Creating an Enabling Environment for WR&R Implementation P-M. Stathatou, E. Kampragou, H. Grigoropoulou, D. Assimacopoulos, C. Karavitis & J. Gironás School of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Greece 13th IWA Specialized Conference on Small Water & Wastewater Systems & 5th IWA Specialized Conference on Resources- Oriented Sanitation, 14-16 September 2016, Athens, Greece
Why Wastewater Reuse & Recycling? Pressures Rapid economic development Continuous population growth Varying hydrological cycles Freshwater: A scarce resource Limited quantity Degraded quality Existing water systems Most often unable to support natural processes & population needs European Policies & Initiatives Resource efficiency Pollution control Circular economy & industrial symbiosis Eco-efficiency in the production chains Ecosystem services Recycling & Reusing of treated Wastewater (WR&R)
Benefits of WR&R Highly reliable alternative water resource Unaffected by climatic conditions Constant production of treated WW Locally controlled water supply Preservation of limited freshwater resources Decreased freshwater abstractions Enhancement of environmental protection Reduced WW discharge Protection of aquatic ecosystems Contribution to cost reduction Reduced Capital and O&M costs of water supply infrastructures & facilities Avoided WW treatment & nutrient removal for discharge to sensitive water bodies Energy savings Limited application of fertilizers in farming
WR&R Implementation Issues Despite their various benefits, WR&R practices are not widely applied around the globe Complex and inadequate legal & institutional frameworks & socioeconomic structures hindering WR&R implementation 1. Weak governmental policies which discourage WR&R penetration 2. Lack of available funding sources 3. Negative socio-cultural perceptions on reclaimed water use 4. Limited technical capacity & expertise for WW reclamation, supply & use 5. Non-existent legal frameworks regulating WRM 6. Overlapping jurisdictions among involved institutions
The Need for an Enabling Environment A paradigm shift is needed to overcome WR&R implementation barriers WW to be considered as a valuable resource and not as waste Transformation of traditional linear patterns of water use into circular pathways incorporating WR&R An enabling environment should be created Focus on more than availability & costs of reclamation technologies The political, economic, social, technical, legal & institutional, conditions which encourage and support WR&R implementation Aim of the study Comprehensive methodology for developing an enabling environment for WR&R implementation Identification of implementation barriers & drivers Recognition of the most significant barriers on which priority should be given by decision-makers
The Proposed Methodological Framework
The Methodological Framework towards an Enabling Environment for WR&R
Step 1 Identification of Drivers & Barriers to the WR&R Implementation Process Sub-step 1a: Identification of the factors influencing WR&R implementation Aim Identifying the external factors & their influence on the system Method PESTL analysis (a common variation of the PESTLE analysis) 22 policy, economic, social, technical, legal & institutional factors of potential influence Some factors are related to specific reclaimed water uses Crop irrigation Urban environment Industrial processes Ecosystem services Other factors concern WR&R in general & apply to all possible reclaimed water uses Sub-step 1b: Characterization of factors as drivers or barriers & assessment of their influence Aim Map the views of Local Stakeholders on the identified factors Method On-line PESTL questionnaire for the assessment of the 22 factors Type of influence of each factor on implementing WR&R schemes Positive: Driver Negative: Barrier Importance of influence Low / medium / high Recommendations on how to overcome factors with negative influence
Factors Explored Policy factors 1. National / regional policies on WRM 2. National / regional environmental policies 3. Land use policies 4. Transnational or transboundary treaties & agreements 5. Trade policies (exports of agricultural products) Economic factors 1. Availability of governmental & public funds 2. Indirect financial incentives 3. Freshwater pricing schemes for crop irrigation 4. Freshwater pricing schemes for industrial uses 5. Freshwater pricing schemes for urban uses 6. Farm operating costs Social factors 1. Public awareness on water scarcity problems 2. Public awareness on WR&R 3. Social perceptions on the consumption of crops irrigated with reclaimed water 4. Involvement of different SH groups in decisionmaking processes Technical factors 1. Technical expertise & know-how of WW reclamation & supply 2. Technical expertise & know-how of using reclaimed water 3. Irrigation systems used Legal & institutional factors 1. Ownership of treated WW Water rights law 2. Regulatory framework on WR&R 3. Enforcement of regulations and laws 4. Delineation of responsibilities among the institutions involved in water & WW management
Step 2a Definition of the impact of each barrier upon the others Analysis of the Barriers identified in Step 1 Aim Identification of the causal interrelationships & impacts among barriers Method Cross-Impact Analysis Cross-Impact Matrix (CIM) Rows: Barriers having influence on other barriers Columns: Barriers being influenced by other barriers Expert judgment Each barrier is considered against all the other barriers to fill up the CIM The Question If Barrier i changes and behaves as a Driver for WR&R implementation, then what is the impact (of this change) on Barrier j? Impact of on B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 B 1 3 3 1 B 2 0 3 2 B 3 1 1 2 B 4 3 3 1 Score values 0: No improvement / change 1: Slight / weak improvement 2: Strong improvement 3: Very strong improvement / it becomes a driver
Step 2b Analysis of impacts & interrelationships among barriers Active sum (AS) Sum of score values across a row of the CIM Overall impact of the barrier in question upon all other barriers Passive sum (PS) Sum of score values across a column of the CIM Overall impact of all other barriers on the barrier in question Impact of on B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 Active sum (AS) B 1 3 3 1 7 B 2 0 3 2 5 B 3 1 1 2 4 B 4 3 3 1 7 Passive sum 4 7 7 5 (PS) Product (P = AS x PS) Quotient (Q = AS/PS)
Step 2b Systemic Role of barriers Based on the corresponding Ps & Qs barriers are classified as follows Active barriers (high Q values) Barriers strongly influencing other barriers, but not much influenced by others Changes on these barriers can have a leverage effect on the system / effective for the system s regulation Reactive barriers (low Q values) Barriers with little influence on other barriers, but strongly influenced by others Useful for the observation of the system s condition Critical barriers (high P values) Barriers with strong influence on other barriers and also strongly influenced by them Changes on these barriers can have destabilizing effects on the system / not easily controllable Buffering barriers (low P values) Barriers neither influencing other barriers nor influenced by others Inert to system change, should be examined separately Key Barriers: Active & buffering barriers
Active Sum (AS) Step 2b Visualization of the Systemic Role of Barriers Cross-impact grid (axes: AS & PS) Made up of straight lines & hyperbolas Q values - Barriers influence on others P values Barriers integration in the system 3 1 Divided into 5 different colour fields/areas 1. Critical barriers 2. Buffering barriers 3. Active barriers 4. Reactive barriers 5. Transition zone / neutral barriers The position of each barrier in the diagram reveals its role within the system 2 5 4 Passive Sum (PS) Key Barriers: Located in fields 2 & 3 Dotted lines correspond to the average values of AS and PS Adapted from Gausemeier et al., 1996
Application of the Methodological Framework
The Study Site Area The Copiapó River Basin, Chile Location: Atacama Desert, Chile Area: 18,538 km 2 Population: 200,000 inh (census 2012) Pressures on water resources High temporal variation of rainfall Long dry periods Uncontrolled trade of water rights Rapid population growth Water related issues Severe water scarcity conditions Intense competition over water supply between the different water use sectors Suggested solution (COROADO project) WR&R for urban water uses Location of the Copiapó River Basin
Results Barriers & Drivers for WR&R Implementation Barriers outweigh drivers for the implementation of urban WR&R schemes L1: Ownership of treated wastewater L2: Regulatory framework on WR&R L3: Enforcement of regulations & laws L4: Delineation of responsibilities among the institutions involved in water & WW management 2 Policy P2: National/regional environmental policies P3: Land use policies 4 Legal 10 Barriers 1 Economic E1: Availability of governmental & public funds T2: Technical expertise & know-how of urban citizens for using reclaimed water 1 Technical 2 Social S2: Public awareness on WR&R S4: Involvement of different stakeholder groups in decision-making processes
Results The CIM of the Identified Barriers P2 P3 E1 S2 S4 T2 L1 L2 L3 L4 AS P2 3 2 0 3 0 1 1 2 1 13 P3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 4 E1 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 6 S2 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 1 0 6 S4 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 2 3 12 T2 1 0 1 2 0 2 2 1 0 9 L1 1 0 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 19 L2 0 0 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 14 L3 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 2 9 L4 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 2 8 PS 5 3 9 8 15 10 8 13 16 13 0: no improvement/change; 1: slight/weak improvement; 2: strong improvement; 3: very strong improvement The CIM was completed by experts of the Copiapó River Basin expressing expected changes considering the local water resources management frameworks & issues
Active Sum (AS) Results Key Barriers Inhibiting System s Transition Classification of barriers Active: L1, P2 Reactive: L3, L4 Critical: L2, S4 Buffering: P3, S2, E1 Neutral: T2 20 15 P2 L1 L2 S4 Five key barriers inhibit system s transition Priority should be given on L1: Unclear legal framework regarding the ownership of treated wastewater P2: Lack of environmental policies focusing on pollution control P3: Limited integration of reclaimed water use in the current land use & development policies S2: Limited public awareness on WR&R E1: Limited availability of governmental funding sources for WR&R 10 5 0 P3 S2 E1 0 5 10 15 20 Passive Sum (PS) T2 L4 L3 The Cross-Impact Grid of the Copiapó River Basin
Results Instruments to foster an Enabling Environment for WR&R Implementation Setting Priorities for Decision-Makers From all the initially identified Barriers, priority should be given on 5 Key Barriers Instruments for transforming Key Barriers to Drivers Introduction of a coherent water rights system Definition & regulation of the ownership of treated wastewater according to its origin Institution of environmental policies to control pollution Incentives for using reclaimed water & minimizing WW discharges Integration of reclaimed water use in land use & development policies Redevelopment of abandoned urban zones Conduction of awareness raising campaigns on WR&R Access to relevant information Introduction of funding mechanisms & arrangements Fund mobilization & investments on WR&R
Conclusions Benefits of the proposed framework In-depth understanding of the local water systems Exhaustive list of factors with potential influence on WR&R implementation Incorporation of local views, perceptions & standpoints Novel & systematic method to recognize significant barriers Prioritization of enabling instruments & arrangements Focus on key barriers to foster WR&R implementation & create an enabling environment Participatory process for engaging SH Interaction, consultation & active participation of local stakeholders Constraints of the proposed framework Sufficient number of questionnaire responses is needed Subjective scoring of impacts based on SHs interpretation & understanding
Acknowledgments The research leading to these results has received funding from the EU-funded FP7 project COROADO: Technologies for Water Recycling & Reuse in Latin American Context: Assessment, Decision Tools and Implementable Strategies under an Uncertain Future (Grant agreement No: 283025) Thank you for your attention!