Creating an Enabling Environment for WR&R Implementation P-M. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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

Pressures ◦ Rapid economic development ◦ Continuous population growth Why ◦ Varying hydrological cycles Wastewater Freshwater: A scarce resource ◦ Limited quantity Reuse & ◦ Degraded quality Recycling? 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 & socio- economic 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  An enabling environment overcome WR&R should be created implementation barriers ◦ Focus on more than availability & costs of reclamation technologies ◦ WW to be considered as a valuable resource and not as ◦ The political, economic, social, waste technical, legal & institutional, conditions which encourage and ◦ Transformation of traditional support WR&R implementation linear patterns of water use into circular pathways incorporating WR&R 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 Sub-step 1b: Characterization of factors influencing WR&R factors as drivers or barriers & implementation assessment of their influence ◦ Aim ◦ Aim ◦ Identifying the external factors & their ◦ Map the views of Local Stakeholders on influence on the system the identified factors ◦ Method ◦ Method ◦ PESTL analysis (a common variation of ◦ On-line PESTL questionnaire for the the PESTLE analysis) assessment of the 22 factors ◦ 22 policy, economic, social, technical, legal ◦ Type of influence of each factor on & institutional factors of potential influence implementing WR&R schemes ◦ Positive: Driver ◦ Some factors are related to specific reclaimed water uses ◦ Negative: Barrier ◦ Importance of influence ◦ Crop irrigation ◦ ◦ Low / medium / high Urban environment ◦ Industrial processes ◦ Recommendations on how to overcome ◦ Ecosystem services factors with negative influence ◦ Other factors concern WR&R in general & apply to all possible reclaimed water uses

Factors Explored Policy factors Social factors 1. National / regional policies on WRM 1. Public awareness on water scarcity problems 2. National / regional environmental policies 2. Public awareness on WR&R 3. Land use policies 3. Social perceptions on the consumption of crops irrigated with reclaimed water 4. Transnational or transboundary treaties & agreements 4. Involvement of different SH groups in decision- making processes 5. Trade policies (exports of agricultural products) Technical factors Economic factors 1. Technical expertise & know-how of WW 1. Availability of governmental & public funds reclamation & supply 2. Indirect financial incentives 2. Technical expertise & know-how of using reclaimed water 3. Freshwater pricing schemes for crop irrigation 3. Irrigation systems used 4. Freshwater pricing schemes for industrial uses 5. Freshwater pricing schemes for urban uses Legal & institutional factors 6. Farm operating costs 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 Impact barriers on B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4  of Method ◦ Cross-Impact Analysis B 1 3 3 1 ◦ Cross-Impact Matrix (CIM) B 2 0 3 2 ◦ Rows: Barriers having influence on B 3 1 1 2 other barriers B 4 3 3 1 ◦ Columns: Barriers being influenced by other barriers  Score values ◦ 0: No improvement / change ◦ Expert judgment ◦ 1: Slight / weak improvement ◦ Each barrier is considered against all the other barriers to fill up the CIM ◦ 2: Strong improvement ◦ The Question ◦ 3: Very strong improvement / it becomes a driver ◦ If “Barrier i ” changes and behaves as a Driver for WR&R implementation, then what is the impact (of this change) on “Barrier j”?

Step 2b Analysis of impacts & interrelationships among barriers  Active sum (AS) Impact Active ◦ Sum of score values across a row of on B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 sum (AS) the CIM of ◦ Overall impact of the barrier in 7 B 1 3 3 1 question upon all other barriers 5 B 2 0 3 2 4 B 3 1 1 2  Passive sum (PS) 7 B 4 3 3 1 ◦ Sum of score values across a column of Passive sum the CIM 4 7 7 5 (PS) ◦ Overall impact of all other barriers on the barrier in question  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

Step 2b Visualization of the Systemic Role of Barriers  Cross-impact grid (axes: AS & PS) 3 1 1 ◦ Made up of straight lines & hyperbolas Q values - Barriers’ influence on others ◦ P values – Barriers’ integration in the system ◦ Active Sum (AS) ◦ Divided into 5 different colour fields/areas 1. Critical barriers 5 2. Buffering barriers 3. Active barriers 4. Reactive barriers 5. Transition zone / neutral barriers 2 4  The position of each barrier in the diagram reveals its role within the system Passive Sum (PS) Dotted lines correspond to the average values of AS and PS Key Barriers: Located in fields 2 & 3 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 Location of the Copiapó River Basin  Suggested solution (COROADO project) ◦ WR&R for urban water uses