licensing and
paying tax will give them
a branding and ensure to
adhere to quality.
Table 10-16 Feasibility of public private partnership for formalizing
reclaimed water supply through tankers
(Source: Author’s compilation)

184 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
5.3. Way Forward
The most common interventions thought of to
enable water reuse are dual piping with
a separate distribution network and storage
for reclaimed water. The study identified
challenges to these interventions (Table 10-17).
These are predominant challenges which will
be faced by any developed urban periphery to
consider any one of the above interventions.
Hence, reclaimed water supply through tanker
vendor seems to avoid most of the operational
and economic challenges water utilities have
to face. For the behavior challenges, steps for
the path forward suggested are:
1. The focus should be on increased sample
size of the independent residential units
for better understanding and perceptions
of users as the current study sample size of
350 covers a heterogeneous group of users.
Due to the complexity and variability of
factors aecting attitudes and knowledge,
this small sample size may not fully identif y
weak associations or dierences.
2. Understanding how to educate communities to see
reclaimed water use as a long-term investment benefit
rather than the short-term high cost is vital. Extensive
studies of this kind will help divide the groups to target
the kind of outreach required. For example, in this study
we know that the tanker dependent community members
are early adapters. They expressed their readiness and
willingness to use reclaimed water as they see the benefit
of reduced cost. Currently, expenditure on tanker supply
incurred is high as there are no other alternatives to
procure water and assured qualit y is not based on scientific
tests or analysis.
3. Once public outreach eectively brings in support from
the majority of communities, designing appropriate
policies followed by legislation, technical and
financial measures will be relatively easier to
implement for respective target groups.
Key drivers for the acceptance of reclaimed water
include positive perceptions about the treatment
process and reclaimed water, and the extent to
which other people might influence a person’s
decisions about the quality of water that STPs
produce. So, personal communication channels
(i.e. family, friends, and colleagues) must share
messages of the benefits of using recycled water
instead of focusing primarily only on the issues
and challenges of operating an STP.
The marketing strategies used by the water board
and even private land developers should be
devised in an attractive manner.
Further study should be carried out on
demand assessment from dierent supply
sources aer the 2019 notification was
released by BWSSB. It is a welcome move
to supply reclaimed water through tankers.
Understanding if the public have accepted
it, and assessing the quality and return on
investment to date, would aid in scaling up
this initiative to peri-urban areas and simultaneously inform
regulation of the private tanker vendors.
Competing water demands have been a matter of concern
with the growing requirements within and across sectors.
Peri-urban areas can facilitate pilot testing opportunities
which can give a better understanding for urban planners and
policy formulators to translate practices to city wide planning.
Formalizing the tanker supply system will substantially
expand and improve water and sanitation provision in
peri-urban areas, especially in ways that will benefit
low-income and vulnerable groups.
No Interventions or
mechanisms
Operational challenges
Behavioral challenges Economic challenges
1
Distribution
network from STP to
households.
Laying pipeline networks,
pumping stations
Public will question why
this alternative provision
is needed, instead of fresh
water supply pipelines
Additional
infrastructure cost
for construction and
maintenance
2House service – dual
piping connections
Construction and rework on
existing buildings
Public acceptance is very
diicult. For example,
rain water harvesting
structures with very little
alteration of structure
have received opposition
Cost to the
consumers for
construction and
maintenance
3Storage
Quality will deteriorate if, kept
for too long. People cannot
provide separate tanks
Spatial constraints will
not allow the public to
accept the idea at the first
instance
Additional cost for
maintenance and
disposal
Formalizing
the tanker
supply system
will substantially
expand and
improve water and
sanitation provision
in peri-urban areas,
especially in ways
that will benefit
low-income
and vulnerable
groups.
Table 10-17 Challenges for Reclaimed water usage for non-consumptive uses (Source: Author’s compilation)

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 185
References
Alhumoud, J. M., Behbehani, H. S. & Abdullah, T. H. (2003). Wastewater Reuse Practices in Kuwait. Environmentalist, 23, p. 117.
Alonso, A. D. & Ogle, A. (2010). Tourism and Hospitality Small and Medium Enterprises and Environmental Sustainability.
Management Research Review, 33(8), pp. 818-826. DOI:10.1108/01409171011065626.
Boussu, K., Kindts, C., Vandecasteele, C. & Van der Bruggen, B. (2007). Applicability of Nanofiltration in the Carwash Industry.
Separation and Purification Technology, 54(2), pp. 139-146.
BDA (Bangalore Development Authority), Revised Master Plan Document for Bengaluru – 2031, Chapter 3, Master Plan Document.
Retrieved from http://opencity.in/documents/bda-revised-master-plan-2031-master-plan-document.
BWSSB. (2017). Bengaluru Water Supply and Sewerage project (Phase 3). JICA, NJS consultants, November 2017.
CGWB. (2011). Ground Water Year Book - India 2010-11. Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources. Government of India.
Retrieved from http://www.cgwb.gov.in/documents/Ground%20Water%20Year%20Book-2010-11.pdf.
Chadchan, J. & Shankar, R. (2012). An Analysis of Urban Growth Trends in the Post- economic Reforms Period in India.
International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 1(1), pp. 36-49.
Cheng, D. (2014). The Persistence of Informality: Small-scale Water Providers in Manila’s Post-privatization Era.
Water Alternatives, 7(1), pp. 54-71.
CPCB. (1999). Status of Water Supply and Wastewater Collection Treatment and Disposal in Class I Cities-1999.
Control of Urban Pollution Series: CUPS/44/1999-2000.
. (2005a). Parivesh Sewage Pollution – News Letter. Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment
and Forests, Govt of India, Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi 110 032.
Retrieved from http://www.cpcbenvis.nic.in/cpcb_newsletter/sewagepollution.pdf.
. (2005b). Performance Status of Common Eluent Treatment Plants in India. Central Pollution Control Board, India.
. (2007a). Evaluation of Operation and Maintenance of Sewage Treatment Plants in India-2007. Control of Urban Pollution
Series: CUPS/68/2007. Central Pollution Control Board, India.
. (2007b). Advance Methods for Treatment of Textile Industry Eluents, Resource Recycling Series: RERES/7/2007.
Central Pollution Control Board, India.
. (2009). Status of Water Supply, Wastewater Generation and Treatment in Class I Cities and Class II Towns of India.
Control of Urban Pollution Series: CUPS/70/2009-10. Central Pollution Control Board, India.
CPHEEO. (2011). An Analysis of 2011 Census Data on Household Amenities with respect to Drinking Water Sources and Latrine
Facilities in Urban Areas of the Country. Ministry of Urban Development.
CSD. (2012). Environmental Report Card for Bengaluru. Centre for sustainable development.
CWC. (2010). Water and Related Statistics. Water Planning and Project Wing, Central Water Commission, India.
Dolnicar, S. & Schäfer, A. I. (2009). Desalinated Versus Recycled Water: Public Perceptions and Profiles of the Accepters.
Journal of Environmental Management, 90(2), pp. 888-900.
Dolnicar, S., Hurlimann, A. & Grün, B. (2014). Branding Water. Water research, 57, pp. 325-338.
Dolnicar, S. & Saunders, C. (2005). Marketing Recycled Water: Review of Past Studies and Research Agenda, in Khan, S. J., Muston,
M. H. & Schaefer, A. I. (eds.) Integrated Concepts in Water Recycling, pp. 181-192. Wollongong: University of Wollongong.
Domene, E., Saurí, D. & Parés, M. (2005). Urbanization and Sustainable Resource Use:
The Case of Garden Watering in the Metropolitan Region of Barcelona. Urban Geography, 26(6), pp. 520–535.
Dziegielewski, B., Kiefer, J. C., Opitz, E. M., Porter, G. A., Lantz, G. L., DeOreo, W. B., Mayer, P. W. & Olaf, J. N. (2000). Commercial and
Institutional End Uses of Water Denver, CO: American Water Works Association (AWWA) Research Foundation and the American.
Ellen MacAr thur Foundation. (2015). Towards a Circular Economy: Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition.
Evans, A. E. V., Varma, S. & Krishnamurthy, A. (2014). Formal Approaches to Wastewater Reuse in Bengaluru, India.
Sustainable Water and Sanitation Services for All In A Fast Changing World, pp. 1–6.
Friedler, E., Lahav, O., Jizhaki, H. & Lahav, T. (2006). Study of Urban Population Attitudes towards Various Wastewater Reuse
Options: Israel as a Case Study.Journal of Environmental Management,81(4), pp. 360-370.
Gleeson, T., Wada, Y., Bierkens, M. F. P. & van Beek, L. P. H. (2012). Water Balance of Global Aquifers Revealed by Groundwater
Footprint. Nature, 488, pp. 197-200. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature11295.
Gleick, P. H., Srinivasan, V., Henges-Jeck, C. & Wol, G. H. (2004). Urban Water Conservation: A Case Study of Commercial and
Industrial Water Use in California. In Gleick, P. H. (Ed.) The world’s water 2004-2005, pp. 131-156. Baltimore, MD: Island Press.
Hingorani, P. (2011). The Economics of Municipal Sewage Water Recycling and Reuse in India. India Infrastructure Report,
pp. 312-322.
Hui, I. & Cain, B. E. (2017). Overcoming Psychological Resistance Toward Using Recycled Water in California. Water and Environment
Journal, 32(1), pp. 17–25. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/wej.12285.
Hurlimann, A. (2008). Community Attitudes to Recycled Water Use: An Urban Australian Case Study–Part 2. Salisbury, SA, CRC for
Water Quality and Treatment Project, (201307).
Hurlimann, A., Dolnicar, S. & Meyer, P. (2009). Understanding Behaviour to Inform Water Supply Management in Developed nations
- A Review of Literature, Conceptual Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(1), pp. 47-56.

186 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
IWA. (2016). Water Utility Pathways in a Circular Economy.
Jamwal, P., Thomas, B. K., Lele, S. & Srinivasan, V. (2014). Addressing Water Stress through Wastewater Reuse:
Complexities and Challenges in Bangalore, India.
Janakarajan, S. (2009). Urbanization and Per-urbanization: Aggressive Competition and Unresolved Conflicts.
The case of Chennai city in India. South Asian Water Studies, 1(1), pp. 51-76.
Khan, S. & Roser, D. (2007).Risk Assessment and Health Eects Studies of Indirect Potable Reuse Schemes.
University of New South Wales, Centre for Water and Waste Technology.
KSPCB. (2012). A Report of Monitoring Committee on Performance of Wastewater Treatment in the Apartments and Other
Establishments in BBMP Limits of Bengaluru. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, Bengaluru.
Kuttuva, P. S. (2015). An Integrated Analysis of the Economic, Social, Institutional and Environmental Factors Aecting
Decentralized Urban Wastewater Reuse systems : Insights from Bengaluru, India.
Lahnsteiner, J., Van Rensburg, P. & Esterhuizen, J. (2018). Direct Potable Reuse–a Feasible Water Management Option.
Journal of Water Reuse and Desalination,8(1), pp. 14-28.
Leong, C. (2016). The Role of Emotions in Drinking Recycled Water. Water , 8(11). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/w8110548.
Liu, K., Fu, H. & Chen, H. (2018). Research on the Influencing Mechanism of Traditional Cultural Values on Citizens’ Behavior
Regarding the Reuse of Recycled Water. Sustainability, 10(1). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010165.
Lee, H. & Tan, T. P. (2016). Singapore’s Experience with Reclaimed Water: NEWater.International Journal of Water Resources
Development,32(4), pp. 611-621.
McDonald, R. I., Weber, K., Padowski, J., Flörke, M., Schneider, C., Green, P. A., Gleeson, T., Eckman, S., Lehner, B., Balk, D., Boucher,
T., Grill, G. & Montgomery, M. (2014). Water on an Urban Planet: Urbanization and the Reach of Urban Water Infrastructure.
Global Environmental Change, 27, pp. 96–105.
MoUD (Ministry of Urban Development). (2006). National Urban Sanitation Policy.
Ministry of urban Development, Government of India.
. (2010). Service Level Bench Marking Databook, Improving Service Outcomes 2008-9.
Retrieved from http://mohua.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/databook.pdf.
. (2012). Wastewater Recycle and Reuse: The Need of the Hour Workshop. 18 April 2012.
Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India: India. [PowerPoint presentation]
. (2012). Improving Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Services: Advisory Note, July 2012.
Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India.
MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forest). (2012). Answer to Question No. 637 by Minister of State for Environment and Forest,
Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India in Rajya Sabha (Council of States) dated March 20, 2012.
Narain, V. (2009a). Growing City, Shrinking Hinterland. Land Acquisition, Transition and Conflict in Peri-urban Gurgaon, India.
Environment and Urbanization, 21(2), pp. 501-512. DOI:10.1177/0956247809339660.
. (2009b). Gone Land, Gone Water. Crossing Fluid Boundaries in Periurban Gurgaon and Faridabad, India.
South Asian Water Studies, 1(2), pp. 143–158
Norström, A. (2007). Planning for Drinking Water and Sanitation in Peri-urban Areas. Swedish Water House Report 21, pp. 1–16.
Queensland Water Commission. (2008). Standard Vehicle Washing: Fixed Commercial Premises. Report Vehicle Washing – Part II,
Water Eiciency Guidelines, Queensland, Australia.
Raj, K. (2015). Urbanization and water supply: An analysis of unreliable water supply in Bengaluru City, India.
Nature, Economy and Society: Understanding the Linkages, pp. 113–132.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2404-4_6.
Ravishankar, C., Nautiyal, S. & Seshaiah, M. (2018a). Social Acceptance for Reclaimed Water Use: A Case Study in Bengaluru.
Recycling, 3(1), p. 4.
. (2018b). Making Every Drop Count – Micro Level Water Demand Accounting Challenges and Way Forward,
Working Paper 424. Institute for Social and Economic Change.
Rao, K., Hanjra, M. A., Drechsel, P. & Danso, G. (2015). Business Models and Economic Approaches Suppor ting Water Reuse.
In Drechsel, P., Qadir, M.& Wichelns, D. (eds.) Wastewater, pp. 195–216. Springer.
Revell, A. & Blackburn, R. A. (2007). The Business Case for Sustainability? An Examination of Small Firms in the UK’s Construction
and Restaurant Sectors. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(6), pp. 404-420. DOI:10.1002/bse.499.
Rollnick, R. & Naudin, T. (2010). UN-Habitat Annual Repor t 2010. UN-Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya.
Tortajada, C. & Ong, C. N. (2016). Reused Water Policies for Potable Use.
International Journal of Water Resources Development, 32(4), pp. 500-502. DOI: 10.1080/07900627.2016.1179177.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2016.1179177.
UNPD. (2011). World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision.
. (2016). The World’s Cities in 2016 – Data Booklet. Department of Economic and Social Aairs, Population Division.
UNEP. (2010). Clearing the Waters: A Focus on Water Quality Solutions. Nairobi UNEP.
Retrieved from https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/clearing_the_waters3.pdf.
UN Water. (2017). World Water Development Report-Wastewater the untapped resource.

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 187
Retrieved from https://www.unwater.org/publications/world-water-development-report-2017/.
Vishwanath, S. (2014). Rainwater Harvesting in Urban Areas. Bangalore, India.
Retrieved from http://www.rainwaterclub.org/docs/R.W.H.industries.urban.pdf.
Walpole, R. E. & Myers, R. J. (1985).
Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. 3 Edition, Macmillan Publishing Co., New York, USA.
WSP. (2011). Economic Impact of Inadequate Sanitation in India. New Delhi: Water and Sanitation Program.
WHO (World Health Organization). (2004). Information Products: Water, Sanitation and Health. World Health Organization.
Appendix
Questionnaire for private water supply tanker vendors
No Water Tankers Skip Logic – Question
no to be asked
Name of the supplier: Agency Name:
Contact no:
1Since when you have started this business?
2What is the motivation behind you starting this business?
3How many and Which localities do you cater to?
4What is the radius of operation? Kms. Within Bellandur ward?
5How many trucks do you have?
6What is the range of capacities these trucks have?
7
What is the price range according to the capacity?
Have you employed people and what are their roles?
How many personnel do you need to supply water?
Driver, the one who places the pipe into the tank?
Total investment in business?
Specific costs – Capital costs and O and M costs
8Can you please tell how many tankers operate in this ward?
And their contact numbers
9
What is the demand in each locality?
Can you please list or help in telling which houses in specific
areas or establishments take more water from you?
Per day or per week basis?
When is the demand high?
Is there any pattern?
10 What is the source of water for you?

188 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
11
During scarcity, what are the options you resort to get water?
Public stand posts
Lake
Purchase from individual houses
Purchase from neighbouring areas
Purchase from apartment complex
How much do you pay and are there variations in costs of
payment across these above mentioned sources
and time – peak and normal?
Are there situations when you do not get water from any of
these sources?
At such times, do you refuse to supply water?
Will this aect your business and reliability?
How is the competition in tanker business?
Do you think more number of people are getting into this
business and how does it aect you?
12
What are the problems you encounter in your business?
What do you think is useful to make things easier
for people and you since you are the lifeline to people who get
water from you?
Do you feel this business is sustainable in the long run?
13 What will you do if the source which your drawing water from
cannot be reliable in terms of quantity and quality?
14 Do you check quality of water?
If yes, what is the process adopted?
15
Have people complained to you about quality?
Or do they question you about the source of supply?
Have you received any complaints about water quality?
If yes, please explain the type of complaints?
How do you handle them?
16
Have you had problems with supply?
i.e., has there been a situation where water was not available
when you had to supply?
17
What is the Seasonal demand and tanker operating during
summer and other season
Specify, no. of tankers supplied in a week during summer and
o season?
Frequency and quantity?
18 Price variation across seasons, I understand that when you pay
more, you have to charge more, please give details
19
Do you have any association of Tankers?
If yes, how does it function, formal or informal functioning
methods and how do you help each other?
Are areas of supply defined informally or formally?
Can you supply water in someone else’s area?
Is there any objection of supplying water to areas other than
your area?
20 If BWSSB sells its treated water for you, are you willing to buy
and supply it to consumers?
21 Is there anything else you would like to share –
The problems or issues with Water supply

10 Market for Reclaimed Water through Private Water Tankers – Sustainable Service Provision in Peri-urban Areas 189
Notes
1. There are increased number of paying guest accommodations that have mushroomed in the city to cater to the flow of
migrant population from all over the countr y. These paying guest accommodations largely do not have kitchens and
aid working professionals. We have chosen this category since it alters the water demand calculation requirement within
the ward premises.
2. Rangoli is a very popular folk art that has several religious connotations across the expanse of India.
This age-old tradition is about drawing geometric patterns or abstract in courtyards. The designs depend on the theme
of the occasion.

©Travel Stock/Shutterstock.

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reuse in Nairobi, Kenya 191
11
Toward SDG 6:
Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reuse
in Nairobi, Kenya
Lesley Rotich and Larry A. Swatuk
Lesley Rotich, School of Environment, Resources and Sustainability University of Waterloo, Canada.
e-mail: lesleymemo@gmail.com
Larry Swatuk, School of Environment, Enterprise and Developemnt University of Waterloo, Canada.
e-mail: lswatuk@uwaterloo.ca
Abstract
Targets 6.1 and 6.2 of SDG 6 focus on delivering and ensuring drinking water and sanitation for all people. There is considerable
possibility for achieving these targets in par ticular through improved use and management of water currently available to people
both as blue water (rainfall and accessible groundwater) and reclaimed wastewater. Put dierently, there is great potential for
a city such as Nairobi to make better use of the water that it already has. Wastewater reuse is proving to be an economically and
environmentally sound demand and supply management strateg y, especially with climate change uncertainties in mind.
To establish the current use and possible uptake of wastewater reuse in Kenya, 27 in-depth inter views were conducted with the
main stakeholders of water recycling within Nairobi and its environs. They included government oicials, technical experts of
recycling systems and formal and informal wastewater users. While not definitive, our results indicate that grey and wastewater
recycling can reduce both freshwater demands and the amount of untreated wastewater being discharged into the environment.
Public authorities and implementers need to engage with other stakeholders to provide regulation and standardization of
the industr y. Improving the level of knowledge of these systems among members of the public would also build trust and increase
the uptake of these systems.
Keywords
Greywater, wastewater, reuse, SDG 6, Nairobi, governance

192 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
01
Introduction
The conventional methods of water supply and wastewater
management systems utilize centralized large infrastructure
to capture, store and transport massive amounts of water
over long distances. These methods have been shown to be
unsustainable for economic, societal and environmental
reasons and have failed to guarantee water security1.
They are expensive to construct, have negative environmental
impacts, and leave basic human water needs still unmet
(Gleick, 2000).
It is estimated that in the coming years, 60% of the world’s
population will be urban dwellers (Stavenhagen et al.,
2018). This population growth brings about unprecedented
challenges, with provision of water and
sanitation being a pressing issue that is painfully
felt when lacking. Municipal water systems are
facing immense pressure to meet the needs of
the rapidly growing population and in some
places, pressures to meet increasing industrial
demands and/or rising luxur y expectations of
the relatively advantaged, fueling the need for
sustainable water use. While this reality
presents several challenges, it also oers
an opportunity to move away from past
inadequate water management systems to more
innovative ways that incorporate integrated
urban water management solutions like demand
management strategies which involve the use of
treated wastewater to meet demands
( WW AP, 20 17).
In Kenya, ever since the construction of the
Ruiru Dam in the 1930s, water managers in
Nairobi have consistently focused on large-scale
development of surface water to meet increasing
demand (Blomkvist & Nilsson, 2017). Water is sourced from
distant river basins in greater propor tions and at a greater
pace to meet the demands of the fast-growing metropolis
(Nilsson , 2011). A strategy based on supply extension is both
physically and economically unsustainable, calling for
the need to diversify water sources (Ledant, 2013).
Alternative water sources include rainwater, brackish water,
municipal wastewater and greywater. Of these, grey and
wastewater present potentially viable options for Nairobi
based on reliability, availability and raw water quality as
illustrated by Kariuki et al. (2011).
This chapter explores the question, what is the potential
for greywater and wastewater reuse to contribute to water
security in Nairobi? We present our findings in relation to:
(i) the drivers for and benefits from recycling greywater and
wastewater; (ii) the barriers to the uptake of wastewater
reuse; and (iii) the role of greywater and wastewater reuse in
planning for urban water security.
Nairobi is Kenya’s capital city whose metropolitan region
has a current population of approximately 4 million people.
Inadequate infrastructure and services can be seen in
the region’s water and sanitation sector where a large
portion of the population relies on informal vendors for
household water and disposes liquid and solid wastes into
ditches, streams and open dumpsites (World Bank, 2011).
According to the 2009 census, the main sources for water
for Nairobi residents were: piped water 76%, water vendor
16.5%, and spring/well/borehole 7.2%; sewerage ser vice
connection was at 48% (KNBS, 2009). Somewhat masked by
these statistics are the significant socio-economic dierences
that exist within the city. Kibera, for example, is a well-
known slum within Nairobi’s boundaries with an estimated
population between 300,000 to close to 1 million people.
The slum is situated on a mere 2.5 square kilometers of land
approximately 5 kilometers from the cit y center.
Kibera informal settlements suer from a host of challenges
that include inadequate healthcare, security,
energy, housing and access to water and
sanitation (Mutisya & Yarime, 2011).
Wastewater systems range from a variety
of simple low-cost devices which diver t
greywater to direct reuse in, for example,
toilet flushing and lawn irrigation to
complex treatment systems that incorporate
sedimentation tanks, bioreactors, filters,
pumps, and disinfection. Some wastewater
systems are home-built piping and storage
systems, but there are also a variety of
commercial wastewater systems available
which filter water to remove hair, debris,
pollutants and bacteria from wastewater
(Allen et al., 2010). For the purposes of this
study, formal systems are loosely defined
as commercial systems that treat and store
the water before reuse. Informal systems
include the bucket method (use of a bucket
to collect used water for reuse) and home-
built direct reuse systems that do not go through a treatment
process before reuse. Grey/wastewater systems are defined
as systems that can treat both greywater and blackwater.
As discussed briefly in Section 2, the study chose two
economically dierent areas for analysis: Kibera, where
the challenges are greatest as is the need for potable water
and improved sanitation; and dierent sections of middle-
to-high income Nairobi, as reflected in the commercial
reach of private companies selling and installing greywater/
wastewater reuse systems. The study did not aim to be
definitive; rather, it sought to explore the potential for
the roll-out of systems of grey water/wastewater reuse to be
meaningful contributors to achieving SDG 6. Our research
suggests that there is significant potential for the uptake of
grey/wastewater reuse across Nairobi. However, there are
considerable – but not impassable – barriers to overcome.
Somewhat ironically, grey/wastewater reuse at household
There is
significant
potential for the
uptake of grey/
wastewater reuse
across Nairobi.
However, there are
considerable – but
not impassable
– barriers to
overcome.

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reusein Nairobi, Kenya 193
scale is very common across Kibera through the bucket
system but the capacity for either taking up or scaling up
formal systems is limited. Across more aluent sections of
Nairobi, where the capacity for both taking up and scaling
up formal systems is considerable, the willingness to do so
is hampered by a variety of social, political and economic
factors.
The balance of the paper proceeds as follows: in Section 2
we describe our methodology. Section 3 presents our results
in terms of six drivers for reuse (lack of sewerage connectivity;
practical benefits; legislation; financial incentives; modern
technology; and environmental altruism) and five barriers to
uptake and/or expansion (cost; lack of government support;
public perceptions regarding health; lack of knowledge;
absence of standardized systems).Section 4 presents
a discussion where we explore, among other things,
the economic, technical and social feasibility of grey/
wastewater reuse and its potential to contribute to urban
water security. Lastly, Section 5 presents our conclusions and
makes several recommendations for further studies.
02
Methodology
2.1. Data Collection
Data collection consisted of both primary and secondary
methods. Primary data collection involved fieldwork which
included in-person and phone interviews with various
stakeholders of grey and wastewater recycling within
the city as well as observations. Secondary data included
review of government documentation, reports and other
relevant literature.
Building on the foundational literature, primar y data was
collected using semi-structured interviews and an interview
guide was used to ensure that all themes were covered.
Interviews were conducted in person whenever possible.
Participants were grouped into four dierent categories
and a set number of similar, open-ended questions were
asked of participants in the same category (see Appendix for
the questions). This approach ensured regularity
within the dierent categories while also allowing for
unexpected themes and considerations to be explored if they
came up.
In total, 27 interviews were conducted, and they consisted
of 6 government oicials from dierent departments,
6 technical experts who are in grey and wastewater recycling
business, 5 clients who use the formal systems and
11 residents of Katwekera village in Kibera who use
the informal system. Of the 27 inter views, 22 were conducted
in person by the researcher and audio recorded, 2 were
carried out by an assistant and the responses written down,
one respondent declined to be recorded while another
interview was conducted telephonically.
2.2. Data Analysis
Qualitative analysis was used to understand the participants’
perspectives within their dierent social contexts. It was
loosely based on the six step thematic analysis as outlined by
Braun & Clarke (2006). Firstly, the data was transcribed, and
ideas noted. Next, initial codes were generated from these
ideas, followed by a search for themes. The themes were
then reviewed and defined and finally, a report was written.
Thematic analysis is a method used to identify, analyze and
report patterns within data and to interpret various aspects of
the research topic (Boyatzis, 1998; Braun & Clarke, 2006).
It is a useful method for examining the dierent perspectives
of the research par ticipants, exploring the similarities
and dierences and generating unanticipated insights from
the data (Nowell et al., 2017). This method was suitable for

194 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
this study given the dierent participant categories and thus,
dierent perspectives on the same issue.
Interview questions were not necessarily pre-coded but
followed a similar pattern which helped in developing initial
codes throughout the interviews, facilitating coding and
analysis. Additionally, the qualitative data analysis soware
NVIVO was used so that, upon identification of the major
themes, the user could separate the information within them
to suit dierent subcategories. Some of the considerations
made in the creation of subcategories for this study included
highlighting specific words or ideas that reoccurred during
the interviews, classifying a range of answers, and identif ying
conflicting responses within a theme. In essence,
while coding is done by the researcher, the program facilitates
the organization of large chunks of data and eases the process
of finding connections and understanding patterns within
the data.
To maintain confidentiality, participants were coded
according to their representative group followed by
a numerical digit. Government oicials were coded as GO,
technical experts as TE, formal users as User and Kibera
residents (informal users) as KR. Participants were referred to
based on their codes, e.g. “according to GO2”,
“User 1 mentioned”, or “TE1 said…”
03
Results
3.1. Drivers for Grey/Wastewater Reuse
3.1.1. Lack of Adequate Sewerage Infrastructure
In Nairobi, one of the major drivers for wastewater recycling is
the lack of connection to the sewer line for many households
in the city. The law requires that wastewater should only be
discharged aer it has met certain standards for houses,
industries and other establishments that are not connected to
the main sewer lines, forcing house owners to invest in various
sanitation solutions such as septic tanks, biodigesters and
recycling systems. “On most occasions, people who consider
wastewater in this country or East African countries do it
because they don’t have access to the sewer line, prompting
widespread use of septic tanks. But over the years, the septic
tanks have caused problems with neighbours, filling up and
overflowing and people started looking into other options like
recycling water” (TE1).
Issues with lack of connection to a sewer line also brought
to light the reason why most users mix their grey and black
water. “It’s diicult to sell the concept to someone with
a sewer line unless someone actually wants to recycle
the water. That’s why most people don’t dierentiate their
wastewater and want you to treat all of it” (TE1). With these
wastewater recycling systems, one can take care of both their
grey and black water, which would otherwise require
a dierent sanitation solution to deal with each.
3.1.2. Practical Benefits
An overwhelming majority of participants agreed that reusing
grey and wastewater reduces the reliance on freshwater.
In turn, this reduces water bills and provides more water for
non-potable uses. Estimates on cost savings were given
by three technical experts. According to TE4 and TE6, reusing
water cut their clients’ costs by 60% and 70% respectively.
According to TE5, one of his clients started reusing
wastewater to water his lawn and was able to reduce his
monthly water bill by Kshs 10,000 [approximately US $94].
In Kibera, 5 out of 6 of the participants interviewed state
that reusing greywater helps them reduce the use of, and
the cost of obtaining, freshwater. In terms of cost saving for
formal users of grey/wastewater systems, recycling water also
reduces the costs that would other wise have been incurred
through sewerage services or paying for septage hauler trucks
to empty septic tanks (User2, User 3, User 4, User 5).
Besides user benefits, wastewater recycling has positive
ecological impacts as it reduces the amount of untreated
In Nairobi, one
of the major drivers
for wastewater
recycling is the lack
of connection to the
sewer line for many
households in the
city.

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reusein Nairobi, Kenya 195
wastewater discharged into the environment. The rivers in
Nairobi are fed by eluent discharge and treatment before
disposal reduces the pollutant loads in the rivers,
as TE5 explains: “Most people actually discharge into rivers.
If we had a way of capturing this water and treating it to at
least a certain standard, even if it is half the standard and
releasing it back to the environment, you can imagine how
clean Nairobi river and all of the rivers in Nairobi would be”.
3.1.3. Legislation
Water quality regulations (2006) of the Environmental
Management and Coordination (Water Quality) Regulations,
2006 (Cap. 387) stipulate that wastewater should not be
discharged into the environment or public sewers
(for businesses with additional pollutants) without some
level of treatment. This opened up the market for wastewater
solutions, making them a necessity: “The realit y is the local
legislation drove our business to come about. You would
have customers with waste challenges, and you’d solve their
problem but generally people don’t like to spend money
on wastewater, unless someone from NEMA [National
Environmental Management Authority] is harassing them”
(TE2).
The Water Resources Management Authority [WARMA] also
encourages reusing wastewater: “We promote zero discharge.
We provide the permit for abstractors and eventually they
must commit how they are planning on managing the waste
that comes from their water use. We compel them to invest
in waste management, and if they can recycle and have zero
discharge, that’s better” (GO5).
3.1.4. Financial Incentives
Grey/wastewater recycling systems are expensive and as
such, can only be aorded by specific clientele, leaving a big
portion of the population unable to obtain these systems.
One of the participants explained how their company
increased their market reach to middle-income areas within
Nairobi: “When we started, we used to do Karen, Kileleshwa,
Lavington -- the suburb areas -- but nowadays we’ve been
able to penetrate Machakos, Kitengela and Syokimau [middle-
income areas]. We’ve come up with special pocket-friendly
packages for those people. Instead of asking for the whole
contract amount, you do an arrangement with a client where
they pay what they can, maybe monthly, quarterly, etc.” (TE6).
3.1.5. Appreciation for Modern Technology
There is an appreciation for new technology that some people
have, which can be linked to education and exposure.
Our evidence suggests that willingness and capacity to invest
in these systems varies directly with level of education.
Formally educated individuals are interested in how these
systems work and appreciate the technology.
“We’ve encountered dierent clients; there are those who buy
because of the technology, the doctors and engineers, but we
also have those who buy purely for the need” (TE6). According
to TE5, a majority of his clients are not really concerned
about their water costs, which requires him to use a dierent
strategy to convince clients to invest in the systems.
“At the entry point, we hardly use water-saving as a selling
point. We use modern technology as a key selling point” (TE5).
3.1.6. Environmental Altruism
This ‘green’ sentiment is associated with those who are
concerned about the state of the environment and was
mentioned by some participants: “The cost of water is not
really the reason why people are using the systems.
There is the issue of using modern systems, reliability of cost
and environmental awareness. People want to be able to
reuse at least some of the water in their gardens” (TE5).
3.2. Barriers to Grey/Wastewater Reuse
3.2.1. Cost/Financial Barriers
The cost of acquiring and maintaining the systems was
established to be one of the barriers hindering uptake.
Most, or sometimes all parts of the system are imported,
which increases the cost of obtaining them.
Having a greywater system also requires having separate
plumbing lines within the house and increases the costs
of having these systems which makes many people opt
for having all-inclusive wastewater recycling systems.
“Wastewater recycling is not widely practiced because it’s
an expensive aair” (TE4).
These systems require regular maintenance for optimal
functioning and have monetary costs. There are also energy
requirements as they run on electricity which can be costly,
depending on the size of the system and the house occupancy.
That also means that one needs to be connected to a reliable
power supply, with power cuts aecting regular functioning
(TE1). In addition, one needs to factor in the cost of chemicals
like chlorine, which is needed for disinfection before using
the water. As shown in Table 11-1, the average first year cost
of a grey/wastewater household system, according to study
participants, is approximately Kshs. 615,000, or US $5,080 – an
amount far beyond the aordability of most Kenyans.2
Table 11-1 Average Grey/Wastewater Household System Cost in
The First Year (A uthor’s Compilation ba sed on Data
Provided by Technical E xperts and Formal Sy stem Users)
S
System
300,000
Civil works 250,000
Electricity per annum 25,000
Chlorine per annum
20,000
Service contract per annum
20,000
Year 1 total
Kshs.615,000
[Approx. US $5,080]

196 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
3.2.2. Lack of Government Support
Participants attested to a lack of government support,
especially for technical experts who are in the industry.
When asked what the government is currently doing to aid
in wastewater recycling in Kenya, three technical experts
answered ‘nothing’ (TE2, TE6, TE5). “Instead of making
business easier by e.g. doing subsidies for people who choose
to put in wastewater treatment system to conserve water and
what not, they charge you additionally. There’s absolutely
nothing to promote business” (TE2).
The lack of support can also be seen in the lack
of proper guidance regarding wastewater reuse.
TE5 explained this, comparing it to Japan where
the government has regulations regarding what
system must be used when not connected to
the sewer system. “I’d say a lot of people want to
do the right thing, but the government has only
given a guideline to the standards you should
meet. They haven’t told the people what they
should be using, and how to do it.
Like in Japan, they identified a system; like the
Jokaso3 system is a product across the country,
anybody can actually start producing their
own Jokaso as long as it meets and passes the
required standards” (TE5).
One government oicial pointed out a lack of collaboration
between people who practice wastewater recycling and
the government: “Unless they come to us for technical advice,
we really don’t interact with people who are recycling” (GO4).
3.2.3. Public Perception and Health Risks
The perception on wastewater recycling can be demonstrated
in two ways: through a dismissive attitude towards water and
the ‘yuck factor’ associated with recycled water.
The amount of water required for household activities is far
less than that required for industries, including agriculture,
and as such there is a reluctance to recycle water for
conservation purposes.
Reusing recycled water is still viewed negatively in Kenya,
and fuels health concerns over the safety of the water.
While most system users voiced no concerns over the qualit y
of the recycled water, some participants attested to the
negative perceptions surrounding wastewater recycling
among the public. Formal users of the recycling systems
found the quality of the water to be adequate for non-
potable uses which include lawn watering, car washing and
pavement/driveway cleaning.
3.2.4. Lack of Knowledge and Awareness
Our findings suggest that knowledge on recycling systems
is limited in Kenya. The high costs of systems make them
accessible to only a specific segment of the population, with
limited knowledge of them among those who cannot aord
them. Most of the participants interviewed in Kibera did not
know about these ‘complex’ systems or how they worked.
Technical experts also acknowledged the lack of awareness
among the public and even those close to people who recycle
water. “You’ll find in a place like Karen where we’ve done a lot
of projects, your neighbor will reuse this water, but you don’t
even have any information about it and you didn’t have any
idea that this can be done” (TE6).
3.2.5. Lack of Standardized Systems
Currently, suppliers of recycling systems source whole units as
a complete package or import parts
from dierent countries and assemble
systems locally. Participants mentioned that
local manufacturing would reduce
the costs of the systems and would also help
in standardization of the industry.
The dierent systems have dierent
maintenance requirements as explained by
technical experts. For some, maintenance is
done every four months, some twice a year,
and others once a year with periodic checks
in between, especially during the holiday
seasons when it may be challenging to
avoid overloading the systems. While these
dierences may be ideal for the client, they
would present a challenge for government regulation of this
fledgling industry, especially if the systems are not vetted for
consistency in quality and eiciency. However, the imported
systems are said to be well developed due to their prevalence
in the countries from which they have been sourced, which
include USA, Germany and Japan.
The lack of
support can also
be seen in the
lack of proper
guidance regarding
wastewater
reuse.

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reusein Nairobi, Kenya 197
04
Discussion
4.1. Recycling as Sanitation Solution
Findings show that one of the major drivers for the adoption
of grey and wastewater recycling and subsequent reuse at
the residential level is the lack of connection to the sewer
system for many households. Both technical experts
and formal users discussed this, with technical experts
emphasizing the diiculties of selling the treatment systems
to those connected to the sewer line. All the formal users
used the systems as their main wastewater discharge system,
which established the need to mix both grey and black water
and to minimize pollution from either wastewater sources.
In line with the literature, our study suggests that as a form
of decentralized wastewater management, recycling systems
oer significant benefits to the user, are less resource
intensive and more ecologically sustainable. The results
of this investigation indicate that there are opportunities
for the adoption of decentralized wastewater schemes in
Nairobi, whether for individual houses or for clusters of
homes. For example, one of the technical experts discussed
the possibility of having one recycling system for a cluster of
100 homes as a sanitation solution in middle income areas,
providing the benefit of reusing water to all of those
in the cluster while distributing the costs of the system among
the users.
4.2. Water Reuse Benets
As established in the interviews here as well as in the
literature (e.g. Friedler, 2008; Morel & Diener, 2006), grey/
wastewater reuse has several economic and environmental
benefits. At a household level, it reduces water bills while
providing water for non-potable use. On a larger scale,
the reduction in domestic water consumption can reduce
freshwater demand and lower the rate of groundwater
extraction. Results from this study suggest that wastewater
reuse has the capability to reduce demands over time.
However, these findings are limited in their geographic scope
and sample size and would benefit from further research.
Nevertheless, they are indicative of grey/wastewater’s
potential and are in line with findings from peer reviewed and
grey literature (e.g. Al Baz et al., 2008).
Use of reclaimed water for non-potable needs can free up
capacity in the existing water supply system, allowing it to
serve more people. The findings of this study suggest that,
with several par ts of Nairobi experiencing water rationing
several times a week, freshwater saved through water reuse
could be supplied in greater quantity to more people and
at lower cost. A direct environmental benefit of recycling is
the reduction in pollutant discharge in streams and rivers.
With only 48% of residents connected to the sewer line,
a large portion of the population disposes liquid and solid
waste in ditches, streams and open dumpsites, posing public
health risks.
Studies have shown that the viability of water reuse increases,
and more benefits are realized, when the practice is
implemented on a large scale rather than at the individual
level. A study conducted by Friedler (2008) in Israel
established that for a country experiencing water shortages,
the benefits of reusing greywater were much more significant
when the practice was rolled out nationally or regionally as
opposed to by individual consumers. The same would apply
for Nairobi, where the economic benefits of reusing grey/
wastewater can currently only be realized by the individual
users. The lack of ability to apply them at a larger scale is
one possible explanation for the apparent reluctance of
government oicials to prioritize issues related to residential
water reuse.
4.3. Need for Better Governance
The current water quality discharge regulations fueled
the current growth of the wastewater recycling sector in
Kenya. Technical experts attested to the regulations being
a positive influence on business as EIA approvals required
eluent discharge plans. These regulations fueled the need
for homeowners to look into dierent sanitation solutions,
enabling technical experts to tap into the market.
However, there are no quality guidelines for domestic reuse
of the treated eluent. Participants adhered to the treatment
standards for eluent discharge and for irrigation purposes
for their non-potable uses. In a study of Kenya’s water
reuse policy, Wakhungu (2019) established that the current
water reuse guidelines are inadequate, and there is a need
to formulate reuse guidelines for domestic and industrial
sectors, in line with the findings for this study on residential
water reuse.
Establishment of guidelines and a focal institution for
wastewater recycling would help in standardization of
the industr y, which is currently lacking. This would also help
in guaranteeing consistent quality and eiciency of
the systems being sold to the end user, and the resultant
treated eluent. On a broader scale, this would also ease
the management of both grey and wastewater reuse practices
which currently vary according to income levels.
4.4. Ways to Overcome Barriers
Participants suggested ways to lessen the burden of cost on
the system purchaser that included tax rebates and subsidies.
An eective strategy would also be the establishment of

198 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
financial agreements between lending institutions and
government to provide credit facilities for system purchasers.
This would help new homeowners to be able to secure
housing loans that cover the installation of the systems during
construction, which would overall make it cheaper.
Those who would want to retrofit their houses but lack the
financial capacity would also benefit from this strategy.
A more complete understanding of grey/wastewater reuse
systems would help all stakeholders to make better informed
decisions and create a knowledgeable platform upon which
the industr y can develop. Technical experts mentioned
education and exposure levels as aspects that aect
the acceptance of recycled water which should be factored
in education eorts. It is possible that some negative
perceptions are fueled by unsafe reuse practices and should
be countered by investing in and demonstrating acceptable
reuse standards.
4.5. Grey/Wastewater Reuse Feasibility
4.5.1. Economic Feasibility
Price is an important variable that can significantly aect
the uptake of reuse practices. There are price considerations
for the grey/wastewater systems themselves as well as
for potable water. Some participants attested to water
being relatively low-priced in Kenya, but based on a study
conducted by Ledant (2013), this perspective may dier
depending on one’s income level. Those with lower income
levels have been found to
pay higher costs for water
compared to those in higher
and middle-income areas,
yet the latter is the segment
of the population that is
better able to aord grey/
wastewater reuse systems.
Technical experts indicate
that saving on water costs
was not a leading driver for
business based on return on
investment considerations.
Users, on the other hand,
attest that savings on water
costs is one of the benefits
they have received from
having the systems, although
not a motivation to install
them. However, suicient
demand for the systems
would reduce their costs
through economies of scale
as well as through increased
marketplace competition,
allowing them to become
more widely adopted.
4.5.2. Social Feasibility
Technical experts give a low score to knowledge of water
reuse among the public but are quick to acknowledge
that there has been a significant increase in the number of
people adopting the practice and seeking out their services.
Educational levels were found to influence the awareness of
water reuse, with more educated people appreciating the
technology and the benefits of having a water reuse system.
Income levels determine who would be able to aord
the systems, with purchase and maintenance costs
being a big factor.
The public’s attitude towards water aects conservation
eorts. Viewing water as a social good but not as an
economic good limits the number of people willing to use
water conservatively, especially at the residential level,
where domestic water consumption is far less compared
to industrial and agricultural use. Also, the ‘yuck factor’
associated with recycling water makes people shy away
from adopting the practice. This is evident in Kibera where
some participants are opposed to paying for a decentralized,
neighborhood-scale system and wonder how the water would
be ‘clean’. Nevertheless, residents in high-density suburbs
such as Kibera are de facto recyclers of grey/wastewater.
Despite limited formal education and knowledge of complex
systems of water recycling, it is clear that eicient usage of
a scarce resource such as water for the household (including
small scale urban agriculture) is common practice, not only
in our study area, but across other par ts of Africa (Ndunda,
2014; Mukheli et al., 2002). Thus, educational eorts tailored
towards dierent population segments could help change
the attitudes and could improve the appreciation of both
freshwater and reclaimed water, for both the social good and
economic good involved.
4.5.3. Technical Feasibility
Wastewater recycling systems require both availability of
land and secure tenancy for construction, presenting quite
a hurdle for those who have neither. While the systems are
automated for day-to-day operations, they are known to
be maintenance intensive. They need to be monitored on
a regular basis to ensure that the pumps are working, and
chlorine levels are enough to treat pathogens. Technical
services must be performed at various regular intervals
throughout the year depending on the type of system.
Participants report that the water quality is good for their
non-potable uses (lawn watering, car washing, cleaning
driveways) but that systems need appropriate maintenance
for that water quality to be sustained. As discussed above,
it was also both economically viable and practical to install
systems that can treat all domestic wastewater and thus,
systems that do so are the most prevalent in Nairobi.
For Kibera par ticipants in the study, the bucket method is
suicient with no treatment prior to water reuse.
Educational
eorts tailored
towards dierent
population
segments could
help change the
attitudes and
could improve the
appreciation of
both freshwater
and reclaimed
water, for both the
social good and
economic good
involved.

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reusein Nairobi, Kenya 199
4.6. Water Reuse and Urban Planning for Water
Security
The third objective of this study was to find out the role of
greywater and wastewater reuse in planning for urban water
security. The analysis shows that reclaimed water can play
a major role in urban water security as it is both a water
conservation strategy and a sanitation solution.
In discussions with participants, it emerged that government
oicials leaned towards conventional ‘end-of-pipe’ solutions
with little consideration for other measures in planning
for future water supply. The focus of the government is on
increasing distribution and minimizing losses of potable
water. However, with distribution losses estimated to be 38%
as of 2018 (WASREB, 2018), an increase in production would
also result in more water loss. Complementary systems of
water supply need to be thoroughly considered for Nairobi;
grey and wastewater reuse present climate-independent
water supply strategies that become increasingly important
with increases in water use.
05
Conclusion and Recommendation for
Future Research
The barriers that hinder wider adoption of the practice should
be possible to overcome. The growing number of urban
wastewater recycling systems globally indicate that water
reuse is a viable strategy for sustainability eorts. Water reuse
practices have already been found to be a water conservation
measure and sanitation solution for some in Nairobi.
Financial incentives for
homeowners may be a good
means to overcome the
barriers identified. Additionally,
educational eorts focused on the
technical systems and safe reuse
practices, tailored to dierent
audiences, are also important
strategies for increased uptake.
Furthermore, there is a need for
the government to formulate
proper water reuse regulations
that address water quality needs
for all sectors (including domestic
non-potable uses) in order to
carry out implementation plans
that match policy statements.
Findings from this study suggest
a reduction in potable water
demand through water reuse over
time but was unable to quantif y
the exact amount that would be
saved. A study on a larger sample
size across a greater geographical
region conducted over a longer
period of time would be able to give approximate amounts of
water that is saved and quantify the percentages of reduced
demands. A study on consumer behavior and attitudes
towards reclaimed water would also be beneficial for greater
sustainability.
Economic feasibility is an important consideration for more
widespread adoption of any innovative strategy.
Future water reuse research in Nairobi would benefit from
an in-depth, cost-benefit analysis on the use of treatment
systems at the residential level. Cost estimates based on
capital infrastructure are dierent from the true economic
costs and benefits of the systems. Additionally, the economic
value of environmental costs and benefits are also not
included in this analysis and have therefore not been
quantified.
There is a need
for the government
to formulate
proper water reuse
regulations that
address water
quality needs
for all sectors in
order to carry out
implementation
plans that
match policy
statements.

200 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant umber 50656-10083].
References
Allen, L., Christian-Smith, J. & Palaniappan, M. (2010). Over view of Greywater Reuse:
The Potential of Greywater Systems to Aid Sustainable Water Management.
Retrieved from www.pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/greywater_overview3.pdf.
Al Baz, I., Otterpohl, R. & Wendland, C. (eds.). (2008). Eicient Management of Wastewater Its Treatment and Reuse in Water-Scarce
Countries. New York: Springer Nature.
Blomkvist, P. & Nilsson, D. (2017). On the Need for System Alignment in Large Water Infrastructure:
Understanding Infrastructure Dynamics in Nairobi, Kenya. Water Alternatives, 10(2), pp. 283–302.
Retrieved from www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol10/v10issue2/356-a10-2-6/file.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic A nalysis and Code Development.
Retrieved from https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=_rfClWRhIKAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR6&dq=boyatzis+1998+transformi
ng+qualitative+information&ot s=EApOEnfl2f&sig=lVuB-PnP5SKihq-qyLfD7vo4yv8#v=onepage&q=boyatzis 1998 transforming
qualitative information&f=false.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp. 77–101.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Friedler, E. (2008). The Water Saving Potential and The Socio-economic Feasibility of Greywater Reuse within
The Urban Sector – Israel as a Case Study. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 65(1), pp. 57–69.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00207230701846697.
Gaulke, L. S. (2006). On-site Wastewater Treatment and Reuses in Japan.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Water Management, 159(2), pp. 103–109.
Retrieved from http://courses.washington.edu/onsite/ICEPaperGaulkeJohkasou.pdf.
Gleick, P. H. (2000). The Changing Water Paradigm: A Look at Twenty-first Centur y Water Resources Development.
Water International, 25(1), pp. 127-138.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060008686804.
Government of Kenya. (1999). Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA).
Kaluli, J. W., Githuku, C., Home, P. & Mwangi, B. M. (2011). Towards a National Policy on Wastewater Reuse in Kenya.
Policy on Wastewater, Jomo Kenyatta Universit y of Agriculture and Technology (JAGST ), 13(1).
Retrieved from http://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/123456789/7899/Towards a national policy on wastewater reuse in
Kenya....pdf?sequence=3.
Kariuki, F. W., Kotut, K. & Ngángá, V. G. (2011). The Potential of a Low Cost Technology for The Greywater Treatment.
The Open Environmental Engineering Journal, 4(1), pp. 32–39.
Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d966/97d7396a3776b57748752a7a26924b738797.pdf.
KNBS. (2009). Population Distribution by Sex, Number of Households, Area and Density by Count y and District. Kenya Census 2 009, 1–5.
Lahnsteiner, J. & Lemper t, G. (2007). Water Management in Windhoek, Namibia. Water Science & Technology, 55(1-2), pp. 441-448.
Retrieved from https://iwaponline.com/wst/article/55/1-2/441/14202/Water-management-in-Windhoek-Namibia.
Ledant, M. (2013). Water in Nairobi: Unveiling inequalities and its causes. Les Cahiers d’Outre -Mer, 66(263), pp. 335–348.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4000/com.6951.
Morel, A. & Diener, S. (2006). Greywater Management in Low and Middle-Income Countries, Review of dierent treatment systems
for households or neighbourhoods. Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag).Dübendorf, Switzerland.
Retrieved from www.eawag.ch.
Mukheli, A., Mosupye, G. & Swatuk, L. A. (2002). Is the Pungwe Water Supply Project a Solution to Water Accessibility and Sanitation
Problems for the Households of Sakubva, Zimbabwe? Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 27(11-22) pp. 723-732.
Mutisya, E. & Yarime, M. (2011). Understanding the Grassroots Dynamics of Slums in Nairobi: The Dilemma of Kibera Informal
Settlements. International Transaction Journal of Engineering Management, & Applied Sciences & Technologies, 2(2), pp. 197-213.
Retrieved from http://tuengr.com/V02/197-213.pdf.
Ndunda, E. N. (2014). Wastewater Reuse in Urban and Peri-urban Irrigation: An Economic Assessment of Improved Wastewater
Treatment, Low-Risk Adaptations and Risk Awareness in Nairobi, Kenya. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Pretoria.
Nilsson, D. (2011). Pipes, Progress, and Poverty: Social and Technological Change in Urban Water Provision in Kenya and Uganda
1895-2010. Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:419023/FULLTEXT01.pdf.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E. & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847.
Stavenhagen, M., Buurman, J. & Tortajada, C. (2018). Saving Water in Cities: Assessing Policies for Residential Water Demand
Management in Four Cities in Europe. Cities, 79, pp. 187–195.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.03.008.

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reusein Nairobi, Kenya 201
Wakhungu, M. J. (2019). An Ethnography of Policy: Water Reuse Policy in Kenya. Water Policy, 21(2), pp. 436-448.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2019.160.
WASREB. (2018). A Performance Report of Kenya’s Water Services Sector.
Retrieved from https://wasreb.go.ke/downloads/WASREB_IMPACT_Issue10_FINAL.pdf
World Bank. (2011).Kenya - Nairobi Metropolitan Ser vices Improvement Project (English). Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved from
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/420941468047100756/Kenya-Nairobi-Metropolitan-Services-Improvement-Project.
WWAP. (2017). The United Nations World Water Development Repor t 2017. Wastewater: The Untapped Resource.
Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/in/documentViewer.xhtml?v=2.1.196&id=p::usmarcdef_0000247153&file=/
in/rest/annotationSVC/DownloadWatermarkedAttachment/attach_import_f9dddee8-460f-4a60-be1f-
5d1f8caac033%3F_%3D247153eng.pdf&locale=en&multi=true&ark=/ark:/48223/p.
Appendix
1. Interview guide for industry/technical experts
Basic Information and expertise
Please state the current organization you’re employed in and your position
What are the duties of your current position?
What is your personal or professional experience with wastewater reuse?
How did you first become involved with water reuse systems for residential use?
How has your experience been ever since?
Growth of the region and climate change uncertainty
What do you think should be the focus of the city in accommodating the water needs of increasing population?
Is a supply strategy the most reliable way of providing water ser vices? Do you think demand management should be a focus for
water provision?
Climate change is an uncertainty in planning for future water supply, how has it been incorporated in the plans for water supply?
Can the construction of big dams be the sole answer to water provision? Is it feasible?
Wastewater reuse viability
Does wastewater reuse provide a viable means of supplementing or reducing reliance on municipal water supply? Why? Why not?
What are the benefits and drawbacks of wastewater reuse?
What type of permits (if any) or precautions should be considered before one installs a wastewater system?
Do you think other technologies are a more viable means of water conservation? Why?
Wastewater systems feasibility
What is the financial feasibility of installing a system in an existing house in comparison to a new house that’s being constructed?
Are there more installations for existing homes or for new homes?
What is the ease of operating a wastewater reuse system? What is needed and who can do it?
What are the maintenance requirements (financial, regulatory and capability) for a wastewater system?
Barriers
Wastewater recycling is not widely practiced in Kenya, why do you think this is the case? How could these barriers be overcome?
What are the concerns of reusing water? How can they be addressed?
Drivers
What incentives would enable an uptake of wastewater systems installations?
What legislative and institutional frameworks are you aware of that are in place to support the adoption of wastewater reuse?
What is the government doing to promote wastewater reuse in households? Does it provide subsidies for the systems?
In your opinion, what do you think the government should do to improve wastewater reuse in households?
Other: How would you gauge the knowledge of wastewater among the residents of Nairobi?

202 Water Reuse and Key Stakeholders
2. Interview guide for government ocials
Basic Information
Please state the current organization you’re employed in and your position
What are the duties and responsibilities of your department?
What is your personal or professional experience with wastewater reuse?
Growth of the region and climate change uncertainty
What do you think should be the focus of the city in accommodating the water needs of increasing population?
Is a supply strategy the most reliable way of providing water ser vices? Do you think demand management should be a focus for
water provision?
Climate change is an uncertainty in planning for future water supply, how has it been incorporated in the plans? Can the
construction of big dams be the sole answer to water provision? Is it feasible?
What’s the focus of your department in promoting water conservation and ensuring water security now and in the future?
According to you, is this suicient? If no, what do you think should be done?
Wastewater feasibility
What is your department doing with regards to wastewater management in Nairobi?
Does wastewater reuse present a viable means of supplementing or reducing reliance on municipal water supply? Why? Why not?
What type of permits (if any) or precautions should be considered before one installs a wastewater system?
Do you think other technologies are a more viable means of water conservation? Why?
Barriers
Wastewater recycling is not widely practiced in Kenya, why do you think this is the case? How could these barriers be overcome?
What are the concerns of reusing wastewater? How can they be addressed?
Drivers
What are the incentives for greywater reuse and wastewater reuse broadly defined?
What legislative and institutional frameworks are in place to support the adoption of wastewater reuse?
In your opinion, what do you think the government should do to improve wastewater reuse in households?
Other: How would you gauge the knowledge of wastewater among the residents of Nairobi?
3. Interview guide for formal system users
Basic Information
Area of residence
Are you a house owner or a renter?
Domestic water access
What is the source of your domestic water?
How oen do you receive municipal water?
Could you describe how you use water? How much water do you use for each activity?
Is the water you use suicient in quality and quantity for your needs?
What motivated you to install a wastewater reuse system?
What kind of activities do you use your recycled water for?
How oen do you use the water?
Is the water quality satisfactory?
What variables aect the reuse of recycled water? Is there a time that you use it more?
On average, how much did it cost to have the system installed? What changes did you make to your house, e.g. piping,
before installing the system?
Did you need a license or permit to install the recycling system? If yes, what was the ease of obtaining them?
What benefits would you say you obtain from reusing wastewater?
What are your concerns about reusing wastewater? How do you address them?
Are you aware of any legislations regarding the reuse of wastewater?
Does the government provide subsidies for wastewater systems? If not, do you think it should?

11 Toward SDG 6: Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reusein Nairobi, Kenya 203
In your opinion, what do you think the government should do to improve wastewater reuse in households?
4. Interview guide for Informal greywater users
Basic Information
Area of residence
Are you a house owner or a renter?
Domestic water access
Where do you source your domestic water from?
How oen do you obtain water?
How much water on average, do you obtain in a day? How much does it cost?
Could you describe how you use water? How much water do you use for each activity?
Is the water you obtain enough for all your needs? If no, what challenges do you experience in obtaining suicient water?
Do you practice water conservation in your home? If yes, how do you minimize water use in your home?
Do you reuse any of your water? E.g. from laundry, bathroom or kitchen? If no, why not?
Could you describe how you reuse water?
What variables aect the reuse of water? Is there a time that you use it more?
How long have you been carrying out this practice? What motivated you to start?
Why do you reuse wastewater?
Do you treat the water before reusing it?
What benefits would you say you obtain from reusing greywater?
What problems if any, have you encountered from reusing water?
What method do you use?
Would you pay to have an improved grey/wastewater system?
In your opinion, what do you think the government should do to improve grey/wastewater reuse in households?
Notes
1. The United Nations defines water security as ‘The capacity of a population to safeguard sustainable access to adequate
quantities of and acceptable quality water for sustaining livelihoods, human well-being, and socio-economic development,
for ensuring protection against water-borne pollution and water-related disasters, and for preserving ecosystems in a climate
of peace and political stability’
2. As reported on 9 April 2018 in the Kenyan newspaper, The Standard, an Ipsos Public Aairs survey reported that
‘[n]early half of Kenya households earn less than Kshs. 10,000 per month’ while ‘1 percent earn between Kshs. 55,000 to Kshs.
75,000 and another one percent earning [sic] between Kshs. 75,000 and Kshs. 100,000 per month.’
See: https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/business/article/2001276202/what-majority-of-kenyan-households-earn-in-a-month.
3. Jokaso is a Japanese word that translates to ‘purification tank onsite wastewater treatment system’ (Gaulke, 2006)

©Panwasin Seemala/Shutterstock .
V
Technology
for Water Reuse

©JEONGHYEON NOH/Shutterstock.

12 The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 207
12
The Capability of Forward Osmosis
Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity
and Climate Change
Am Jang, Sung-Ju Im, Nguyen Duc Viet and Nosheen Asghar
Am Jang, Graduate School of Water Resources, Sungkyunkwan University, Republic of Korea.
e-mail: amjang@skku.edu
Sung-Ju Im, Graduate School of Water Resources, Sungkyunkwan University, Republic of Korea.
e-mail: sungjuim@skku.edu
Nguyen Duc Viet, Graduate School of Water Resources, Sungkyunkwan University, Republic of Korea.
e-mail: viet.nd@skku.edu
Nosheen Asghar, Graduate School of Water Resources, Sungkyunkwan University, Republic of Korea.
e-mail: nosheenasghar57@gmail.com
Abstract
This study aims to present the latest research trend of forward osmosis (FO) based hybrid processes, as well as other advanced
technologies, to solve the emerging water security-related issues and improve current policy on safe water production and
management. Advanced technologies could play a vital role in achieving the sustainable development goals, which were
developed by UN-Water in 2015. In the light of this, membrane-based technologies, including FO membranes, have emerged as
an eective solution for water shortage and security. Although FO demonstrates high potential for improving capability of water
markets, there are still several disadvantages to getting closer to commercially viable. Hybrid processes are therefore proposed
to resolve all existing barriers. With lower energy consumption and higher water quality production compared to conventional
processes, the use of low-energy hybrid FO system can be adapted to address water security, climate change, and environmental
aspects in the future. Following that, current policy on water production and management should be improved as well.
This paper will review comprehensively i) Sustainable growth through improved water security, ii) Solutions to water problems for
sustainable development through case studies and experimental research, iii) The use of advanced water treatment technology
in adaptation to water scarcity and its linkages to current water policy focusing on the main goal of UNESCO i-WSSM.
Keywords
Advanced water treatment technology, case study, water security, water reuse optimization, policy

208 Technology for Water Reuse
01
Introduction
Over the next two decades, demand for water is projected
to grow dramatically, with an increase of 1% per year in all
sectors. Advanced technologies could play a vital role in
achieving the sustainable development goals, which were
developed by United Nations (UN)-Water in 2015 (UN-Water,
2015a). Water production technologies, such as desalination
as well as wastewater reuse are dominant factors in meeting
the challenges of adaptation to achieve water security and
sustainable climate for the future.
Advanced membrane based technologies, including for ward
osmosis (FO) membranes, have emerged as an eective
solution to deal with water shortage and security.
Although FO demonstrates high potential for improving
the capability of the water market, there are still
several disadvantages to getting the technology closer
to commercialization. Hybrid processes are therefore
proposed to resolve all existing barriers. With lower energy
consumption and higher water quality production compared
to conventional processes, the use of low-energy hybrid
FO systems can adapt to water security, climate change,
and environmental aspects in the future.
In order to bring the innovation closer to commercially
viable, the suppor t of policy may play a vital role to facilitate
application of advanced technologies. However,
there is a gap between technologies and current policy,
which should be taken into consideration to enhance the role
of policies in improvement of water security for sustainable
growth.
The major purpose of this study is to have a look briefly
at the latest trend in application of advanced FO membrane
based hybrid processes in water production and treatment to
solve the emerging water security-related issues.
Apart from that, successful case studies around the world are
discussed with respect to their contribution to adaptation
for water scarcity. Furthermore, we will point out existing
challenges in terms of engineering and policies as well as
the current eorts that are underway to address those.
Future prospects for research will be also recommended to
provide an eective approach to the main goal of UNESCO
i-WSSM, including adequate amount of water, acceptable
quality of water, and sustainable access.
02
Water Security and Sustainable
Development
2.1. Water Security
According to UN Water (2013), water security is defined as
“the capacity of population to safeguard sustainable access to
adequate quantities of acceptable quality water for sustaining
livelihoods, human well-being, and socio-economic
development, for ensuring protection against water-borne
pollution and water-related disasters, and for preserving
ecosystems in a climate of peace and political stability”
(UN-Water, 2013a). Currently, water resources around
the world are under high pressure and are being reduced at
extremely rapid rates.
Water for agriculture is projected to account for over 70%
of global water withdrawals by 2050, while the figures for
industry and domestic uses are approximately 20% and 10%
respectively (UN-Water, 2013b). Moreover, food production
is predicted to increase by 50% by 2050. Considering
water consumption associated with agriculture and food
production, there will be extreme consequences for water
demand. In addition, an 85% increase in water consumption
for the energ y production industry is expected in the next two
decades (USAID, 2017; Kulkarni, 2011). Water demand for other
industries such as minerals and the manufacture of goods and
fuel production will also increase rapidly in the near future.
It is therefore important to do an action plan to address water
that is “too little, too much, too dirty, too erratic”
(USA ID, 2017).
Figure 12-1 Water-Food-Energy Nexus
(Source: adapte d from UN-Water, 2013)

12 The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 209
2.2. Improvement of Water Security for Sustainable
Development
Sustainable development is defined as the development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs”
(UNEP, 2005; UN, 1987; UN, 2015).
According to UN Water (2013), “investment in water security
is a long-term pay-o for human development and economic
growth, with immediate visible short-term gains”, which
means that water security improvement plays a vital role in
guarantee of sustainable development (UN-Water, 2013a).
Enhancing water security comprises water services and
capacity building, as well as providing good governance,
the maintenance of water-related services, and natural
infrastructure as well will alleviate the needs for significant
funds funnelled thorough channels such as development
aid, consequently, promote the policy on sustainable
development. In particular, water security was proposed as
a heart of the project on SDGs funded by UN water, 2015.
The relationship between water security and water’s
cross-cutting valuable to food, energy, and other priority
development areas was figured to achieve not only economic
but also social development as well as environmental
sustainability (Figure 12-1).
Water, in relationship with food and energy,
plays an important factor in improvement of
sustainable development goals. In this way,
water is a fundamental component of both
energy and food as it is needed to generate
energy as well as for the growth of food.
Thereby, guarantee of water security means
guarantee partly of food security and energy
security as well, which finally attain global
security by sustainable development.
In which, advanced solutions in production of
fresh water and treatment of wastewater play
a pivotal role in enhancement of water security
for sustainable development.
03
Advanced Solutions for Water-Related
Issues
As discussed, global climate change is already starting to
aect water supply and demand, water-related diseases as
well as destruction and depletion of aquatic habitat.
It is therefore essential to carr y out various activities including
good management practices and technical solutions to
improve water security for sustainable development
(WHO & UNICEF, 2006).
3.1. Management Solutions
Water management means a series of activities involving
careful planning, development, distribution and resource
management. Water management helps water demands to
be met by encouraging water conservation and sustainability
initiatives, raising awareness of water conservation and
equitable distribution of water.
Addressing water scarcity requires a cross-
sectorial and multidisciplinary approach
to water resource management to improve
equitable economic and social benefits
without sacrificing the conservation of
vital ecosystems. This integration needs to
take account of development, supply, use,
and demand (FAO, 2003). Integrated water
resources management (IWRM) provides
a broad framework for governments to
align water use patterns with the needs and
demands of dierent users, including the
environment (Gleick et al., 2001; UN-Water,
2019). Integrated water resource programs
aim is to analyse all water resources and
infrastructure issues and to decide holistically
how to address the needs of drinking water,
wastewater and storm water (Town of Medway
MA, 2019). Where drought recently impacted
agriculture in a region causing water scarcity,
rainwater and drained water were recirculated in constructed
wetlands to limit saltwater intrusion, to provide irrigation
water for crops during the dry period (Town of Medway MA,
2019; US-EPA, 2019).
Guarantee of
water security
means guarantee
partly of food
security and energy
security as well,
which finally attain
global security
by sustainable
development.

210 Technology for Water Reuse
3.2. Technological Solutions
3.2.1. Conventional Technologies for Water Treatment
and Reuse
Water reuse or recycling refers to the use of treated
wastewater, grey water including agriculture, industrial
processes, groundwater recharge, recreational use and
non-potable urban wastewater (i.e., fire protection and toilet
flushing). Treatment of wastewater to make it usable is one
of the most essential strategies to reduce water scarcity and
protect water resources from depletion. Current technologies
are classified as intensive i.e., need large quantity energy and
extensive technologies, i.e., require a large amount of land
(Table 12-1). In which intensive technologies include physical-
chemical system, membrane technologies, disinfection
technologies, and radionuclide removal, while extensive
technologies include waste stabilization ponds, constructed
wetlands, infiltration percolation systems, and organic
removal processes. Intensive technologies such as membrane
filtration usually require high energy consumption, whilst
extensive processes, for instance constructed wetlands
require large area for plants using for wastewater treatment.
3.2.2. Forward Osmosis (FO) Processes
In the FO process, water, driven under osmotic pressure,
is transported from a lower osmotic pressure solution
(i.e., feed side, low salt concentration) to a higher osmotic
pressure solution (i.e., draw side, high salt concentration)
through a semipermeable membrane (Figure 12-2). In order
to regenerate draw solution (DS) for continuous operation,
further processes such as reverse osmosis, or membrane
distillation, etc. are necessary (Viet et al., 2019).
Although FO technology has had significant development
in the last decade, it is still in the phase of pilots and a few
demonstration sites. The major benefit of the FO process is
its lower energy consumption owing to the use of osmotic
pressure, which results in lower membrane fouling than
pressure-driven processes, finally leading a lower cost
requirement. In addition, organic matters, nutrients,
as well as micropollutants are retained well by FO membrane,
producing high quality permeate water. However, current FO
membrane generations have demonstrated low stable water
flux and high reverse salt flux. These drawbacks may decline
overall eiciency as well as increase operating cost.
Therefore, combination of FO technology with other
processes is required to obtain better removal eiciency and
reduce operating cost as well. Advanced treatment strategies
may bring the technology closer to commercially viable.
Figure 12-2 Forward osmosis proces s (Source: adapted from V iet
et al., 2019)
Table 12-1 Conventional technologies for wate r treatment and reuse (Source: adapted from N ational Research Counci l, 2012)
Intensive technologies Extensive technologies
• Physical chemical system
coagulation, flocculation, sand filters, clarification
sedimentation, dissolved air flotation
• Membrane technologies
ultrafiltration, nano-filtration, microfiltration, reverse
osmosis, membrane bioreactor, electro-dialysis
• Disinfection technologies
ultraviolent radiation, chlorination, ozonation,
photocatalysis
• Radionuclide removal
Soening, Sand filtration, precipitation by barium
sulphate, and Electrodialysis
• Waste stabilization ponds
Maturation ponds, stabilization reservoirs…
• Constructed wetlands
vertical flow horizontal flow…
• Infiltration percolation system
• Organic
synthetic and naturally occurring compound removal
• Aeration
air stripping, tower aeration, diused and tray aeration,
multistage bubble aeration

12 The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 211
04
Application of Advanced Water Treatment
Technology to Adapt to Water Scarcity
4.1. Background
Treatment of wastewater using advanced available processes
to make water usable is one of the most important ways to
reduce water scarcity, save human health and protect water
resources from depletion. In India and Pakistan, for instance,
water recovery from wastewater is available for irrigation in
the dry season. Well-treated wastewater can replenish water
supplies, consequently, reduce the demand gap.
Practices of using treated wastewater for irrigation are
growing in Europe and it is par ticularly well established in
Spain, Italy, Cyprus and Greece as well (Harishankar, 2014;
IWA, 2015). Applications of treated wastewater around
the world are in a wide variety, including, agricultural,
industrial, residential and in some areas for direct drinking.
Reuse systems of wastewater include a multi barrier
treatment framework consisting of advanced unit processes
and incorporating resilience, redundancy, and robustness to
ensure success (National Research Council, 2012).
Water reuse requires physical and chemical treatment to
achieve the quality of the water needed for the proposed use.
Conventional treatment systems rely on processes of
physio-chemistry and biology. From the point of view of
wastewater reclamation, i.e., high quality purposes, complete
removal of contaminants from wastewater is important.
Advanced wastewater treatment (WWT) processes are used to
treat used water from dierent sources to a quality that meets
its intended purpose (Al-Rekabi et al., 2007).
Advanced treatment processes produce high quality water
as mentioned in the table of technological solutions for
wastewater in section 3.2, which can address current issues
of water quality (National Research Council, 2012). Membrane
technology is a promising and advanced technology in
water industries for WWT and desalination of sea water
owing to its higher removal eiciency and smaller footprint
compared to conventional technologies such as micro/
ultra/nano-filtration and reverse osmosis (MF, UF, NF, RO).
Transmembrane pressure dierence generated by pumping
is utilized and water molecules move through the membrane
while impurities are rejected (Al-Rekabi et al., 2007) but they
are not eective in removing emerging micro-pollutants
such as pharmaceuticals, personal care products (PPCPs),
steroid hormones, or pesticides. The energy demand of these
conventional membrane processes is very high compared
to forward osmosis (FO), a type of membrane that uses the
osmotic pressure gradient between two dierent solutions to
produce water flow through a membrane (Zhao et al., 2012).
4.2. The FO Hybrid System Based Solutions for
Water Production
Due to the increasing global water scarcity; rising energ y
demand, energ y costs; and negative impacts on
the environment, osmotic processes such as forward osmosis
(FO) have gained renewed interest. FO technolog y can play
a major role in solving water shortages by alternative sources
of water such as saltwater and wastewater recycling.
This innovation would have a significant impact on a drought-
aected country such as South Africa, where saltwater is
plentiful in the form of coastal seawater and inland brackish
groundwater (Achilli et al., 2009).
FO only allows water molecules to pass through it
by diusion. It uses an osmotic pressure gradient as a driving
force to drive the permeation of water across the membrane,
leaving contaminants behind as they are filtered by
the membrane (Linares et al., 2014). Applications of FO can be
classified as in Figure 12-3. Using of FO for water desalination
includes direct and indirect desalination, while application
Figure 12-3 Applications of forward osmosis

212 Technology for Water Reuse
of FO on water reuse
comprises FO-membrane
bioreactor (FOMBR), oil
and gas desalination, brine
concentration, dewatering
of activated sludge as well
as municipal wastewater
treatment.
Hybrid processes are
a combination of at least two
processes which influence
each other.
In most cases, the FO
method is combined with
other separation processes.
For example, (1) to separate
the DS from product or as
an advanced pre-treatment
technology, (2) to enhance
the performance of conventional a process by using FO as
pretreatment, (3) to improve the permeate water quality, and
(4) to reduce energy consumption by using low cost energy
sources such as osmotic pressure, waste heat energy for
DS regeneration. Applications of FO hybrid systems show
that they outperform conventional processes. For example,
integration of a FO system with anaerobic treatment, i.e.,
treatment process without oxygen to remove nutrient from
wastewater and to generate biogas has been described as
a promising avenue for research and development in future
(Chekli et al., 2016). Use of FO as a pretreatment process
can enhance the performance of conventional desalination
processes (Nicoll, 2013). In FO-electrodialysis (ED) hybrid
systems for desalination of seawater, FO is used as
a pretreatment to reduce the multivalent ions concentrations
in the feed water; removal of these ions results in reduced
scaling eects on heat exchangers and enables thermal
processes to work at higher temperatures and improve water
recovery rates (Award et al., 2019).
It is important to consider the environmental and economic
aspects of FO hybrid systems while evaluating their
performance (Award et al., 2019). FO has commonly been
known to be cost and energy eicient process because
the energy consumption for regeneration of DS is always
neglected in lab scale demonstration. In the case of DS
regeneration, using membrane distillation is possible to
utilize waste heat, for instance, from liquefied natural gas
(LNG) recovery process or nuclear power plant or use solar
thermal energy to reduce the carbon footprint.
Use of a FO-nanofiltration (NF) plant for wastewater reuse
in agriculture has indicated that the total energy consumption
is almost 40% higher than that of another conventional hybrid
treatment processes by Ultrafiltration-Reverse osmosis
(UF-RO) (Goh et al., 2019). More research in hybrid systems is
therefore required to optimize overall performance.
4.3. The Role of FO Hybrid Based Processes to
Combat Water Scarcity
Regarding increasing water shortages and resource depletion,
current water management strategies focus on hybrid water
reuse and desalination technologies as alternative sources
of water. Due to the high cost for membranes and system
operations, seawater desalination and wastewater treatment
using FO need to be hybrid with other WWT processes.
The use of FO hybrid systems could be more feasible for
eicient reconcentration of DS and a better alternative
than the performance of the FO process alone for WWT
(Chekli et al., 2016). In last couple of years, several hybrid
processes have been developed in many applications
including desalination of seawater and brackish water,
fertigation, protein concentration, and dewatering of
RO concentrate (Figure 12-4).
The use of FO
hybrid systems
could be more
feasible for eicient
reconcentration
of DS and a better
alternative than the
performance of the
FO process alone
for W WT.
Figure 12-4 Applications and advantages of FO hybrid systems (Source: adapted from Chekli et al., 2 016)

12 The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 213
05
Case Studies
5.1. FO Hybrid System Around the World
Recently, a large number of FO hybrid systems have been
introduced, however, due to it being a very new technology,
a small number of full-scale systems were set up around the
world. There are several successful full-scale and pilot-scale
examples of hybrid FO systems in operation to date. In this
section, we are going to show several successful case studies
as well as its contribution to reduction of water scarcity.
5.1.1. Hybrid FO-RO System for Water Production
Desalination produces daily water needs for over 300
million people around the world (IWA, 2016). Meanwhile,
the conventional membrane for desalination, in particular
RO, is now over 50 years old and has demonstrated several
drawbacks recently such as high cost of membrane, high
energy consumption, and serious membrane fouling as
well. Hybrid system of FO-RO demonstrates many benefits
compared to RO system alone.
In 2012, as a part of adapting to new technology, a world’s
first commercial hybrid FO/RO plant was constructed in Oman
by Modern Water, an UK-based company, with a contract
of $759,800 (Figure 12-5). This plant supplies over 200 m3 of
potable water per day for public residents with 30% loweºr
in energy consumption compared to a conventional RO plant
(Voltas Water Management Division, 2018). Owing to the dry
conditions as well as water scarcity for supplying a growing
population, water demand for potable or process water in
Oman is set to rise to 1.3 million m3/d by 2020 (Global Water
Intelligence, 2016). Therefore, the FO/RO hybrid system
accounted for approximately 6% of total water supply in
Oman. The integration of RO and FO membrane in this system
resulted in a lot of benefits compared to a conventional RO
process, including (1) inherently low fouling characteristics in
both particulate and biological fouling; (2) significant reduced
product boron levels without post-treatment when compared
to conventional RO; and (3) higher availability than
a conventional RO plant due to low fouling, simple cleaning
and ease of operation (Voltas Water Management Division,
2018).
The plant includes (1) pretreatment process using low energy
membrane; (2) Two modules of FO membrane were combined
with RO system to simultaneously produce freshwater and
treat wastewater.
In addition to Oman, a FO-RO hybrid desalination project
(FOHC) was built in Korea from 2014 to 2019 with
the budget of 28 million USD funded by Korea’s Ministry of
Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. This project aims to
develop a FO-RO hybrid demonstration plant with capacity
of 1,000 m3/d for simultaneous production of fresh water
and treatment of sewage (Figure 12-6). To date, a pilot plant
was successfully operated with energy consumption of only
2.5 kWh/m3 compared to 3.5 kWh/m3 for the average energ y
consumption of the world’s leading desalination plants,
reducing of production cost up to 25% (Sohn, 2017).
In terms of water cost, the hybrid FO-RO demonstrated much
lower cost compared to conventional RO; if FO recovery
reaches 120%, water cost will be reduced approximately 7%
(Figure 12-7).
Figure 12-5 The world’s first commercial FO plant in Oman
(Sourc e: Nicoll, 2 017)
Figure 12-7 Water cost according to the par ticular system
(Sourc e: Sohn, 2017)
Figure 12-6 FO -RO hybrid system in Korea (Source: Sohn , 2017)

214 Technology for Water Reuse
The capacity of desalination plants around the around
the world is predicted to reach 120 million m3/d by 2020.
The success of these case studies has recently facilitated
the application of advanced technologies for simultaneous
reduction of energy consumption and increase of water
production.
5.1.2. Fertilizer Drawn Forward Osmosis (FDFO) in
Australia
As one of the most potential processes to commercialize at
full-scale, FDFO-NF hybrid systems have so far been mostly
studied through lab-scale or pilot-scale applications.
For instance, a pilot-scale of FDFO-NF was operated in
the State of New South Wales, Australia in 2015 (Figure 12-8).
In this system, saline water (i.e., feed solution) collected
from a groundwater treatment plant, which removes mineral
compounds from groundwater, was utilized to supply
water for dilution of fer tilizers (i.e., draw solution) used for
agriculture. Diluted fertilizer, aer FDFO process, was then
processed by the NF membrane and finally, used directly for
irrigation of tur f grass farm and tomato plants in Australia
(Phuntsho et al., 2016).
The pilot system was made up of the FO process containing
two spiral wound cellulose triacetate (CTA) FO membrane
modules connected in parallel with a total membrane area
of 20.2 m2. The pure water permeability was observed to be
1.02 /(m2hbar) and salt rejection of 93% (Phuntsho et al.,
2016). The FDFO-NF hybrid system consumed 21% less energy
than the UF-RO hybrid system in irrigation water production.
Moreover, the cost of producing water was estimated at AUD
$0.46/m3, while the figures for MF-RO and UF-RO were AUD
0.49/m3 and 0.54/m3, respectively (Phuntsho et al., 2016).
The agriculture sector may consume up to 70% of total fresh-
water by 2050, the use of a low energy consumption FDFO-NF
hybrid system is therefore an eective strategy to adapt to
water scarcity, especially for the agriculture sector.
In addition, the nutrients recovered through the treatment of
a wastewater stream can supply nutrients for fertigation.
5.2. What are Challenges in The Application of
Advanced Technology?
Even though hybrid systems show high potential as a superior
species of membrane separation technology in a wide range
of industrial applications, there are several obstacles,
which should have attention paid to bring this hybrid process
closer to commercially viable.
5.2.1. Challenges Associated with The Most Common
Treatment Options
5.2.1.1. Challenges in Hybrid Technologies for Water
Production and Reuse
When water is the final product of the process, a hybrid
membrane acts as a water production technolog y.
In this process, water production by the recovery of DS may
cost high energ y. Thus, the actual energy consumption of
a hybrid system may exceed the economic benefits if it is not
optimized. Moreover, the low water flux of FO membranes is
an obstacle from the perspective of water scarcity in
the future as water demand becomes higher and higher.
The implementation of a FO module into an existing system
requires costly additional area for relevant water streams due
to the change. It means that higher costs for new systems are
required for production of potable water around the world.
Consequently, less developed countries do not have access to
suicient clean water.
In terms of water reuse, we can utilize specific sources of DS,
such as fertilizer or chemical wastewater streams with high
conductivity, which then can be used directly for further
purposes without any additional process for regeneration.
Therefore, the problems related to energy consumption are
not barriers of this process. Meanwhile, the capability of
advanced hybrid systems in rejection of micro-pollutants
in wastewater is still ineicient so far. Moreover, due to a lack
of proof of principles and pilot plant
data, convincing end users in the water
treatment industry of the economic
benefits of hybrid system is very hard.
Therefore, research data for further
analysis is necessary to enable novel
hybrid system to approach closer to
commercialization.
5.2.1.2. Challenges in Linkages
Between Technologies and
Current Policy
As mentioned in section 3, science
and technology must play a vital role
in devising the solutions that will be
necessar y to overcome the problems
caused by water scarcity to guarantee
sustainable development. However,
Figure 12-8 Pilot-scale of FDFO -NF hybrid system in Au stralia (Source: Phuntsho et al., 2016)

12 The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 215
there are some challenges in linkages between technologies
and current policy, which should be addressed in the future to
enhance water production and reuse to adaptation to water
security.
• Lack of Criteria for Making Decision on Technology Use
Globally, even though technologies are more and more
advanced, water policy, in particular decisions on technology
use, is based on mostly non-technical criteria, such as global
and local knowledge or adapting alternatives from abroad
to local conditions, cost, or even political reasons. This lack
of technical criteria, as well as related concerns in economic,
social, and cultural aspects, lead to diiculties in deployment
of advanced technologies to populations, especially in
developing countries. Therefore, there is a requirement for
policy making in a technical area given the economic, social,
and cultural needs along with geographical and physical
variability. In which developing countries should have many
chances to gain benefits from choosing the best technologies
by using sustainable criteria (UN-Water, 2015b).
• Lack of Policy to Eliminate Barriers for Water Technology
Application
Barriers - such as weak water market demand, uncertain
return on investment or lack of technical skills and capacity,
inhibit the adoption of water technologies. Meanwhile,
policies may be applied to evaluate its potential to support
or prevent these barriers to facilitate new technologies
(UN-Water, 2015b). However, lack of clear governance on
elimination of barriers leads to the diiculty of decision
makers in providing eective support for implementation of
water related solutions. In Nigeria, for example,
the representative said that his country faced serious
problems in providing adequate irrigation, as water competed
with other needs for domestic resources. However, poor water
policies on grants for water resources caused a barrier for
technological transferring as well as international assistance
(UN, 2014).
• Lack of Policy on Protection of Intellectual Proper ty
Rights (IPR)
Innovation of advanced technologies depends on new
patented knowledge rather than public knowledge.
Therefore, inappropriate protection of intellectual property
rights may work against the application of new water
technologies, especially in some countries where the
intellectual property laws are weak or ineective. Moreover,
lack of eicient IPR in developing countries may reduce
technology flows from developed countries to developing
ones. When the IPRs protection policy of developing countries
is eective, the entry of foreign technologies is easier.
This result implies that this policy is likely to increase the
expansion of water servicing (Mrad, 2017).
• Lack of Supporting Funding for Water Technologies
Policy incentives in the form of tax breaks or tari protection
give significant benefits for the development and diusion
of water technologies. Wealth provides critical resources
to mitigating water risks; as countries become wealthier,
reducing water risks becomes more aordable.
However, in several countries, where these policies are weak
or ineective, the implementation of successful innovation
is much lower. The policies in state must therefore favour
such technologies and encourage the actors to adapt them
by various incentive mechanisms. Currently, investment in
water technologies for supply or sanitation has not kept pace
with the needs. The UN-water global analysis and assessment
of sanitation and drinking water (GLAAS) report documents
a huge financing gap between plans and budgets for water
supply and sanitation, with 80% of countries indicating
insuicient financing for the sector. In Japan, for instance,
the investment for water supply system needs coincides with
a projected decline in available financing, such that they will
exceed the potential available funds for investment by 2025.
It is therefore critical to introduce eicient policy to find other
sources for water-related projects (OECD, 2016).
5.2.2. Current Eorts are Under Way to Address
Existing Challenges
In order to deal with drawbacks of the hybrid system as
mentioned in section 4, technical solutions have been
discovered and applied. For instance, utilization of waste
streams based DS such as brine RO eluent (i.e, very high salt
concentration solution), concentrated industrial wastewater,
or inorganic fer tilizers may reduce the total energy
consumption of hybrid systems as well as, saves the cost
for waste treatment. Besides, utilization of waste heat and
renewable energy such as solar energy for re-concentration
processes of DS is being studied to reduce the total operation
cost, i.e., the energy consumption of hybrid processes.
Transferring from lab-scale to pilot-scale and full-scale
is the most important task, which researchers, as well as
businesses and end-users, have to undertake to ensure that
the technological advancement can be used for commercial
purposes. Likewise, prior studies provide with the date set for
the application of advanced membrane hybrid system in full-
scale for the upcoming projects in near future.
In terms of policy making, knowledge sharing between
technicians and policy makers as well as among dierent
countries around the world is leading us to better decision-
making on water technology utilization. Knowledge Sharing
Program (KSP), for instance, including 76 partner countries
and 9 International Organization, is currently aiming to
share knowledge for expansion of economic and political
cooperation. This includes not only the dissemination of
techniques but also to the enabling conditions that may
favour their transfer and adaptation and of the capacities to
make them viable (UN-Water, 2015b). Moreover, international
cooperation is also currently expanding as mentioned
in the water development goal (Target 6.a) to support
developing countries in water and sanitation, wastewater
treatment and reuse technologies.

216 Technology for Water Reuse
06
Future Perspectives
Advanced FO hybrid systems have demonstrated lots of
benefits compared to standalone process. However, to bring
the innovation closer to commercialization, there are some
situations, in both aspects of engineering and policy,
that should be paid attention in the future.
6.1. In the Engineering Aspect
Low energy consuming advanced hybrid systems should be
innovated to reduce operating cost as well as to increase
these systems’ eiciency. A combination of FO process with
processes using solar power or waste heat from thermal plant
to save energy for recovery of DS could be a high potential
technology for sustainable development.
Further optimization of FO hybrid systems, in particular on
membrane permeability or packing density to simultaneously
enhance water flux and reduce membrane fouling as well
as increase the rejection of micro-pollutants, will likely
enable these systems to reach full-scale faster than current
processes (UN-Water, 2015b). Finding a sustainable DS,
which can enhance water flux eectively as well as being
environmentally friendly for the recovery process,
is an interesting issue for academic research in the future.
6.2. In the Policy Aspect
The problem is how technical innovation can be eectively
applied in real cases so as to improve the adaptation of
technologies to water scarcity around the world.
As mentioned above, there is some lack of policies on criteria
for making decisions on water technologies, on inhibition of
barriers for application of technologies and on protection
of property rights. Water investment, which supports the
use, transfer, and adaptation of new technologies to water
scarcity, is also not enough yet. Bridging the gap between
technologies and water policies is not just a question of
technologies but also about how the policies are improved
to make a more eicient application of advanced systems.
Therefore, international and local cooperation is critically
necessar y to provide “suicient, safe, acceptable, physically
accessible and aordable water for personal and domestic
uses” as the human right to water adopted by United Nations
(UN-Water, 2003).
07
Conclusion
With current scenario of water scarcity and climate change,
advanced technologies and eective linkage between
technologies and policies play a pivotal role in the facilitation
of innovation in order to tackle related-water issues.
Advanced FO hybrid systems have demonstrated its benefits
in adaptation to water scarcity through a lot of research data
as well as successful case studies around the world.
However, there are obstacles which should be addressed to
bring it closer to commercially viable, in which policy making
is the dominant factor. Attention on the lack of global and
local policies on technological application as well as
the linkage between innovations and policies also should
be high on the agenda of all governments in the future to
improve water security for sustainable development.
Attention on
the lack of global
and local policies
on technological
application
as well as
the linkage
between
innovations and
policies also
should be high on
the agenda of all
governments in the
future to improve
water security
for sustainable
development.

12 The Capability of Forward Osmosis Based Hybrid Processes in Adaptation to Water Scarcity and Climate Change 217
References
Achilli, A., Cath, T. Y., Marchand, E. A., Childress, A. E. (2009).
The Forward Osmosis Membrane Bioreactor: A Low Fouling Alternative to MBR Processes. Desalination, 239, pp. 10-21.
Al-Rekabi, W. S., Qiang, H. & Qiang, W. W. (2007). Improvements in Wastewater Treatment Technology. Parkistan Journal of
Nutrition, 6(2), pp. 104-110.
Award, A. M., Jalab, R., Martar, J. M., Adham, S., Nasser, M. S., Judd, S. J. (2019). The Status of Forward Osmosis Technology
Implementation. Desalination, 461, pp. 10-21.
Chekli, L., Phuntsho, S., Kim, J. E., Kim, J. H., Choi, J. Y., Choi, J. S., Kim, S. H., Kim, J. H., Hong, S. K., Sohn, J. S. & Shon, H. K. (2016).
A Comprehensive Review of Hybrid For ward Osmosis Systems: Performance, Applications and Future Prospects. Journal of
Membrane Science, 497, pp. 430-449.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). (2003). Review of World Water Resources by Country.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from http://www.fao.org/3/y4473e/y4473e08.htm.
Gleick, P. H., Singh, A. & Shi, H. (2001). Threats to the World’s Freshwater Resources. Managing the Risks Facing the Private Sector.
Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security, Oakland, California, USA.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2001/11/threats_to_the_worlds_freshwater3.pdf.
Global Water Intelligence. (2016). Desalination Markets 2016.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, https://www.globalwaterintel.com/client_media/uploaded/TOC%20GWI_Desalination_
Markets_2016-2.pdf.
Goh, P. S., Ismail, A. F., Ng, B. C. & Abdullah, M. S. (2019). Recent Progresses of Forward Osmosis Membranes Formulation and
Design for Wastewater Treatment. Water, 11(10), 2043.
Harishankar, S., Kumar, R. S., Sudharsan, K. P., Vignesh, U. & Viveknath, T. (2014). Solar Powered Smart Irrigation System.
Advance in Electronic and Electric Engineering, 4(4), pp. 341-346.
IWA (International Water Association). (2015). Alternative Water Resources; A Review of Concepts, Solutions and Experiences.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from https://iwa-network.org/learn_resources/alternative-water-resources-a-review-of-
concepts-solutions-and-experiences/.
. (2016). What Role for Desalination in the New Water Paradigm.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from https://iwa-network.org/news/what-role-for-desalination-in-the-new-water-paradigm/.
Kulkarni, S. (2011). Innovative Technologies for Water Saving in Irrigated Agriculture. International Journal of Water Resources and
Arid Environments, 1(3), pp. 226-231.
Linares, R. V., Li, Z., Sarp, S., Bucs, S. S., Amy, G. & Vrouwenvelder, J. S. (2014). Forward Osmosis Niches in Seawater Desalination
and Wastewater Reuse. Water Research, 66, pp. 122-139.
Mrad, F. (2017). The Eects of Intellectual Proper ty Rights Protection in the Technology Transfer Context on Economic Growth:
The Case of Developing Countries. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 23(2), pp. 33-57.
National Research Council. (2012). Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation’s Water Supply Through Reuse of Municipal
Wastewater. The National Academies Press.
Nicoll, P. G. (2013). Forward Osmosis as a Pre-Treatment to Reverse Osmosis. Proceedings of The International Desalination
Association World Congress on Desalination and Water Reuse, Tianjin, China.
Nicoll, P. G. (2017). Forward Osmosis – A Brief Introduction. Water Today – The Magazine.
OECD. (2016). Water, Growth and Finance: Policy Perspectives.
Phuntsho, S., Kim, J. E., Johir, M. A. H., Hong, S. K., Li, Z., Ghaour, N., Leiknes, T. & Shon, H. K. (2016). Fertiliser Drawn Forward
Osmosis Process: Pilot-scale Desalination of Mine Impaired Water for Fertigation. Journal of Membrane Science, 508, pp. 22-31.
Sohn, J. S. (2017). FO-RO Hybrid Desalination Project: Progress and Challenges. Busan Global Water Forum, Busan, Korea.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from http://en.bwf.kr/data/files/B1_Jinsik_Sohn.pdf.
Town of Medway MA, USA. (2019). Integrated Water Resources Management Program.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from https://www.townofmedway.org/dpw-water-sewer/pages/integrated-water-resources-
management-program.
UN (United Nations). (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future.
. (2004). Obstacles Faced by Developing Countries in Meeting Water, Sanitation Needs Highlighted in Sustainable
Development Commission. Environmental Issues and Sustainable Development.
. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). (2005). Communicating Sustainability: How to Produce Eective Public
Campaigns.
USAID (United State Agency International Development). (2017). Improving Water Security: A Process to Address
“Too Little, Too Much, Too Dirty, Too Eerratic”.
US-EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2019). Irrigation Controllers.
Retrieved November 10, 2019, from https://www.epa.gov/watersense/irrigation-controllers.
UN-Water. (2003). The Human Right to Water and Sanitation.

218 Technology for Water Reuse
. (2013a). Water Security and the Global Water Agenda: A UN-Water Analytical Brief.
. (2013b). Water and Food Security.
Retrieved November 10, 2019, from https://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/food_security.shtml.
. (2015a). UN-Water Annual Report 2015.
Retrieved November 10, 2019, from https://www.unwater.org/publications/un-water-annual-report-2015/.
. (2015b). Water and Sustainable Development: From Vision to Action. A Report of the 2015 UN-Water Zaragoza Conference.
. Water Scarcity. Retrieved November 11, 2019, from https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/scarcity/.
Viet, N. D., Cho, J. W., Yoon, Y. M. & Jang, A. (2019). Enhancing the Removal Eiciency of Osmotic Membrane Bioreactors:
A Comprehensive Review of Influencing Parameters and Hybrid Configurations. Chemosphere, 236, 124363.
Voltas Water Management Division. (2018). Driving value through smar t engineering.
Retrieved November 12, 2019, from http://lalvol.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Voltas-Water-Brochure_v271.pdf.
WHO & UNICEF. (2006). Meeting the MDG Drinking Water and Sanitation Target: The Urban and Rural Challenge of the Decade.
Zhao, S., Zou, L. & Mulcahy, D. (2012). Brackish Water Desalination by a Hybrid Forward Osmosis–Nanofiltration System Using
Divalent Draw Solute. Desalination, 284, pp. 175-181.

Subject Index
abstracted water 81
advanced water treatment 89, 98,
211
anaerobic treatment 93
appropriate technology 129, 132
aquatic environment 78
blackwater 156
ceramic membrane 90, 95
ceramic microfiltration 95
circular economy 29, 30, 40, 56, 86,
90, 109, 114, 129, 143, 170, 174
climate change 28, 107, 114, 157, 208
community-based management 129
decentralized wastewater treatment
system 132
desalination 5 7, 13 5
domestic water 111
drinking water 209
drought 28, 78
ecological impact 194
environmental benefit 197
environmental protection 89
external recycling scheme 93
external water recycling systems
92-93
fertilizer drawn forward osmosis 214
food security 107, 135, 157
forward osmosis 210
forward osmosis hybrid 212
greenhouse gas emission 97-98
greywater 156
groundwater abstraction 172
groundwater contamination 112
groundwater recharge 132, 210
hazard analysis and critical control
points 92
hybrid forward osmosis-reverse
osmosis 213
industrial discharge 42
industrial wastewater 92
integrated water resource
management 89, 115, 209
internal water recycling scheme 90
irrigation 113, 160
legal framework 57-59
life cycle assessment 88, 92, 97
marginal water 130-134
marginal water resources 129
municipal wastewater treatment
plant 100
municipal water 60
nanofiltration 96
NEWater 29, 57, 60-61
public-private-partnerships 46, 49
reclaimed water 60, 142, 178
recycled fibre 100
recycled water management plan 92
reverse osmosis 96
safety impact 147
safety standard 58
sanitation 28, 38, 157
SDG 1 156
SDG 2 156
SDG 3 41, 156
SDG 4 157
SDG 5 157
SDG 6 41, 156, 170, 192
SDG 7 41
SDG 8 157
SDG 11 28, 41, 157
SDG 13 41
SDG 14 41
SDG 15 157
soil contamination 111
storm water 116, 209
Sustainable Development Goals
28, 39, 41, 48, 156, 209
triple bottom line 88, 92, 97
urban settlement 159
urban wastewater 210
urban wastewater treatment 131
urban water resilience 60
urban water resources
management 73
urbanization 38, 40, 106, 158, 159
wastewater 40, 116, 131, 133, 156,
209, 211
wastewater contamination 111
wastewater management 39
wastewater pollution 109
wastewater recycling 194
wastewater reuse 111-112, 114-116,
194
wastewater treatment 40, 73
wastewater treatment plants 41, 72,
77, 110, 131-132, 142, 160
water availability 72-73, 75-76, 78,
80-81, 86-87, 107, 146
water consumption 172
water demand 178
water distribution 131
water management 28
water purification 73
water quality 42, 58, 73, 76, 132,
133, 208
water quantity 75-76
water recycling scheme 89
water resources 39
water resources management 57
water reuse 29, 56, 76-77, 80-81,
143, 210
water scarcity 38, 73, 107, 108, 113,
114, 128, 142, 182
water security 28, 157, 192, 199, 208
water stress 38
water supply 28, 38, 134, 148

Water Reuse
Within a Circular
Economy Context
Water Reuse Within a Circular Economy Context
GLOBAL WATER
SECURITY ISSUES
SERIES
2
2
Providing clean and secure water resources is key to achieving SDG 6,
"Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation
for all”. Water is essential for human activities and is critical to many sectors
of the economy, therefore its sustainable use is fundamental in a circular
economy model.
In accordance with the United Nations’ World Water Development Report
2019, global water demand is expected to increase by 20-30% by 2050 and
this increased demand will exacerbate water security issues generally.
Rapid urbanization and population growth are creating even more
challenges to supplying safe water. Climate Change is also resulting in more
frequent occurrences of oods and severe droughts, which in turn also
aect the availability of secure water supply and sanitation. In this context,
it is now more important than ever to look for non-conventional water
resources to ensure sucient water resources for all basic human needs.
According to UN-Water, 80% of wastewater ows back into the ecosystem
without being reused or treated, and 1.8 billion people are exposed to
contaminated drinking water sources as a result. Wastewater is a potential
resource that can ll this supply gap in industry and agriculture. Reused
water is not just an alternative source of water, it is an opportunity to
provide benets for many human activities.
This second GWSI series examines the critical role of water reuse in the
circular economy, demonstrating that wastewater and other marginal
water sources should be seen as resources that are too valuable to simply
ignore or discard. The case studies within this report explore how water
reuse can be a major tool and part of a strategy to achieve the SDGs. Water
reuse also presents an opportunity to develop sustainable water resources
that protect our communities and ecosystems.
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Intergovernmental
Hydrological
Programme
Intergovernmental
Hydrological
Programme
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
9789231 004131