IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i7p9696-9710d52944.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of Different Stakeholders on Reclaimed Water Reuse: The Case of Beijing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Weiping Chen

    (State Key Laboratory for Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Yanying Bai

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Weiling Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory for Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Sidan Lyu

    (State Key Laboratory for Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Wentao Jiao

    (State Key Laboratory for Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

Abstract

Public involvement is critical to the successful implementation of reclaimed water reuse programs. Based on the participatory research method, we studied the attitudes of the stakeholders who are involved in reclaimed water reuse in Beijing, China. Results showed that the general public’s knowledge on water resources was poor, while their awareness on reclaimed water reuse was high. The general public showed a strong acceptance of non-contact and non-potable reclaimed water reuse, but their acceptance of the three major water reuse types of river water supplement, park water supplement, and agriculture irrigation was not high. The beneficial use of reclaimed water was admired by water resource managers, industrial sectors, and researchers, and these stakeholders strongly supported the advancement of reclaimed water reuse. However, some of the stakeholders showed concerns about the potential risks from reclaimed wastewater reuse. Among them, risks from waste water treatment facilities were the biggest concern. Stakeholders’ perception of reclaimed water was influenced by their social-economic attributes. This study will enrich the current survey findings on public perception of reclaimed water reuse, particularly in developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Weiping Chen & Yanying Bai & Weiling Zhang & Sidan Lyu & Wentao Jiao, 2015. "Perceptions of Different Stakeholders on Reclaimed Water Reuse: The Case of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:7:p:9696-9710:d:52944
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/9696/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/9696/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jasem M. Alhumoud & Haider S. Behbehani & Tamama H. Abdullah, 2003. "Wastewater Reuse Practices in Kuwait," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 117-126, June.
    2. 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.
    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. Xiao Liang & Meine Pieter Van Dijk, 2016. "Evaluating the Interests of Different Stakeholders in Beijing Wastewater Reuse Systems for Sustainable Urban Water Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Furlong, Casey & Jegatheesan, Jega & Currell, Matthew & Iyer-Raniga, Usha & Khan, Tehmina & Ball, Andrew S., 2019. "Is the global public willing to drink recycled water? A review for researchers and practitioners," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 53-61.
    3. Majid Ghorbani & Liyan Xuan, 2018. "Challenging Ingrained Thoughts? The Joint Effect of Stereotypes and Awareness of Related Information on Pro-Environmental Behavior in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Samantha Redman & Kerri Jean Ormerod & Scott Kelley, 2019. "Reclaiming Suburbia: Differences in Local Identity and Public Perceptions of Potable Water Reuse," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Yuheng Yang & Xi Zhang & Leran Chang & Yufei Cheng & Shengle Cao, 2018. "A Method of Evaluating Ecological Compensation Under Different Property Rights and Stages: A Case Study of the Xiaoqing River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    6. Hanliang Fu & Zhaoxing Li & Zhijian Liu & Zelin Wang, 2018. "Research on Big Data Digging of Hot Topics about Recycled Water Use on Micro-Blog Based on Particle Swarm Optimization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, July.
    7. Ricart, Sandra & Rico, Antonio M., 2019. "Assessing technical and social driving factors of water reuse in agriculture: A review on risks, regulation and the yuck factor," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 426-439.
    8. Nikolaos Tzortzakis & Christos Saridakis & Antonios Chrysargyris, 2020. "Treated Wastewater and Fertigation Applied for Greenhouse Tomato Cultivation Grown in Municipal Solid Waste Compost and Soil Mixtures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Ludovico Pontoni & Eric D. Van Hullebusch & Yoan Pechaud & Massimiliano Fabbricino & Giovanni Esposito & Francesco Pirozzi, 2016. "Colloidal Mobilization and Fate of Trace Heavy Metals in Semi-Saturated Artificial Soil (OECD) Irrigated with Treated Wastewater," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Veronika Vaseková, 2022. "How do people in China perceive water? From health threat perception to environmental policy change," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(3), pages 627-645, September.
    11. Dimitra Lazaridou & Anastasios Michailidis & Konstantinos Mattas, 2019. "Evaluating the Willingness to Pay for Using Recycled Water for Irrigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-8, September.

    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. Pere Riera & Raúl Brey & Guillermo Gándara, 2008. "Bid design for non-parametric contingent valuation with a single bounded dichotomous choice format," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 186(3), pages 43-60, October.
    2. Sean F. Ellis & Maik Kecinski & Kent D. Messer & Clive Lipchin, 2022. "Consumer perceptions after long‐term use of alternative irrigation water: A field experiment in Israel," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 1003-1020, June.
    3. Dimitra Lazaridou & Anastasios Michailidis & Konstantinos Mattas, 2019. "Evaluating the Willingness to Pay for Using Recycled Water for Irrigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-8, September.
    4. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    5. Savchenko, Olesya M. & Kecinski, Maik & Li, Tongzhe & Messer, Kent D. & Xu, Huidong, 2018. "Fresh foods irrigated with recycled water: A framed field experiment on consumer responses," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 103-112.
    6. Dupras, Charles & Birko, Stanislav & Affdal, Aliya O. & Haidar, Hazar & Lemoine, Marie-Eve & Ravitsky, Vardit, 2022. "Governing the futures of non-invasive prenatal testing: An exploration of social acceptability using the Delphi method," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    7. Shakhawat Chowdhury & Muhammad Al-Zahrani, 2014. "Fuzzy synthetic evaluation of treated wastewater reuse for agriculture," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 521-538, June.
    8. Ben Brahim-Neji, Hella & Ruiz-Villaverde, Alberto & González-Gómez, Francisco, 2014. "Decision aid supports for evaluating agricultural water reuse practices in Tunisia: The Cebala perimeter," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 113-121.
    9. Deh-Haghi, Zoherh & Bagheri, Asghar & Fotourehchi, Zahra & Damalas, Christos A., 2020. "Farmers’ acceptance and willingness to pay for using treated wastewater in crop irrigation: A survey in western Iran," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Whiting, Alix & Kecinski, Maik & Li, Tongzhe & r, Kent D. Messer & Parker, Julia, 2019. "The importance of selecting the right messenger: A framed field experiment on recycled water products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1-8.
    12. James Stoutenborough & Arnold Vedlitz, 2014. "Public Attitudes Toward Water Management and Drought in the United States," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(3), pages 697-714, February.
    13. Nikoleta Jones & Konstantinos Evangelinos & Petros Gaganis & Eugenia Polyzou, 2011. "Citizens’ Perceptions on Water Conservation Policies and the Role of Social Capital," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(2), pages 509-522, January.
    14. Eun Joo Park, 2020. "Strategy of Water Distribution for Sustainable Community: Who Owns Water in Divided Cyprus?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    15. Ricart, Sandra & Rico, Antonio M., 2019. "Assessing technical and social driving factors of water reuse in agriculture: A review on risks, regulation and the yuck factor," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 426-439.
    16. Menegaki, Angeliki N. & Mellon, Robert C. & Vrentzou, Anna & Koumakis, George & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2009. "What's in a name: Framing treated wastewater as recycled water increases willingness to use and willingness to pay," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 285-292, June.
    17. Maton, Laure & Psarras, Georgios & Kasapakis, Giannis & Ravn Lorenzen, Jesper & Andersen, Martin & Boesen, Mads & Nøhr Bak, Søren & Chartzoulakis, Kostas & Marcus Pedersen, Soren & Kloppmann, Wolfram, 2010. "Assessing the net benefits of using wastewater treated with a membrane bioreactor for irrigating vegetables in Crete," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 458-464, December.
    18. Georgios Tentes & Dimitrios Damigos, 2012. "The Lost Value of Groundwater: The Case of Asopos River Basin in Central Greece," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(1), pages 147-164, January.
    19. Elcin Akcura, 2013. "Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electricity," Working Papers 161, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Office of the Chief Economist.
    20. Daniel Chami & Maroun Moujabber & Alessandra Scardigno, 2009. "Regional Water Balance and Economic Assessment as Tools for Water Management in Coastal Lebanon," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(11), pages 2361-2378, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:7:p:9696-9710:d:52944. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.