IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v101y2015icp154-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reusing wastewater to cope with water scarcity: Economic, social and environmental considerations for decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Garcia, X.
  • Pargament, D.

Abstract

Wastewater reuse has been recognized as an encouraging solution to cope with the problem of water scarcity around the globe. Adopting Integrated Water Resources Management principles will ensure that the implementation of wastewater reuse projects will take into account all the various types of affected stakeholders, accounting in addition for the external costs and benefits derived from the reuse decision. The objective of this paper is to analyze the economic, social and environmental aspects surrounding the concept of wastewater reuse in order to assist policy-makers and managers on the implementation of economic instruments for decision-making. This study proposes a methodological framework for conducting cost-benefit analysis, which is later exemplified by the Yarqon Recycling Project case study in Israel. In this case study application, 3 different scenarios (“pessimistic”, “base-case” and “optimistic”) with a range of parameters values, were used to estimate the most relevant internal and external costs and benefits. Additionally, the most influential parameters were identified using a sensitivity analysis that included both Monte Carlo simulations and the standardized regression coefficients method. For the “base-case” scenario, the net present value obtained was approximately $4.83 million. Although the feasibility of the project is demonstrated, the sensitivity analysis results were less favorable (likelihood of obtaining a positive result was only 64.28%), being the external recreational costs derived from irrigating with reclaimed wastewater the most influential parameter. The results of this analysis led to the conclusion that including the relevant externalities might have a strong impact on the economic feasibility of the wastewater reuse projects. The proposed methodological framework aims to guide decision-makers in evaluating their success with respect to Integrated Water Resources Management in economic terms.

Suggested Citation

  • Garcia, X. & Pargament, D., 2015. "Reusing wastewater to cope with water scarcity: Economic, social and environmental considerations for decision-making," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 154-166.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:101:y:2015:i:c:p:154-166
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344915300112
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pedrero, Francisco & Kalavrouziotis, Ioannis & Alarcón, Juan José & Koukoulakis, Prodromos & Asano, Takashi, 2010. "Use of treated municipal wastewater in irrigated agriculture--Review of some practices in Spain and Greece," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(9), pages 1233-1241, September.
    2. -Lal, Khajanchi & Minhas, P.S. & Yadav, R.K., 2015. "Long-term impact of wastewater irrigation and nutrient rates II. Nutrient balance, nitrate leaching and soil properties under peri-urban cropping systems," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 110-117.
    3. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    4. Jeannie Sowers & Avner Vengosh & Erika Weinthal, 2011. "Climate change, water resources, and the politics of adaptation in the Middle East and North Africa," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 599-627, February.
    5. J. R. Hicks, 1943. "The Four Consumer's Surpluses," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 31-41.
    6. Nick Hanley, 1992. "Are there environmental limits to cost benefit analysis?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 33-59, January.
    7. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    8. Tsagarakis, K.P., 2005. "Recycled water valuation as a corollary of the 2000/60/EC water framework directive," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 1-14, March.
    9. Ghyselbrecht, Karel & Van Houtte, Emmanuel & Pinoy, Luc & Verbauwhede, Johan & Van der Bruggen, Bart & Meesschaert, Boudewijn, 2012. "Treatment of RO concentrate by means of a combination of a willow field and electrodialysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 116-123.
    10. Nijhawan, Anisha & Labhasetwar, Pawan & Jain, Priyanka & Rahate, Manish, 2013. "Public consultation on artificial aquifer recharge using treated municipal wastewater," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 20-24.
    11. Toze, Simon, 2006. "Reuse of effluent water--benefits and risks," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 80(1-3), pages 147-159, February.
    12. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    13. Turner, R. Kerry & Paavola, Jouni & Cooper, Philip & Farber, Stephen & Jessamy, Valma & Georgiou, Stavros, 2003. "Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 493-510, October.
    14. Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Acuña, Vicenç & Bardina, Mònica & Brozović, Nicholas & Marcé, Rafael & Munné, Antoni & Sabater, Sergi & Termes, Montserrat & Valero, Fernando & Vega, Àlex & Schneider, Daniel W., 2013. "Examining the Demand for Ecosystem Services: The Value of Stream Restoration for Drinking Water Treatment Managers in the Llobregat River, Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 196-205.
    15. Poor, P. Joan & Pessagno, Keri L. & Paul, Robert W., 2007. "Exploring the hedonic value of ambient water quality: A local watershed-based study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 797-806, February.
    16. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    17. Aliza Fleischer & Yacov Tsur, 2003. "Measuring the Recreational Value of Open Space," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 269-283, July.
    18. Huang, Ju-Chin & Boyle, Kevin J. & Halstead, John M. & Gibbs, Julie P., 2002. "An Hedonic Analysis of the Effects of Lake Water Clarity on New Hampshire Lakefront Properties," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-8, April.
    19. Limburg, Karin E. & O'Neill, Robert V. & Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen, 2002. "Complex systems and valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 409-420, June.
    20. Kfir, Ofir & Tal, Alon & Gross, Amit & Adar, Eilon, 2012. "The effect of reservoir operational features on recycled wastewater quality," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 76-87.
    21. Menegaki, Angeliki N. & Hanley, Nick & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2007. "The social acceptability and valuation of recycled water in Crete: A study of consumers' and farmers' attitudes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 7-18, April.
    22. Bouwer, Herman, 2000. "Integrated water management: emerging issues and challenges," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 217-228, August.
    23. Pereira, Luis Santos & Oweis, Theib & Zairi, Abdelaziz, 2002. "Irrigation management under water scarcity," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 175-206, December.
    24. Gössling, Stefan & Peeters, Paul & Hall, C. Michael & Ceron, Jean-Paul & Dubois, Ghislain & Lehmann, La Vergne & Scott, Daniel, 2012. "Tourism and water use: Supply, demand, and security. An international review," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-15.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hu, Zhineng & Chen, Yazhen & Yao, Liming & Wei, Changting & Li, Chaozhi, 2016. "Optimal allocation of regional water resources: From a perspective of equity–efficiency tradeoff," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 102-113.
    2. Ziheng Feng & Liying Sun, 2024. "Water Conservation Implications Based on Tempo-Spatial Characteristics of Water Footprint in the Water-Receiving Areas of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Maaß, Oliver & Grundmann, Philipp, 2016. "Added-value from linking the value chains of wastewater treatment, crop production and bioenergy production: A case study on reusing wastewater and sludge in crop production in Braunschweig (Germany)," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 195-211.
    4. Zhang, Jinbo & Liu, Lirong & Xie, Yulei & Han, Dengcheng & Zhang, Yang & Li, Zheng & Guo, Huaicheng, 2023. "Revealing the impact of an energy–water–carbon nexus–based joint tax management policy on the environ-economic system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
    5. Xiang Deng & Xiang Cheng & Jing Gu & Zeshui Xu, 2021. "An Innovative Indicator System and Group Decision Framework for Assessing Sustainable Development Enterprises," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 1201-1238, December.
    6. Chen, Zhuo & Wu, Qianyuan & Wu, Guangxue & Hu, Hong-Ying, 2017. "Centralized water reuse system with multiple applications in urban areas: Lessons from China’s experience," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 125-136.
    7. Zheng, Xiang & Zhang, Zhenxing & Yu, Dawei & Chen, Xiaofen & Cheng, Rong & Min, Shang & Wang, Jiangquan & Xiao, Qingcong & Wang, Jihua, 2015. "Overview of membrane technology applications for industrial wastewater treatment in China to increase water supply," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 105(PA), pages 1-10.
    8. Antonio R. Hurtado & Julio Berbel, 2024. "A Cost–Benefit Analysis of Reclaimed Water and Desalinated Seawater for Irrigation in Axarquia, Southern Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Centobelli, Piera & Cerchione, Roberto & Esposito, Emilio & Passaro, Renato & Shashi,, 2021. "Determinants of the transition towards circular economy in SMEs: A sustainable supply chain management perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    2. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    3. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    4. Kontogianni, Areti & Luck, Gary W. & Skourtos, Michalis, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1479-1487, May.
    5. Ando Fahda Aulia & Harpinder Sandhu & Andrew C. Millington, 2020. "Quantifying the Economic Value of Ecosystem Services in Oil Palm Dominated Landscapes in Riau Province in Sumatra, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, June.
    6. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Bianchi, Ettore & Accastello, Cristian & Trappmann, Daniel & Blanc, Simone & Brun, Filippo, 2018. "The Economic Evaluation of Forest Protection Service Against Rockfall: A Review of Experiences and Approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 409-418.
    8. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    9. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    10. Arantza Murillas‐Maza & Jorge Virto & María Carmen Gallastegui & Pilar González & Javier Fernández‐Macho, 2011. "The value of open ocean ecosystems: A case study for the Spanish exclusive economic zone," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 35(2), pages 122-133, May.
    11. Marina Bravi & Marta Bottero & Federico Dell’Anna, 2024. "An Application of the Life Satisfaction Approach (LSA) to Value the Land Consumption and Ecosystem Services," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 2988-3013, March.
    12. Chenai Murata & Sukhmani Mantel & Chris de Wet & Anthony R Palmer, 2019. "Lay Knowledge of Ecosystem Services in Rural Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: Implications for Intervention Program Planning," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-29, April.
    13. de Groot, R. & Stuip, M. & Finlayson, Max & Davidson, N., 2006. "Valuing wetlands: guidance for valuing the benefits derived from wetland ecosystem services," IWMI Research Reports H039735, International Water Management Institute.
    14. Imran Khan & Hongdou Lei & Gaffar Ali & Shahid Ali & Minjuan Zhao, 2019. "Public Attitudes, Preferences and Willingness to Pay for River Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Élia Pires-Marques & Cristina Chaves & Lígia M. Costa Pinto, 2021. "Biophysical and monetary quantification of ecosystem services in a mountain region: the case of avoided soil erosion," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 11382-11405, August.
    16. Hearnshaw, Edward J.S. & Cullen, Ross, 2010. "The Sustainability and Cost-Effectiveness of Water Storage Projects on Canterbury Rivers: The Opihi River Case," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 97265, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Hooper, Tara & Cooper, Philip & Hunt, Alistair & Austen, Melanie, 2014. "A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 65-74.
    18. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    19. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    20. Aevermann Tim & Schmude Jürgen, 2015. "Quantification and monetary valuation of urban ecosystem services in Munich, Germany," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 188-200, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:101:y:2015:i:c:p:154-166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.