, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT UNEP AND SUSTAINABILITY FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Copyright © United Nations Environment Disclaimer Programme and Stockholm Environment The designations employed and the Institute, 2016 presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of This publication may be reproduced in any opinion whatsoever on the part of whole or in part and in any form for the United Nations Environment Programme educational or non-profit purposes without concerning the legal status of any country, special permission from the copyright territory, city or area or of its authorities, or holders, provided acknowledgement of the concerning delimitation of its frontiers or source is made. boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision UNEP and SEI would appreciate receiving or the stated policy of the United Nations a copy of any publication that uses this Environment Programme, nor does citing publication as a source. No use of this of trade names or commercial processes publication may be made for resale or for constitute endorsement. any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the Suggested citation: United Nations Environment Programme and Stocholm Environment Institute. Andersson, K., Rosemarin, A., Lamizana, B., Kvarnström, E., McConville, J., Seidu, R., Editor: Caspar Trimmer, SEI Dickin, S. and Trimmer, C. (2016). Sanitation, Wastewater Management and Sustainability: Design/layout: UNEP DCPI and SEI from Waste Disposal to Resource Recovery. Nairobi and Stockholm: United Nations ISBN: 978-92-807-3488-1 Environment Programme and Stockholm Environment Institute.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

SEI and UNEP would like to extend and Sanitation; Claudia Wendland, Water warm thanks to all of the institutions and Sanitation Specialist at Women Engage and individuals who helped make this for our Common Future; Mariska Ronteltap, publication possible. Senior Lecturer in Sanitary Engineering at UNESCO-IHE; Petter D. Jenssen, Professor at In particular, we would like to thank the Norwegian University of Life Sciences; Valerie researchers who contributed to our case Naidoo, Executive Manager: Innovation & studies, especially Simone Bittencourt, Business Development, South African Water Cleverson Vitório Andreoli, Miguel Mansur Research Commission; Gustavo Heredia, Aisse, Beatriz Monte Serrat, Ricardo Franci, Executive President at Fundación Rafaela Flach, and Denise Silvetti. AGUATUYA; Anders Finnson, Svenskt Vatten; and Louise Karlberg, SEI. We would also like to express our appreciation to the many people who gave Funding for this publication was provided invaluable feedback on early drafts. In no jointly by UNEP Global Programme of Action special order we thank the following expert for the Protection of the Marine Environment reviewers for their input: Neil Macleod, from Land Based Activities (GPA) and SEI. of Water and Sanitation at eThekwini Water SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

Kim Andersson, Arno Rosemarin, Birguy Lamizana, Elisabeth Kvarnström, Jennifer McConville, Razak Seidu, Sarah Dickin and Caspar Trimmer

UN Environment Programme Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land Based Activities and Stockholm Environment Institute CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Sanitation, wastewater and sustainability 1 Box 1. Poor sanitation access, wastewater contamination, undernutrition, low 4 soil fertility and water scarcity: linked problems with common solutions 1.2 The situation today 5 1.3 Sanitation, wastewater management and the 2030 Agenda 7 1.4 What is “sustainable sanitation and wastewater management”? 8 1.5 Aims of this book 10 Key messages 11

2. THE ADDED VALUE OF SUSTAINABLE SANITATION AND WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 13 2.1 Health and social benefits 13 2.2 Agricultural productivity and soil quality 15 2.3 Water security 17 2.4 Clean energy 18 2.5 Climate mitigation 19 2.6 Environmental protection and healthier ecosystem services 21 2.7 Green business and employment opportunities 21 Key messages 22

3. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND RECOVERY 23 3.1 Current status of resource recovery 23 3.2 From linear to cyclical resource use 25 Box 3.1. Chemical fertilizers: agricultural fertility, but at what cost? 26 3.3 Identifying resource demand and availability 27 Box 3.2. Estimating the potential value of waste resources 28 Key messages 38

4. TECHNICAL FUNCTIONALITY 39 4.1 Designing a system 39 4.2 Geographical and geophysical factors 41 4.3 Operational factors 43 4.4 Source separation 44 4.5 Treatment 49 4.6 Planning and designing for the long term 52 4.7 Decision-support tools 54 Key messages 54

5. PROTECTING AND PROMOTING HUMAN HEALTH 55 5.1 Hazards in wastewater streams 56 5.2 Exposure pathways and health risks 57 5.3 Health protection in resource recovery and reuse 60 5.4 Health risk management 63 Box 5.1. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions for wastewater 67 irrigation in urban Ghana Box 5.2. Local guidelines for faecal sludge application in northern Ghana 69 Key messages 70

iii iv SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Windhoek, Namibia 118 THE REFERENCES AUTHORS 10. 136 CONCLUDING 149 REMARKS 134 117 9. SHOWCASING SYSTEMSTECHNICAL FORSAFERESOURCERECOVERY 8. ECONOMICS AND 79 FINANCING 103 OFSUSTAINABILITY7. INSTITUTIONALANDSOCIALASPECTS 71 6. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY ANDPROTECTION . Reclaiming water from municipalsewage:NewGo 9.1 . O-iessesfrboa n etlzr hn 130 128 132 Livestock protein feed from faecesSouth withblacksoldierfly: Africa eThekwini, On-site systems for biogasandfertilizer: 9.8 120 Reuseofsewagesludgeinagriculture, Paraná State, Brazil 9.7 9.6 Decentralized excreta managementandlocalgreywater reuse inaperi-urban 9.5 inagriculture Reuseofhouseholdblackwater usingliquidcomposting technology, 9.4 Farming withwater andnutrientsfrom sewage: inasemi-desert buildings, Greywater reuse inindividualapartment Vitória, Brazil 9.3 9.2 o ..Sm xmlso noaiefnnigshms 110 105 111 115 103 Sanitationandwastewater managementinadevelopment context Key Box examplesofinnovative 8.1.Some financingschemes Financing implicationsofresource managementandrecovery 8.6 98 8.5 100 messages 8.4 Financing sustainablesanitationandwastewater 8.3 116 Financing 87 The economics ofthesanitationandwastewater managementgap 8.2 Financing 8.1 101 95 in Box 7.11.Buildingasystem for resource recovery, andnotusingit:Kullön, Sweden in Box 7.10.eThekwini Water Africa andSanitation,Durban,South 92 88 82 Key Box in for wastewater 7.9.Certification Sweden fractions 97 the Box 7.8. On-site sanitationregulation inSweden: andlocallydecided function-based the associations:theSISARandCOPANOR delivery Box 7.7.Service models 79 messages planningandgovernance Box 86 7.6.Participatory usingtheCLUES approach private 90 Box 7.5.Organically developed Bengaluru, faecalsludgemanagementservices, India public 80 Box 7.4.Using geography, notsystems, ofutilities to setjurisdictions sphere private Governing spheres thepublicandre-user sphere 102 108 Box 7.3. Translating Ostrom’s ofsanitationand principlesinthecontext 7.3 106 Box 7.2.Capturing therightmessage:urinereuse inNiger wastewater 78 Box 7.1.Private andpublicspheres inrural andperi-urbansystems management 77 72 7.2 Expandedgovernance system for reuse andrecovery 76 Governing 7.1 72 the Box 6.5.REVAQ: andreuse Recovery asadriver for ofsewagetreatment environmental plantsin Sweden certification protection Key millsto bio-refineries Box 6.4.from dirty The pulpandpaperindustry: 6.3 user 71 messages Box 6.2.Integrated Water Resources andwastewater Management 6.2 private Box Environmental Box 6.1.UNEPGEMS/Water Environmental Programme: risksfrom wastewater andexcreta monitoring apioneerinwater quality sphere 6.1 78 6.3. protection 81 Pharmaceuticals responses 75 in wastewater 74 community: community: Hölö, El Gerga, Sweden Alto, 124 Sohag Bolivia 126 Governorate, Egypt 122 reangab Water ReclamationPlant, 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Sanitation, wastewater sanitation and wastewater management more sustainable; and on how they can and sustainability contribute to broader societal sustainability. In particular, it focuses on the idea of Few areas of investment today have as sanitation and wastewater management as much to offer the global shift towards resource management functions: as ways sustainable development as sanitation and of keeping valuable resources available for wastewater management.1 Gaps in access productive uses that support human well- to decent, functioning sanitation are clear being and broader sustainability. markers of inequality and disadvantage. Unsafe management of excreta and To put the scale of the opportunity into wastewater expose populations to disease, perspective, globally we produce an and degrade ecosystems and the services estimated 9.5 million m3 of human excreta2 they provide. and 900 million m3 of municipal wastewater every day (Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2015). This At the same time, there is growing waste contains enough nutrients to replace recognition that societies can no longer 25 per cent of the nitrogen currently used afford to squander the water, nutrients, to fertilize agricultural land in the form of organic matter and energy contained in synthetic fertilizers, and 15 per cent of the sanitation and other wastewater and organic phosphorus, along with enough water waste streams. These resources can, and to irrigate 15 per cent of all the currently should, be safely recovered and productively irrigated farmland in the world (some reused. In fact, the vision of resource- 40 million hectares; Mateo-Sagasta et al. efficient, circular economies is unachievable 2015). At the city scale, the wastewater without radical change in how we manage (including excreta) from a city of 10 million wastewater, excreta and other biomass waste. people contains enough recoverable plant nutrients to fertilize about 500,000 hectares This book discusses how this radical change of farmland – which in turn could produce might take shape. It distils some of the latest about 1.5 million tons of crops.3 thinking and experiences on how to make

1 Although sanitation waste is often considered part of wastewater, this report refers to it separately to reflect the fact that many sanitation systems are “dry” – i.e. they do not involve flushing with water, and keep faeces and urine separate from other wastewater streams. Such source separation of excreta, as discussed in Chapter 4, is often a desired function within sustainable sanitation systems. 2 Based on 1.3 litres of excreta per person and a world population of 7.3 billion people. 3 Based on one person producing roughly 5 kg of nutrient equivalents per year, at a fertilization rate of 100 kg/hectare of farmland producing 3 tonnes of grain per ha.

1 2 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY maps) Figure: BasedonJointMonitoringProgramme forWater data(www.wssinfo.org/data-estimates/ SupplyandSanitation Asia.South These regions are badlyaffected largely found Africa and insub-Saharan maps inFigure 1.1 show, thesegapsare biggest gapsinprovision are found. As the apparent whenwe consider where the become even moreThe opportunities Figure: BasedonWorld Bankdata(http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.DTH.COMM.ZS). FIGURE 1.1B FIGURE 1.1A FIGURE 1.1 Disease: Percentage oftotal deaths that are from communicable diseases Sanitation thesolution?Mappingsomekey globalchallenges Percentage Percentage 2 100 >25 475 >4 Sanitation gaps:Percentage ofpopulation withaccess to or maternal, prenatal ornutritionconditions, 2014 sustainable sanitation could helptoaddress (see Box 1.1). They are to alsoexpected nutrition, water scarcity andsoildegradation food andassociated under- insecurity sanitation andwastewater management: that could bealleviated through sustainable by someofthekeydevelopment challenges improved sanitation, 2015 experience the greatest population growth To realize these opportunities, massive by 2030, according to current projections investment in sanitation and wastewater (2030 Water Resources Group 2009). A large management systems will be needed; to proportion of this future population is likely address existing gaps in provision and make to live in fast-growing cities, where risks the transition to more sustainable systems. from inadequate sanitation and wastewater What form those investments and systems management, as well as opportunities to take has major implications for global mitigate these risks are concentrated. sustainable development.

FIGURE 1.1C Water scarcity: Areas of physical and economic water scarcity, 2007

Little or no water scarcity Physical water scarcity Approaching physical water scarcity Economic water scarcity

Not estimated

Figure: Based on International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development data (www.grida.no/ graphicslib/detail/areas-of-physical-and-economic-water-scarcity_1570).

FIGURE 1.1D Malnutrition: Percentage of children under 5 with stunting, 2015

Percentage

0 >45

Figure: Based on UNICEF data (http://data.unicef.org/nutrition/malnutrition.html)

3 4 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

An algalbloomduetoeutrophicationAn Lake, inDianchi Yunnan, China.Photo:Greenpeace China BOX 1.1 BOX waste). on eutrophication andotherenvironmental riskslinkedto wastewater andsanitation that canmakeshellfishandfreshwater dangerous humans(seeChapterto 6 for more the water canalsolead It below bloomsof to –includingfishof toxic oxygen. algae plants, organisms changing in thecomposition oftheflora andfauna,starving they canradicallyalter how ecosystems boostingthegrowth function, ofaquatic nutrients. When theyreach rivers, lakes Untreated wastewater andfarmlandrun- andfood (Faurèshousehold cooking production and Santini2008). ofbiomass forcaused by inadequate nutrientmanagementcoupled withtheextraction areand soilquality fallinginsomeareas dueto depletionofsoilnutrients, mainly larger populationsandeconomic addition,agricultural development. productivity In Africa continuespeople insub-Saharan to rise. Demandfor food to risewith isexpected While malnutritionprevalence hasdeclined, theabsolute numberofundernourished in awater-scarce environment (NEPAD 2006). Group 2009).Even today, more than300ofthe800millionpeopleinthisregion live projected to increase by 283 percent between 2005and 2030(2030 Water Resources excreta Africa, water demandis sub-Saharan andwastewater management.In intensive consumption ofnaturalresources, willonlyincrease theneedfor improved Current trends, includingpredicted populationgrowth andever more problems withcommon solutions andwatersoil fertility scarcity: linked contamination, undernutrition,low Poor sanitation access, wastewater and coastal waters inhighconcentrations off often largeoff often contain amountsofplant 1.2 The situation today information available concerning wastewater management worldwide. According to a The status of sanitation and wastewater global assessment, only 55 countries have management today differs widely around the collected complete data on their wastewater world (see Figure 1.2), as do the challenges of management, including information on making them more sustainable. Waterborne production, treatment and reuse, while 57 excreta management (with flush and other countries have collected no data at sewer networks connected to a centralized all. Based on the available data it has been wastewater treatment plant) is the standard estimated that on average 30 per cent of in many places, especially in urban areas and wastewater is released untreated in high- richer countries. However, large segments income countries, rising to 62 and 72 per of the population in some regions lack a cent, respectively, in upper-middle and sewer network connection. For example, lower-middle income countries, and 92 per only around 10 per cent of the populations cent in low-income countries (Sato et al. of some sub-Saharan African countries 2013). According to another analysis, globally (including Côte d’Ivoire, Kenya, Lesotho, perhaps 90 per cent of wastewater that is Madagascar, Malawi and Uganda) are released into the environment is untreated connected to a sewer system (Banerjee and (Corcoran et al. 2010). Morella 2011). Worldwide, about 2.7 billion people are thought to use some kind of on- The development of sanitation and site sanitation system (e.g. pit , septic wastewater management is also following tank) requiring faecal sludge management very different paths in different parts of the (see Chapter 4). Users of on-site sanitation are world. Figure 1.3 illustrates this, comparing expected to almost double by 2030 (Strande trends in urban populations and sanitation et al. 2014). systems for sub-Saharan Africa and . Furthermore, in many countries untreated wastewater and excreta pollute streets, Many drivers shape sanitation development, agricultural land and freshwater bodies. not least patterns of urbanization, existing However, when making any generalizations infrastructure and preconceptions about about the global situation, it is important what constitutes “modern” sanitation. In many to acknowledge that there is limited cases, current trends seem incompatible with

Share of population served by different FIGURE 1.2 sanitation technologies, by region

2 4 4 7 11 1 3 5 72 20 4 190 28 79 40 19 2 21 6 18 13 57 1,105 1 41 23 5 144 3 5 12 13 7 593 Sewer 1 5 17 25 Septic 61 17 44 13 Flush/pour flush pit 193 Pit (dry) 439 87 Other 3 Environment (open ) Current population of region with need for FSM (million)

Figure: Based on Boston Consulting Group analysis of UN Joint Monitoring Programme data, from Strande et al. 2014

5 6 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY ). to sustained behaviour change(e.g. ending failedtooften overcome cultural barriers addition, sanitationprogrammes have shared orpublicfacilities. In particularly andfallingoutofuse, malfunctioning maintenance (O&M) have ledto systems inadequate attention to operation and providers) and authorities andservice enforcement, limited capacitiesofpublic governance (e.g. weak regulation and complex challenges. For instance, poor complicating already prioritization, further hassufferedsector from lackofpolitical The sanitationandwastewater management solution, even inhigh-income countries. themostappropriate,as often sustainable waterborne systems are beingrecognized book seeksto show, low-water and non- management farmore difficult.As this waterborne excretaMorella 2011),making to pipedwater networks (Banerjeeand of thepopulationhave private connections Africa asawhole,taking only15 percent competition for limited water resources. And they are beingbuilt in areas facinggrowing andadvancement,associated withmodernity centralized waterborne systems are widely sustainable development. For example, while Figure: Adapted from Kjellénetal. 2012 Urbanpopulation andsanitation system trends, regions selected FIGURE 1.3 Millions of users

1990 100 200 300 400 500 0 1992 No facilities/opendefecation Flush orpourflush 1994

1996 Latin America

1998

Year 2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Millions of users added, thenperhapsasmany as4.1billion human andnaturalenvironment. thoseare If risk releasing untreated wastewater into the and wastewater managementsystems that into account pipedsanitation dysfunctional (UN 2014).However, thisfigure doesnottake countries people lived inmiddle-income 2015). defecation (JMP ofthese The majority to open 1 billionpeoplewhostillresorted improved sanitationfacility, includingalmost in 2015,2.4billionpeopledidnotusean hasbeenestimated that . It functioning many peoplestillhave noaccess to asafe, addition,despite significantIn efforts and Corcoran etal. (2010). etal.Galli (2014),Schweitzer etal. (2015), challenges, seefor example WWAP (2015), properly (UNICEF2012b).For more onthese showed 30–60 percent were notfunctioning Asia of schoolsanitationfacilitiesinSouth 2012).Similarly, anoverview regularly (WSP cent ofhouseholdswithalatrineusedit sanitation promotion campaign only15 per world. Cambodia, for In example, following a inmanyreported countries around the and wastewater managementprojects achieved andhighfailure rates for sanitation challenges canbeseeninthelow coverage ofThe difficulty overcoming these 100 150 200 250 300

1990 50 0

1992 Open defecation Traditional latrine Septic tankorsewer Improved latrine Sub-Saharan Africa 1994

1996

1998 Year

2000

2002

2004 people – 60 per cent of humanity – could sanitation and wastewater management. be said to be without improved sanitation The SDGs dedicate an entire goal to water (Baum et al. 2013). Thus, much greater effort and sanitation: “to ensure availability and and investment will need to be dedicated to sustainable management of water and sanitation in the coming years. sanitation for all,” bringing greater awareness to sanitation challenges. Under Goal 6 are The case for investing in sustainable two targets directly linked to sanitation and sanitation is growing stronger. It is already wastewater management: well established that appropriate sanitation and wastewater management can pay for itself many times over due to to reduced Target 6.2: . . . achieve access health care costs and associated increases to adequate and equitable sanitation in productivity (WHO 2012a). The new and for all, and end open global sustainable development framework defecation, paying special attention to adopted in 2015 – the 2030 Agenda the needs of women and girls and those for Sustainable Development and the in vulnerable situations. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – can provide further impetus and arguments for Target 6.3: . . . improve water quality transformative change. by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of 1.3 Sanitation, hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater management wastewater, and substantially and the 2030 Agenda increasing recycling and safe reuse globally.

While many of the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) targets for 2015 have been met In calling for universal access to meet the or even passed, the MDG target of halving needs of all people, SDG Target 6.2 is much the share of the population without access to more ambitious than the previous MDG basic sanitation was missed by 9 percentage target, while also highlighting the need to points.4 While major resources have been improve hygiene and end open defecation. allocated to health care, education and other development priorities since 2000, the The proposed indicator for measuring global sanitation gap has not been prioritized. UN progress on Target 6.2 is the: “percentage of Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson has population using safely managed sanitation described sanitation as “the most lagging” of services, including a hand- facility all the MDG targets (Eliasson 2014). with soap and water”. “Population using safely managed sanitation services” refers Furthermore, with their focus on sanitation to those “using a basic sanitation facility at access and their failure to address wider issues the household level . . . which is not shared of wastewater and excreta management, the with other households, and where excreta MDGs offered little incentive for investment is safely disposed in situ or treated off-site” in more sustainable systems. Thus, much of (UN Water 2015). This is promising not only the sanitation and wastewater management in that it directly refers to treatment, but development that has already taken place will also in that it emphasizes the level of use require additional investment to make it both rather than simply the level of availability of more effective and more sustainable. a technology, and thus brings in elements of accessibility, acceptability, and safety. The universal applicability and emphasis on integrated solutions in the SDGs and SDG Target 6.3 calls directly for improved the broader 2030 Agenda provide strong wastewater management and, crucially, arguments for investing in sustainable includes recycling and reuse. This wording

4 It is estimated that in 1990 around half of the global population of 5.3 billion had no access to improved sanitation, while in 2015 the share was around 32 per cent, or 2.4 billion people (JMP 2015).

7 8 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY and catalyzingdevelopment throughout Sanitation hasplayed akeyrole inenabling of gender-basedviolence. during menstruation,and increases therisk and peoplewithdisabilities, especially facilities effectively excludes women, girls institutions andpubliclife. Alackofsuitable in school, theworkforce,participation targets 5 by underGoal increasing can alsohelpto achieve non-discrimination “equitable access” to adequate sanitation and wastewater management.Furthermore, withoutadequate sanitation is unthinkable tomorrow’sMaking citieslivable(Goal 11) (Goals 1and8). opportunities value chainsprovide newlivelihood sanitation andwastewater management improve food (Goal 2).Sustainable security to resource(Goal 12)andcanhelp efficiency in excreta andwastewater alsocontributes and reusing thevaluableresources present theyprovide (Goalservices 14).Recovering of freshwater andcoastal ecosystems andthe organic matter, theycould improve thestatus nutrients from agricultural soilby reusing ecosystems, of andreduce therun-off of untreated wastewater innatural systemsIf alsoaimto prevent therelease (Goal 4)andofproductive work lost. of diseasemeansfewer days ofeducation childmortality. Lowerparticularly incidence large burden disease(Goal ofinfectious 3), wastewater managementcould relieve a and wastewater), improving sanitationand pathogens andtoxic substances inexcreta and preventing humanexposure to levels ofambition(endingopendefecation investments. As examples, atthemostbasic sanitation andwastewater management with thelevel ofambitioninsustainable the numberoftargets addressed increases isthat up to 32SDGtargets. Alsoimportant management could helpcountries to achieve improvements insanitationandwastewater development sectors. Figure 1.4.shows how ofSDGgoalsandtargets,variety across effective contributions to achievingawide Sustainable sanitationcanalsomakecost- economy. ofresourcecontext andacircular efficiency places wastewater managementfirmlyinthe 2030 Agenda. central, even fundamental, to fulfillingthe and wastewater managementwillbe populations healthy. Sustainablesanitation and helpingto keepincreasingly urban history, allowing citiesto keepexpanding Sanitation Alliance (SuSanA): sanitation onthatoftheSustainable buildsitsconceptThis ofsustainable report management”? sanitation andwastewater 1.4 investments. thedevelopment context, In question whenitcomes to planning wastewater management? This isacrucial purpose ofsustainablesanitation and mutually dependent,what isthecentral are thedimensionsofsustainability If problemssustainability inanother. well mightcreate inonecontext serious than another, andsystems thatwork technology isinherently more sustainable and institutionsmustbeconsidered. No physical geography, demographics, culture suchas relationship factors withcontextual in theothers. addition,thesystem’s In in onedimensionifitisnotsustainable dependent: nosystem canbesustainable andmutually are mutuallysupporting has several dimensions. These dimensions in sanitationandwastewater management As thisdescriptionmakesclear, sustainability environmental sustainability. and contribute tobroader socio-economic term, aswell asresilient todisasters–and properly overwhile functioning thelong be sustained–usedby target population viable inthelongterm.Theyshouldboth socially acceptable andeconomically technically andinstitutionallyappropriate, minimize environmental degradation, are andpromoteprotect human health, minimize depletionoftheresource base, management systemsare thosethat Sustainable sanitationandwastewater Based on SuSanA 2008 Based onSuSanA What is “sustainable

Beyond Goal 6: The many ways that sustainable sanitation and wastewater management can FIGURE 1.4 help in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals

Investments in sustainable sanitation and wastewater management can help countries to meet many of the other targets under the Sustainable Development Goals. In this figure, the coloured blocks indicate which targets can be promoted by providing sustainable systems with increasingly advanced and ambitious functions. Half-shaded boxes indicate a smaller (but still positive) potential contribution to achieving the target than fully shaded boxes.

Goals and targets Waste Safe sanitation Pathogen Nutrient Resource management Containment access & availability emission control emission control & recovery

1.2 – poverty in all its dimensions 1. NO POVERTY 1.4 – access to basic services 1.5 – resilience, reduce vulnerability, extreme events

2.1 – end hunger l food sufficiency 2. ZERO HUNGER 2.2 – end malnutrition 2.3 – double smallholders’ productivity & incomes 3.2 – end preventable infant and under-5 deaths 3. GOOD HEALTH & WELL-BEING 3.3 – end epidemics l combat water-related diseases 3.9 – reduce deaths & illnesses from pollution and contamination

4.5 – eliminate gender disparities in education 4. QUALITY EDUCATION 4a – build & upgrade safe education facilities 5.1 – end discrimination against women & girls 5. GENDER EQUALITY 5.2 – eliminate violence against women & girls in public space 6.2 – sanitation & hygiene for all 6. CLEAN WATER & SANITATION 6.3 – reduce water pollution, increase recycling 6.4 – substantially reduce water scarcity 6.5 – water resources management, transboundary cooperation 6.6 – protect & restore water-related ecosystems 6a – international cooperation, support developing countries 7.2 – increase share of renewable energy 7. AFFORDABLE & CLEAN ENERGY

8.4 – improve resource efficiency, decouple 8. DECENT WORK & ECONOMIC GROWTH economic growth from environmental degradation

9.4 – upgrade industrial resource 9. INDUSTRY, INNOVATION & INFRASTRUCTURE efficiency & clean technology

11.5 – reduce deaths & econ. losses from disasters 11. SUSTAINABLE CITIES & COMMUNITIES 11.6 – reduce adverse environmental impact of cities 11.7 – safe public spaces 12.2 – management & efficient use of resources 12. SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION & PRODUCTION 12.4 – chemicals and waste management 12.5 – reduce waste generation 13.1 – strengthen resilience to climate-related hazards & natural disasters 13. CLIMATE ACTION

14.1 – reduce marine pollution from land-based activities 14. LIFE BELOW WATER

15.1 – conserve, restore & sustainably use terrestrial ecosystems 15. LIFE ON LAND 15.3 – restore degraded land and soils

Figure: Stockholm Environment Institute 9 10 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY appropriate institutions. by strong,sustainable andissupported andwell-being,social equity isfinancially human healthandecosystems, promotes recovery mustbedoneinaway thatprotects way thatallows themto besafely reused. This wastewater andothersanitationstreams ina recovering theresources contained in be minimizingtheresource inputsand in system planninganddesign should Following thislogic, acentral consideration management systems (seeFigure 1.5). sustainable sanitationandwastewater of management shouldbeattheheart Instead, thisbookproposes thatresource resource base. the mightaffect fulfilling thesefunctions interventions. Littleattention ispaidto how more recently, asenvironmental protection currently thoughtofaspublichealthand, sanitation andwastewater managementare Figure: Environment Stockholm Institute FIGURE 1.5

Key sustainabilitydimensionsinsanitation andwastewater management

sustainability Financial Sustainable

protectionhealth sustainability management Sustainable

Technical resource

sustainability

to makethe keyissuesinsystem design, world examplesandillustrations, itaims wastewater management.Givingreal- insustainable sanitationand and practice This bookbringstogether thelatest thinking public discourse. politicians, andin development practitioners to talkaboutsanitationanditsrole –among importantly, there isagrowing willingness And work. donors are fundingcutting-edge are beingsuccessfully scaledup. Major recovery, have stood thetest oftimeand inresourceand pilotapproaches, particularly thatinfluence success.factors Small-scale understanding ofthesocialandinstitutional developing fast. We have amuchbetter did even adecadeago. Technologies are but wealotmore know today thanwe practice? We donotyet have alltheanswers, management? What doesitlooklikein to sustainablesanitationandwastewatershift How dowe bringaboutthetransformational 1.5

and social social and Institutional Aims ofthisbook

Environmental sustainability implementation and operation accessible Chapter 9 presents some specific examples to policy audiences and development of technological solutions for resource practitioners, while still providing a useful recovery and reuse. The variety of case overview for technical and academic readers studies presented reflects the fact that while more directly involved in sanitation and the benefits of sustainable sanitation and wastewater management. wastewater management are available in both developed and developing countries, The book takes current thinking on urban and rural settings, established cities sustainable development as an analytical and new settlements, the means to exploit framework. The main focus is on sanitation them remain highly context-specific. It also systems – which account for the vast majority demonstrates the importance of a whole of wastewater – and on recovery of the system perspective for sustainability in resources found in wastewater, excreta and sanitation and wastewater management – other organic waste flows for productive mirroring the integrated approach of the reuse in agriculture, energy production and a 2030 Agenda. range of other applications. Overall the book aims to demonstrate that Chapter 2 discusses in broad terms some of sustainable sanitation and wastewater the ways the resources in wastewater, excreta systems are not only smart, cost-effective and other organic waste can be recovered, as investments for sustainability, but also well as the potential for sustainable sanitation practical, affordable – and already here. and wastewater management with resource recovery, along with some of the major challenges that need to be overcome to KEY MESSAGES realize it.

Chapter 3 delves deeper into the concept • Unsafe management of excreta of a resource management approach to and wastewater is widespread sanitation and wastewater management, and and creates significant health and gives some guidance on how to estimate the environmental risks. potential for resource recovery and reuse in a given system. Chapter 4 looks at the technical • Sustainable sanitation and dimension of sustainability, and particularly wastewater management systems how to combine technologies into a system are those that minimize depletion that best meets the needs and constraints of of the resource base, protect and the specific context. promote human health, minimize environmental degradation, are Chapters 5 and 6 look at two more technically and institutionally dimensions of system sustainability: appropriate, socially acceptable protecting public and environmental health, and economically viable in the respectively. Chapter 7 discusses the role long term. of the government and local authorities in creating an enabling environment for • A vision of resource-efficient, sustainable sanitation and wastewater circular economies is unachievable management. It also explores sustainability without radical change in how issues in the social sphere, particularly how to we manage wastewater, excreta win social support for sanitation and resource and other biomass waste. reuse, and how to maximize social benefits such as safe and equitable access. • Sustainable sanitation and wastewater management will be Chapter 8 discusses issues of financial and central, even fundamental, to economic sustainability, including how to fulfilling the 2030 Agenda. calculate the costs and benefits of a shift to sustainable management, and how to finance it.

11 12 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY for repair andreplacement increases these systems age, however, theneed and difficultto upgrade or replace.As waterborne excreta. These are expensive liquidwaste flows,transport including sewerage networks designed to mixand high degree oflock-in theshapeofurban and sanitationwaste streams may bea in resource recovery from wastewater One reason for theslower progress much earlierstage. described inthisbook–butitisata evidenced by many oftheexperiences in wastewater management–as to takeplace a similarchangestarting and putto productive uses. We are seeing ofwaste being separatedtypes atsource increasingly widespread, withdifferent recently, however, recycling hasbecome Moreof itinlandfillsorincinerate it. ofsolidwaste anddispose various types economies, standard wasto mix practice years ago, even inthemostadvanced waste. Untilasrecently as20or30 to anothermajorwaste stream: solid wastewater, rethinking In we canlook wastewater andother sanitationwaste. will require about newways ofthinking challenges ofsustainabledevelopment Bold, innovative solutionsto the Rethinking wastewaterRethinking are chapter. explored inthenext social andenvironmental benefits, which resources, bringing sizeable economic, of water andmany othervaluable nutrients andotheragricultural inputs, become asource ofenergy, ofplant Additionally, more andmore itcan pollutants thatmakeithazardous. be treated to remove thepathogensand and even beturnedintocan asolid. It Wastewater canbereduced involume, different streams attheirsource. wastewater stream, orby separating whatisallowedrestricting to enter the and composition canbechangedby unchangeable substance. nature Its wastewater neednotbeseenasafixed, to realize that isalsoimportant It recovery from thebeginning. optimized for cost-effective resource systems and buildsource-separating leapfrog over conventional sewerage developments have thechance to introduced. Newurbanandperi-urban and itishere thatinnovations canbe 2. THE ADDED VALUE OF SUSTAINABLE SANITATION AND WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT

More sustainable sanitation and wastewater 2.1 Health and social benefits management could yield vast economic (as well as social and environmental) benefits for Poor sanitation and hygiene is the leading societies (Hernandez-Sancho et al. 2015). Many cause of diarrhoea, the second largest of these benefits come in the form of savings cause of death in children under age 5 in of costs linked to inadequate sanitation and developing countries (UNICEF 2012a). In wastewater management – most notably in addition, many of the negative outcomes health care, but also in terms of lost economic that follow from unsustainable sanitation and productivity, reduced ecosystem services wastewater management overwhelmingly and others. In India, for example, the estimated impact the poor, marginalized and vulnerable, economic savings available through providing and undermine efforts to reduce poverty adequate sanitation to all (i.e. without taking and discrimination. Improved sanitation into account benefits from wastewater/excreta and wastewater management systems that management or resource recovery) have been prevent exposure of human populations estimated at US$54 billion annually (WSP 2011). to pathogens and toxic substances can make vast improvements in . Such economic benefits should be explored Figure 2.2 shows estimated annual costs to and factored into the financial planning the Indian economy stemming directly from of any programme to build or upgrade inadequate sanitation. Most of the avoided sanitation and wastewater management costs are linked to direct and indirect health systems. Figure 2.1 shows some estimates of impacts (including lost work days). the economic benefits that could become available from resource recovery, generated It is important to note that these savings in an exercise in the Lao capital, Vientiane, would not result simply from the installation as part of the CityBlues++ project (www. of improved toilets; they would require cityblues.la). As the figure shows, improved systems that prevent human exposure to management and recovery of waste resources pathogens and other hazardous elements could produce additional benefits in areas as in wastewater and excreta all the way from the diverse as natural water management, food toilet until they had been treated and safely security, renewable energy production and disposed of or reused. As will be emphasized climate change mitigation. in later chapters, sustainable sanitation and

13 14 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Figure: Environment Stockholm Institute, basedonimagefrom Cityblues++ 5 Access timehasbeenreferred to as: “cost ofadditionaltimeneededfor accessing shared toilets sites andopen-defecation Disaster resilience: sustainable • management: sustainable sanitationandwastewater rights issuesthatcanbeaddressed through sustainable development andhuman To thesewe could addarange ofother ontourism. andnegative quality impacts costs ofadditionalaccess time,5 poorwater Figure 2.2alsoincludestheopportunity andwell-integratedfully functioning systems. wastewater managementisonlypossiblewith use ofbiological fertiliser Increased productionduetothe FIGURE 2.1 for women” working 2011) (WSP vate toilet withinthehousehold, andcost ofschoolabsence timedueto inadequate toilets for girls andwork-absence timedue DEWATS and the mostvulnerable. reducing healthrisks, especiallyamong during floodsandotherdisasters, keeping wastewater safely contained sanitation systems cancontribute to Septic Tanks City population:c.760,000City AGRO-FORESTRY • Energy potential for transport sector in the organic waste is 10,000 km ofbustravel intheorganic Energy sector waste potential is10,000km for perday (adjusted transport for • Reduced CO2 emissionsdueto substitutionofmineral anddiesel:44,000tons fertilizer CO2/year • Agricultural potential usingbiogasdigestate andurine • Water saving potential withlow-flush/waterless :13,700m3perday • (NPK) productiontoincreaseFood(NPK) Security Fertiliser (Nitrogen,Phosphorus, Potassium energy inwaste consumption collection) dueto increased transport NUTRIENTS RECOVERY Fertiliser Soil and Potential addedvalue ofresource recovery inthecityof Vientiane Additional organicwastecollection processing) for biogasproduction (e.g. households, markets, food and increasingemissionsinfastgrowingcities. toreducemobilityproblems Green publictransport MARKET FOOD PUBLIC TRANSPORT RESTAURANT Residual Sludge Personal people, especially safety: • diarrhoea Educationalopportunities: • as fertilizers is40,000ha.ofriceas fertilizers cultivation personal safety. close access canimprove to afacility access asanitation facility. Thus having a longway for opendefecation orto ofharmwhentheyhavetypes to walk girls andwomen, riskviolence andother adolescent girls. obstaclesto educationfor important management, atschoolscanremove with provision for menstrual health sanitationfacilities,Lockable especially of children dueto under-nutrition. school, andreduce thecognitive ability wastewater canresult inmissed spread by untreatedand othersickness HOTEL Biogas the upcomingphosphoruspeak to increasefoodsecurity regardingto Ecological Sanitation(Urinedivision) aquatic plants Cropping of FOOD PROCESSING energy andCarbonCredits plants areturnedintogreen Septic sludgeandcropped BIOGAS PLANT URBAN LOGISTICS compared to usingapri- to inadequate toilets to biogasplant Biomass delivery and DEWATS septic tanks Desludging of FIGURE 2.2 Economic impacts of inadequate sanitation in India, by categories, 2006

Premature mortality $29,052 (₹1317) Productivity loss $4787 (₹217) HEALTH Healthcare $4677 (₹212) HH treatment, drinking water $2471 (₹112) Bottled water consumption $132 (₹6) $397 (₹18) WATER Piped water Cost of fetching water $1235 (₹56)

HH access $10,544 (₹478) TIME

School access $66 (₹3)

ACCESS Workplace access $132 (₹6)

Lost tourism earnings $110 (₹5) $154 (₹7) TOURISM International tourist illness US$ in millions; ₹ (INR) in billions HH = household

Figure: Based on WSP 2011

In addition to the reductions in amounts of the three main components disease incidence offered by improved of agricultural fertilizer: nitrogen (N), sanitation, resource recovery and safe potassium (K) and phosphorus (P; in the agricultural reuse can contribute a range form of phosphates). If other organic waste of other health benefits, particularly in is processed along with wastewater and relation to nutrition (by safely boosting other sanitation waste, even more N, K and agricultural productivity). Especially in P can be recovered. Excreta also contain the case of smallholders, the livelihood micronutrients such as iron, chlorine, boron, improvements that agricultural reuse copper and zinc, which are vital for plant and can bring to farmers can mean they can human or animal nutrition but are generally spend more on accessing health care or not found in synthetic fertilizers. The benefits improving their quality of life in other of recovering, treating and safely reusing ways. the nutrients for agriculture vary widely in different contexts. They include: 2.2 Agricultural productivity • low-cost replacement or supplementation and soil quality of commercial fertilizers; • reduced reliance on bought/imported Residential and agricultural wastewater and commercial fertilizers; sanitation waste contains large amounts of • direct improvements in agricultural the three most important and economically productivity at minimal cost for valuable inputs for agriculture: nutrients, smallholders who use no fertilizers and organic matter and water. With appropriate have on-site sanitation systems; treatment of wastewater or excreta, these can • reduced health risks for farmers in all be recovered and safely reused by farmers. communities practising open defecation in the fields or applying excreta and other Nutrients wastewater directly to crops; and • new business opportunities in the The most important source for nutrients production and sale of fertilizers from in sanitation waste streams is human and recovered resources. animal excreta, which contains significant

15 16 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY approximately US$10(Dagerskogetal. 2014). of syntheticfertilizer, withavalueof nutrients equivalentto about10kg excreted annuallyby onepersoncontain At another scale, theurineandfaeces andwaste fromthe kitchen food industries. such asanimalmanure, organic waste from recovered from otherorganic waste streams but thesecould alsobe at leastpartially require more nutrients(seeFigure 2.3), America,would suchasSouth exports, livestock andmajoragricultural production (Rosemarin etal. 2008).Regions withhigh with nutrientsrecovered from humanexcreta usecould theoreticallyfertilizer bereplaced Saharan Africa (IFAD 2011), farming, includingmany countries insub- countries thatare dominated by smallholder hasbeenestimatedIt thatin significant. recovered from wastewater andexcreta are The quantitiesofnutrientsthatcanbe consumption. of crop, includingfood crops for human safely usedinthe cultivationofany kind agricultural inputsderived from itcanbe followed,the practices wastewater and oftreatmentDepending onthequality and 6 Stabilizationpondsare large man-madebasins, sometimescalledlagoonsthatare usedintropical often andsubtropical coun Figure: Based ondatafrom faostat.fao.org. FIGURE 2.3 ter. They may beasinglepondorseriesofponds withdifferent through characteristics whichthewastewater flows. Thousand tons 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 95% Africa all current Nutrients consumed vs inchemicalfertilizers nutrients available 88% Available inexcreta: Consumed infertilizer:

Thousand tons 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 valuable crops (Quayle 2012). used for irrigatingadditionaleconomically effluentthatisthen providing high-quality used to cleanwater instabilizationponds, husbandry. Niger, In has been duckweed be usedasfeed inaquaculture andanimal ponds.6 These nutritiousplantscanthen treatment) whileitisstored instabilization somepre- (usuallyafter quality a certain canbegrownand duckweed ineffluentof wastewater treatment. For example, spirulina benefits by recovering nutrients systemsSome caneven generate economic water (CPCB 2009). value comes from nutrients, therest from exchange this, 93 percent rates). ofthe Of 1.09 billionrupees(US$16millionat2015 towns inwastewater hasbeenestimated at discharged coastal from citiesand Indian recoverable resources nutrientsandwater valueofthe systems, theannualmonetary atcentralizedLooking waterborne urban lack access to chemicalfertilizers. of poorsmallholderfarmers, especiallyifthey make asignificant differentto thelivelihoods yield by avalueofaround US$50,whichcan applicationwould increaseIts agricultural in humanexcreta intwo continents, 2012 Nitrogen (N) 24% Phosphorus (P 9% 2 O 5 tries to treat wastewa- ) during

Treated urine is a cheap, safe and effectivefertilizer. Photo: Linus Dagerskog

Organic matter productivity and puts food security at risk. Annual soil organic carbon loss of 2–5 per The organic matter in wastewater and excreta cent has been reported for Africa (Bationo mainly consists of proteins, carbohydrates et al. 2007). In sub-Saharan Africa, 85 per and fats. If it is captured and processed (e.g. cent of farmland has net nutrient losses that through composting or fermentation), this exceed 30 kg of nutrients/ha./year (Henau organic matter can be used as a potent and Baanante 2006). Capturing organic soil conditioner as well as being a source matter from waste streams and applying of energy, as described below, especially it to agricultural land is a key strategy for if supplemented with food waste and improving soil fertility and productivity, agricultural residues (Lal 2008). alongside measures such as preventing overgrazing and the burning of natural Increasing soil organic matter (SOM) supports vegetation, animal manure and soil residues. soil functions such as retaining nitrogen and other nutrients, retaining water, protecting 2.3 Water security roots from diseases and parasites, and making retained nutrients available to the plant (Bot and Benites 2005). The organic Water consumption by human activities has matter itself also contains nutrients that will grown twice as fast as the global population be released gradually as it is broken down since 1900, from around 600 billion m3 to by natural processes. It has been estimated 4,500 billion m3 in 2010, and is expected to that 1 per cent of additional SOM is worth grow by more than 50 per cent again by 2050 about US$39 per hectare per year, due to (McGlade et al. 2012; WWAP 2015). the nutrients that are made available to plants (Land Stewardship Project 2013). Sustainable development requires access to Additionally, by improving retention of water safe drinking water and hygiene facilities as and nutrients, SOM reduces run-off and well as protection of aquatic and terrestrial eutrophication problems. ecosystems. Water security is a growing problem for many arid and semi-arid areas, Declining SOM content is a widespread and those where demand from industry, problem that directly impacts agricultural energy generation, agriculture, freshwater

17 18 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Netherlands, theurbanwastewater volumes likethe anindustrializedcent). country In cent, Egypt 12 percent, and 10 per would stillbesignificant (e.g. Brazil22 per some countries –althoughitscontribution far outstripurbanwastewater in production countries. Clearly, current irrigationneeds generation ofurbanwastewater infour compares water withdrawals withthe Going down to nationallevel, Figure 2.4 etal. 2015). (Mateo-Sagasta 15 per cent ofallcurrently irrigated cropland than 40millionha.–equivalentto about irrigate more year couldevery intheory municipal wastewater produced globally (Drechsel etal. 2010). of The 330 km3 argument for itsreuseanother important year-round availability ofwastewater as growingextra season.Farmers have identified andeven allowingboosting productivity an of drought to crops andfacilitate irrigation, agriculture,In water reuse canreduce therisk or environmental release. ofwastewater availablefraction for safe reuse toilets, thewater andsecond bydry making by usinglow-flushsystem, or particularly reducing theinputoffreshwater into the relieve thesepressures intwo ways: first, by and wastewater managementsystems can outstrips availability. Sustainablesanitation supply andecosystem replenishment Figure: Environment Stockholm Institute, datafrom fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/main. FIGURE 2.4

Annual volume (10^9 m3/year) 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Brazil 20)(2012–agricultural (2008) Egypt withdrawal, 2000) Water withdrawals vs wastewater production, (Otterpohl 2009). depending onwaste separatingtechniques 6 m3/personand25annually, between orlow-waste systems canvary dry wastewater fractions. Water savings using specific treatment ofdifferent excreta and treatment andthusallows more efficientand reduces thevolume ofwastewater thatneeds of thewater andwastewater system, since it the energy requirements andinfrastructure significant water savings. This inturn reduces of water consumption canaddupto Improved and reduction water useefficiency forof thewater abstracted industrialuse. produced are equivalentto almostaquarter generating biogas. There hasbeenagrowing most compatible withresource recovery –is content ofthesewaste streams –andtheone The most efficient wayto capture theenergy mitigation measure. energy, butalsoaneffective climate an efficient wayto produce renewable of wastewater andexcreta canbenotonly carbon dioxide. Capturing theenergy content gas (GHG) more than25timesaspotent as it decomposes. isagreenhouse Methane Organic waste produces methanewhen 2.4 Thailand Clean energy 21)(2008) (2012) Treated wastewater, urban Collected wastewater, urban Produced wastewater, urban Water withdrawal, industrial Water withdrawal, agricultural Netherlands selected countriesselected The Bio-Bus, running on biogas produced at a centralized plant, UK. Photo: Wessex Water interest in using biogas as an alternative in many countries, including Denmark and vehicle fuel, cooking gas or energy source for Sweden, and China is currently investing electricity production. Biogas can be used in heavily in incineration of solid waste (Li et al. large-scale applications to generate electrical 2015). There is some debate, however, over or mechanical power, including as a vehicle whether solid waste incineration discourages fuel (Weiland 2010). It can also be a low- waste minimization or recycling, since it cost domestic cooking and heating fuel, a creates a demand for waste (Seltenrich cleaner and healthier alternative to wood and 2013). If plastics are burnt, moreover, waste other biomass fuels typically used by poor incineration cannot be counted fully as households. Thus, biogas generation from renewable energy production. wastewater, excreta and other organic waste can help to expand access to modern energy. 2.5 Climate mitigation According to one estimate, co-fermentation of wastewater in a decentralized treatment Closely linked to the question of energy plant with food wastes and detergent could recovery are reductions in GHG emissions. allow the generation of 0.9 kWh electricity Improved sanitation and wastewater per person per day, leaving the nutrients management can make an important and parts of the organic matter intact for contribution to climate mitigation, reducing agricultural reuse. This corresponds to a emissions of several key GHGs, primarily monetary value of US$170 per year (Mang CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide. Methane 2009; Mang and Li 2010). Based on an emissions from wastewater contributed average annual electricity consumption of to approximately 7 per cent of total global 3,500 kWh/household, the estimated global methane emissions in 2010 (US EPA wastewater production of 330 km3 could 2012b), and they are expected to grow by thus theoretically provide electricity for approximately 19 per cent between 2010 about 130 million households (Mateo- and 2030, with Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Sagasta et al. 2015). and Central and South America projected to have the greatest increases. Overall, the Another way of recovering the energy from waste sector contributes <5 per cent of global waste streams is incineration or controlled GHG emissions (Bogner et al. 2007). Landfills combustion. This has become widespread are the largest contributor to GHG emissions

19 20 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY source-separated urine as a fertilizer for urine asafertilizer source-separated methodology found thattheuseof One studyusinglifecycle assessment compared to gasoline anddiesel. Table 2.1.shows CO2 emissionsfrom biogas andsubstitutescollected fossil fuel. emissions canbeavoided, ifthebiogasis digested food residue, about0.3kgofCO2 cent (Rogstrand etal. 2012).For kgof every wastewater sludgeby approximately 70 per methane emissionsinpost-processing of organic waste) canreduce unwanted sludge andexcreta (especiallywithother 2015). Similarly, digestionofwastewater etal.emissions by 35 percent (Khiewwijit treatment configuration can reduce CO2 wastewater management,modifyingthe example, inthecaseofmore conventional is dependentonthesystem set-up. For The potential mitigationofGHGemissions carbonsequestrationthrough thereturn • thatare substitutingchemicalfertilizers • substitutingfossil fuelwithrenewable • avoiding uncontrolled methane • and organic waste cycle: emissions canbeachieved inthewastewater There are four basicways inwhichreduced decades. in landfillscankeepemittingmethane for in thewaste sector, andorganic solidwaste Source: 2010 Örebro Municipality * Biogasismeasuredm3ofbiogasequivalent inm3.One toabout1.1lofgasoline TABLE 2.1 Biogas* Diesel Gasoline of organic matter to soils. produced withhighinputsofenergy, and energy recovered from waste streams, emissions from waste, Fuel kg CO2 (excluding offuel) production Comparison ofCO2 emissionsfrom consumption ofdifferent fuels 0.12 2.72 2.36 tons ofCO2 equivalent. potential ofabout70million GHGreduction 2015) substituted diesel, itcould leadto a world’s etal. wastewater (Mateo-Sagasta that could beproduced annuallyfrom the theestimated 46,200million m3ofmethane If (Smith etal. 2014). thus helpingto produce more organic matter in order to value, maximize thefertilization is better processed by anaerobic digestion pyrolysis, whilewet nutrient-richmaterial converted into biochar(asoilenhancer) by For carbon-richmaterial isbest exampledry oforganic mattertypes are treated differently. sequestration ismosteffective ifdifferent Recent research suggeststhatthecarbon recognized carbonsequestrationapproach. Returning organic matter to soilisa negligible (Cordell 2013). rock tradedgloballyeachyear are farfrom ofthe30milliontons ofphosphate transport of nitrogen fertilizer, emissionsfrom the emissions derive from theproduction global GHGemissions. While most ofthese are currently around 1.2 percent oftotal ofchemicalfertilizers the production etal. 2007).GHGemissionsfrom (Tidåker and conventional wastewater treatment year compared to use chemicalfertilizer CO2 emissionsby 33kgCO2/person/ inSwedenwheat production reduced kg CO2 offuel) (includingproduction 0.39 2.98 2.65 2.6 Environmental leaving more of it available for other uses, including preserving ecosystem services protection and healthier and ensuring environmental flows. In cities ecosystem services with combined wastewater and stormwater sewage systems, moreover, there are various options available for keeping stormwater out Preventing environmental damage has of the system; for example, making surfaces become an increasingly recognized and in the built environment more permeable by valued function of wastewater treatment, and leaving green spaces and ditches or using a component in the sustainable development permeable paving (Charlesworth 2003). This agenda (see Chapter 6). Systems that ensure can contribute to treatment of stormwater and wastewater is treated before any release into replenishment of the water table. Alternatively, natural receiving waters reduce threats to stormwater run-off can be used for irrigation, ecosystems and the services they provide, though it may require some treatment and including by improving the quality and may not be suitable for food crops. safety (and thus usability) of freshwater, and reducing pollution and eutrophication in ecosystems that provide food (Corcoran et al. 2.7 Green business and 2010). employment opportunities

Constructed wetlands7 are a commonly used There are economic beneficiaries and and effective link in the treatment chain for employment opportunities along almost any many types of wastewater – exploiting the wastewater management and physical, biological and chemical processes sanitation value chain: from construction that occur in natural wetlands to purify and to operation and maintenance, transport, treat the water. (Constructing wetlands treatment and financing. Recovery and for wastewater treatment is considered an reuse add many more potential direct and “environmentally sound technology” under indirect beneficiaries: farmers, transporters, Agenda 21.8) They are themselves valuable vendors, processors, inputs suppliers and ecosystems, supporting biodiversity and consumers. According to one estimate, providing many of the same important increased investment in sanitation in India services for human society as natural could create new business markets for the wetlands. country up to an annual value of US$152 billion (WSP 2011). Constructed wetlands can also attract many visitors. An example is the Park Huascar, in In urban areas, resource recovery and reuse Lima, Peru, where treated wastewater is used can improve the feasibility and profitability to maintain a multi-purpose facility with a of urban agriculture by using wastewater as a large lake, offering educational trails, a small source of water and nutrients: shortening the zoo, a tree nursery, demonstration farms, route to market, and allowing aquaculture playgrounds, and picnic areas under shady and the production of high value crops such trees (di Mario and Drechsel 2013). The park as flowers. An example is the harvesting of provides important benefits for ecosystems biomass grown within wastewater treatment (e.g. erosion prevention, soil fertility, and systems – in particular, if this is used as feed local climate regulation) in addition to the for on-site aquaculture or animal husbandry services it provides to residents and visitors. it can provide an additional income stream, adding to the financial stability and At the same time, if wastewater is recycled sustainability of the systems. and water-saving techniques are used, less freshwater needs to be abstracted from Faecal sludge management – emptying pits natural systems to meet human demand, and septic tanks, transporting the sludge

7 A constructed wetland is an artificial wetland used to treat wastewater. Flora and fauna growing in the wetland can help to emover sediment, and micropollutants and to deactivate pathogens. 8 Environmentally sound technologies are defined in Chapter 34 of Agenda 21 as technologies that: a) protect the environment; )b are less polluting; c) use all resources in a more sustainable manner; d) Recycle more of their wastes and products; and e) handle residual wastes in a more acceptable manner than the technologies for which they are substitutes.

21 22 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY into commercially products. attractive processing thisnutrient-richorganic waste energy from thefaecalsludgeand inrecoveringalso economic opportunities from thesebusinesses, thereApart are (Chowdhry andKoné2012). on pitlatrinesandotheron-site systems and Asian cities, where itiscommon to rely strong marketpotential inmany African hasprovedbusiness interest. It to have and treating it–isanarea ofgrowing New business: urine collection service forreuse,New business:urinecollection Faso. service Burkina Photo:LinusDagerskog There are economic beneficiaries • water resources Recycling results • Improved sanitationand • Reuseofwater, nutrientsand • Sustainablesanitationand • KEY MESSAGES value chain. management andsanitation along almostany wastewater and employment opportunities to environmental sustainability. meet humandemand, contributing fromabstracted naturalsystems to in lessfreshwater thatmustbe mitigate GHGemissions. generate energy resources and wastewater managementcan andsoilquality.productivity contribute to improving agricultural organic matter inexcreta can for societies. social andenvironmental) benefits yield vasteconomic (aswell as wastewater managementcould

Bolivia, Photo: x 3. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND RECOVERY

3.1 Current status While resource recovery can add challenges to sanitation and wastewater management (see Table 3.1), it can also alleviate growing Quantifying the current status of resource pressures facing these systems, such as recovery is difficult. Considering the general reducing the need for advanced treatment lack of wastewater data, it is not surprising when nutrients and organic matter can be that the data on reuse is even scarcer, and only reused in agriculture. very rough estimates are available. However, we know that sanitation and wastewater There are numerous systems for recovering management today are almost exclusively and reusing resources from wastewater and focused on disposal rather than resource excreta in operation today. The establishment recovery and reuse. Wastewater treatment, of some of them was motivated by business where it exists, generally only reduces opportunities, some by regulatory frameworks pathogen content and less often chemical aimed at ensuring environmental protection, pollutants and excessive nutrients before and some by tangible resource scarcity. release into the environment.

A healthy harvest from a urine-fertilized banana tree, Mali Photo: Linus Dagerskog

23 24 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY TABLE 3.1 Financial Technical Institutional Social environment Health/ • One of the biggest challenges when considering other value-added components Oneofthebiggestchallenges whenconsidering othervalue-added • Cost-benefit analyses may be crucial providingto for thehigherinitial support • Retrofitting or replacing existingsystems may be costly (LarsenandGujer2013). • Goingfrom pilotsto fullscalemay result inchallengesto thefeasibility of • Technical innovations may require amongbuilders. ahighlevel ofcraftsmanship • For to anend-product beinteresting to customers (reusers) itisimportant • programmes Many nationalbehaviour-change are notsufficientlyinformed • Time andresources for ensuringtheadequate testing, trialsandfollow-up are • Resource recovery willrequire muchstronger governance andanactive • However, culturally rooted uneaseaboutreusing humanwaste hasbeenfound • sanitationtechnologies Non-waterborne orsource-separating may challenge • There isalackofpublicenvironmental awareness generatingacceptance • The degree andrisksrelated to are faecalcross-contamination sometimes • There are potential problems related to thepresence ofbothtoxic chemicals • high start-up andoperatingcosts (7th high start-up World Water Forum 2015). is theoverall economics ofmarketinfocus. For example, metalrecovery involves 2012a) recovery (WHO investments thatmay berequired for improved resource managementand technologies andlogistics. of supply(7th World Water Forum 2015). produced to maintainingadesignated volumes level isalsoofimportance requirements onthecomposition ofincoming material. in Consistency that quality, e.g. nutrientlevel, isconstant over time. This may place by research into users’ 2012b). attitudes(WHO adequate institutionalinstrumentsto promote change(Rosemarinetal. 2012). required whenimplementinginnovative solutions. There isaneedto develop across (Corcoran working sectors public sector etal. 2010) potential ofexcreta negative healthimpacts andwastewater 2015). reuse (WWAP mitigation options, since many farmersandconsumers are unaware ofthe individuals andfarmcommunities to adoptandsustainpost-treatment risk- thananticipated.far lessoften Much larger challengesconcern of theability stored ortreated for reuse on-site (Andersson 2014a). repulsed by theideaofhandlinghumanexcreta insystems where theyare peoplemay 2013).Some of centralized be wastewater management(Lienert users’ perceptions becausetheybreak withthe “flush-and-gone” paradigm adequate usage, operationandmaintenance (Rosemarinetal. 2012). of alternative solutionsandalsoalackofrigorous usertraining to ensure assessed andmitigated (Stenström 2013). those present alongtheentire sanitationorwastewater valuechainare not there istoo muchfocusOften ontheriskrelated to end-products, while overlooked; itisessentialto understandpathways ofhumanexposure. irrigated soils(UN Water 2015). lead to excess nutrients, pathogens, metalsandsaltsbuildingupin heavy when resources are reused. Even irrigationwithtreated wastewater can (e.g. from industrialsources ofeffluent) andpathogenicmicro-organisms Overview of challenges reported from ofchallengesreported resourceOverview recovery initiatives 3.2 From linear to resources found in wastewater. Only 20 per cent of phosphorus mined for cyclical resource use food production systems ends up in food consumed (Schröder et al. 2010). Much of the Ecosystems are highly efficient at recycling remainder is lost to rivers and coastal waters, resources. Organisms interact with each other where it can cause eutrophication. The and with the environment, allowing nutrients, system requires constant new inputs. It is also water and other resources to move through worth noting the large (usually fossil) energy the system, with the “waste” products from inputs the system requires, including for one process becoming valuable inputs to the fertilizer production. (For more on synthetic next process. Very little is lost except energy, fertilizers and their production see Box 3.1.) which is replenished by sunlight. However, human interventions such as agriculture have There is an urgent need for societies to resulted in large-scale extraction of resources manage their resources more efficiently from certain ecosystems and the release of in order to meet current and future needs. various wastes and by-products into other A large part of sustainable development systems (DeFries et al. 2004). concerns “closing the loop”: turning linear resource management schemes into cyclical With industrialization, growing use of non- ones, within so-called circular economies. renewable resources, and transformation of the landscape through urbanization and In the case of sanitation and wastewater agricultural expansion, volumes of waste management, there are many “loops” to are growing and the capacity of natural consider. Two of the most important of these systems to absorb them – and to produce link sanitation with food production: those new resources – is shrinking. In the long term, for nutrients and organic matter. The loop for sustainable development requires keeping (waste) water takes in not only agriculture resources in circulation, making productive but also ecosystem flows and a variety of use of them at every stage. other human uses, including industrial. While wastewater often eventually returns One of the three essential plant nutrients, to water bodies (ideally after treatment), it phosphorus, illustrates the highly inefficient is not always possible to reuse it directly, ways in which we currently manage vital for example because it is too polluted, or

A phosphate mine in Tunisia. Phosphorus is a serious issue for food security; mineral phosphate prices rose around 800% in 2008, and 75% of the limited commercial reserves are in Morocco/Western Sahara. Photo: Reuters / Zoubeir /Souissi

25 26 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY constructed wetlands.constructed agriculture orforestry, orfiltering itthrough 9.1),orreusing wastewaterstudy inSection in done in Windhoek inNamibia (seethecase thoroughuse (after treatment) asisbeing urban sewageandreturning itto potable wastewater, suchasrecovering water from closing theloopinterms offreshwater and abstracted. However, there are many ways of released downstream ofwhere freshwater is BOX 3.1 BOX around US$15 billion (Werner 2004),into pitsandthenaturalaround environment. US$15billion(Werner the equivalentofaround 50milliontons offertilizer, withaglobalmarketvalueof conventional sanitationandwastewater managementsystems annuallydumpnutrients yeartons (FAO every unevenly distributed. 2011),thoughitisvery At thesametime, The worldwide useofsyntheticallyproduced isestimated fertilizers at170million during farmingare lostbefore entering thehumanfood chain. is asignificant share, butitisalsoanindicator ofhow muchofthenutrientsapplied could etal. equal22 percent oftotal 2011). globalphosphorusdemand(Mihelcic This depletion. Onaglobalscale, thephosphorusavailable from humanexcreta, ifcollected, et al. 2009),where –alongwithnitrogen –itcontributes to eutrophication andoxygen year findsitswayphosphorus minedevery into watercourses andoceans (Rockström largest inMorocco, reserves Western isestimated thathalfofthe SaharaandChina. It rock. The mainremaining depositsare concentrated ina handfulofcountries, withthe Similarly, anthropogenic dependsonminingofphosphatic phosphorusproduction (Roy etal. 2002). to acidrain,changesintheglobalnitrogen cycle, andnitrate pollutionofgroundwater the USA(USEPA are diminishedstratospheric impacts ozone, 2010).Other contribution can account for thebulk ofanthropogenic NO2emissions–asmuch74 percent in the equivalentweight ofCO2. areas where In are alotofsyntheticfertilizers used, this oxide (NO2),agreenhouse of gasthathas300timestheatmosphericwarmingeffect When nitrogen isappliedto fertilizer farmlanditreleases large amountsofnitrous well astheenergy, itconsumes large volumes ofnaturalgas. hydrogen, usuallyproduced from naturalgas, underhighpressure andheat.As used, theHaber-Bosch process, involves combining nitrogen from theairwith First, anthropogenic nitrogen isenergy-intensive. production The mainmethod increases incrop yields. Yet ourincreasing reliance onthemcomes withmany costs. Comprising mainlynitrogen, potassiumandphosphates, theyhave ledto massive originated chemicalfertilizers Modern onlyintheearly20thcentury. but at what cost? agricultural productivity, Chemical fertilizers: and designing asanitation andwastewater suggests aneworder oflogic for planning sanitation andwastewater management,this of management becomes the central function and financialarrangements. When resource but alsoinsocial, environmental, institutional reflected notonlyin technological systems wastewater management, which needto be new approaches to sanitationand Closing theseloopsrequires fundamentally Framing sustainable sanitation and wastewater management FIGURE 3.1 from a resource management perspective

RESOURCES IN EXCRETA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS TECHNICAL SYSTEM OPTIONS MULTIPLE POTENTIAL AND WASTEWATER BENEFITS Water Water reuse and recycling Centralized vs decentralized Health protection Potable and non-potable water / industrial use / recharge of water bodies Nutrients Combined water and nutrient reuse Waterborne vs non-waterborne Environmental protection Agricultural irrigation / forestry irrigation / aquaculture excreta management Energy content Livelihoods Nutrient reuse or combined organic matter/nutrient reuse Separate greywater Gender equity Organic matter Solid and liquid fertilizer and soil conditioner for agriculture and forestry management Water security Energy generation Sludge management Other Biogas generation / Incineration / Biomass production Food security Off-site vs on-site treatment Ecosystem services Energy security e.g. constructed wetland Wastewater treatment Climate mitigation Other outputs Excreta and sludge treatment and adaptation e.g. protein feed for livestock / building material

Figure: Stockholm Environment Institute management system (see Figure 3.1). The first as the possibility of bringing them to centres question to ask is what resources are available of demand without prohibitive economic, in the waste streams, what demand there environmental or social costs. might be for them, and how they could be economically recovered. Box 3.2 presents an Calculating demand is not just a matter of exercise in mapping available resources and identifying shortfalls in a particular resource. their potential value for an urban centre. Demand depends on the “utility” of a product to the consumers; this is, how much they are 3.3 Identifyting resource willing to pay for it, which can be affected by myriad factors linked to their attitudes demand and availability and expectations. For example, there is often resistance to the idea of excreta- For resource recovery to be viable, there based fertilizers, from users, neighbours and must be the prospect of future demand or potential consumers of the crops grown products derived from the resources, as well with them. However, experience suggests

UrineFaeces treatment composting - nitrification, by a local enterprise, South Africa. El Alto, Photo: Bolivia. Photo: Flickr / SuSanA Secretariat

27 28 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY the bestfitin context. There are alsoquestions to lookattherecovery optionsthatprovide demand have beenestablished, itisnecessary Once resource availability andpotential support. frameworks are neededto provide thecritical Institutions, includinglegalandpolicy potentially lucrative businessopportunities. investment –andcancreateprivate-sector schemesalsorequireRecovery public-and awareness campaigns anddemonstrations. that suchresistance canbeovercome with BOX 3.2 BOX could potentially reduce yearly carbonemissionsby almost70,000tons peryear. waters. From aclimate changeperspective, substitutingdieselandchemicalfertilizers controlling mismanagementanddumpinginresidential environments andreceiving of valuableresources, areuse approach taking willmakeasignificant contribution to both food “sovereignty” andfood security. from offering of theprospect Apart recovery andcould thereforecorresponds ofannualimports, to aquarter notablycontribute to rice cultivation rice (yieldingaround 200,000tons ofrice peryear), whichfor Senegal urine, faecalsludgeandorganic waste would suffice to fertilize over 50,000ha.of energy theappropriate production, treatment andreuse ofnutrientscontained in waste andurine, additionto estimated thisrenewable atabout3,300m³ofdiesel).In achieved (whichexcludes energy required theextra thefaecalsludge, to collect organic produce biogas, anenergy surplusequivalentto about3,000m³ofdieselfuelcould be to withorganic thefaecalsludgewere municipalwasteIf andco-digested co-digested cover 76 percent ofallexistingsanitationinstallations. recovering sanitationwaste from on-site systems, could whichinthecaseofDakar resource recovery. exercise thisinitialexploratory thefocus In hasbeenlimited to flows from on-site systems (alongwithashare ofurine) were efficientlymanaged for The second figure shows how thepotential ifthefaecalwaste addedvalues for Dakar step istoThe estimate next whatresources may beavailable inthedifferent streams. Step 2:Estimatingresource content flows”, developed by the World Bank Water andSanitation Programme. This figure wascreated usinganapproach for sanitationwaste inventories, “faecalwaste citiesandperi-urbanareas. ofstreamscan beawidevariety inlow- andmiddle-income centralized sewer networks; however, asthefirstfigure below shows forDakar, there sanitation andwastewater streams. This shouldberelatively simpleincitieswithlarge The firststep inestimating potential supplyis mapexistingandpotentialto future Step 1:Mappingwaste streams of waste resources Estimating thepotential value applied. from farmlandwhere could theproducts be issue inurbanandperi-urban settingsfar communities, but canbecome more ofan to benegligible insmallholderfarming reuse, for example, thisdistance islikely thecaseofagriculturalconsideration. In where itcanbereused isanothercrucial generated orprocessed andthelocations The distance between where thewaste is for newinfrastructure orotherarrangements. of technical feasibility, andthepossibleneed Faecal waste flows in Dakar, Senegal – present status

TRANSPORT/ DISPOSAL/ CONTAINMENT EMPTYING TREATMENT CONVEYANCE REUSE

5% leakage to drainage system

WC to not effectively 18% to receiving waters sewer treated

3%

safely legally emptied dumped 18%

not safely legally dumped effectively 6% to receiving waters emptied treated safely illegally emptied dumped 11% to drainage system on-site safely system abandoned 10% when full

unsafely emptied 33% to residential environment

open defectation to residential environment 2%

Potential for resource recovery in waste flows, Dakar

TRANSPORT/ CONTAINMENT EMPTYING TREATMENT DISPOSAL/REUSE CONVEYANCE

5% other to drainage system organic leakage waste WC to not effectively 17% to receiving waters sewer treated

3% Energy equivalent 3 on-site to 3000 m system diesel* or biogas 16,200 km/day safely bus travel emptied 73% digester

Carbon emissions reduction of 69,000 tons/year (substitution of diesel water + chemical fertilizers) saving of waterless 35,000 m3 urinals c. 46% of urine Reuse in agriculture: per day fertilizing 50,000 ha.rice open (approx. yield 200,000 tons) defectation to residential environment

* Adjusted to compensate for increased diesel use in transportation.

The red arrows indicate unsafe waste management and the green arrows safe management, at least from a human health point of view. Figure: Stockholm Environment Institute, based on WSP 2014, with additional calculations by SEI.

Other potential costs include treatment and wastewater connections, diets, solid systems, providing regular quality testing, waste management practices, climate and equipment and awareness-raising geology (for more information on material campaigns. flow analyses see e.g. Montangero 2006; Meinzinger 2009). Figure 3.2. shows the main resources that might be recoverable from different waste Nutrients and organic matter streams, depending on the context. The sizes of the waste streams, and the quantities Reuse of nutrients and organic matter from and concentrations of the resources, as sanitation and wastewater streams has well as the potential reuses, would require received more attention in recent years, but detailed, context-specific analysis. They has in fact been practised since ancient times would also depend on factors such as as a way of providing local fertilizers. Despite industrial activities, existing technologies the many options, this type of reuse from

29 30 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY WASTE FLOW OTHER RESIDUES ANIMAL MANURE RAINWATER ETC. PROCESS WATER One isto market themwithnames, packaging to attractive themarket. products fertilizer around theworld to makeexcreta-based Many innovative measures have beentried available. when syntheticalternatives are readily economic, socialorethicalgrounds, even derived andsoilconditioners, fertilizers on also bedemandfor wastewater- andexcreta- reforestation projects. However, there may supplies ofsyntheticfertilizers, and orunaffordabledependence onuncertain or include agricultural landwithlow fertility point. a usefulstarting The inventory could to be)anidentifiableneed for newinputsis productive landusewhere there is(orlikely soil conditioners; hence aninventory of current and useofsyntheticfertilizers matter could complement orsupplement resources intheform ofnutrientsandorganic agricultureIn andforestry, recovered subsidized by somenationalgovernments). arefertilizers now widelyaccessible (andeven from pathogens. At thesametime, chemical societal useofchemicals),andtherisks and industrialresidues andagenerallyhigh increased withthecombination ofdomestic of exposure to (whichhave micro-pollutants the reuse ofhumanwaste, thepotential risks this, includingwidespread socialresistance to world. There are many possiblereasons for on onlyarelatively limited scalearound the sanitation andwastewater systems stilloccurs Figure: Environment Stockholm Institute FIGURE 3.2 e.g. oils,soil,litter DETERGENTS USED WATER INDUSTRIAL Food andother household and RESIDUES EXCRETA ORGANIC commercial HUMAN RECOVERABLE RESOURCES ENERGY ENERGY production recovery bioefuel

gas & Overview ofwaste resourcesOverview andpotentials for improved heat Y n NUTRIENTS e.g. valuable per unitofweight orvolume ofwaste on-site systems), ofnutrients thequantity other wastewater (for example, many rural systems thatkeepexcreta separate from the stream alongsidehumanexcreta. In stream dependsonwhatotherwaste enters The concentration ofnutrientsinthewaste and Agriculture Organization (FAO). average food consumption from theUNFood Jönsson etal. (2004)usingdataon national excreta countries, inselected ascalculated by average percapitanutrientcontent inhuman the waste stream). Table 3.2shows estimated most ofthepopulation’s excreta endupin by therelevant population(assumingthat waste stream basedonthefood consumed nutrient shouldbeavailable inasanitation is possibleto estimate how muchofeach amount ofnutrientstheyconsume. Thus it A humanbeingexcretes roughly thesame apply to cropland. pellets, whichare alsomoredry convenient to processed by, for theminto example, making faecal sludgefrom on-site sanitationcanbe Products derived from sewagesludgeand urine to changethecolour andodour. El Alto, Bolivia,herbsare addedto treated (seeDagerskogetal. as afertilizer 2014).In market for source-separated, treated urine Faso,in Ouagadougou, Burkina to builda example, thishelped aperi-urbaninitiative from excreta to anew, safe For product. etc. thatunderlinetheirtransformation ORGANIC MATTER WATER OTHER minerals management andrecovery FERTILIZER PLANT REUSE SOIL CONDITIONER replenishing waterbodie groundwater recharge, e.g. constructedwetland SERVICES ECOSYSTEM materials, traceelement e.g proteinfeed,building OTHER OUTPUTS potable andnon-potable e.g. irrigation,industrial, & RECYCLING WATER REUSE s , s TABLE 3.2 Estimated excretion of nutrients per capita in different countries Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium (kg/capita/yr) (kg/capita/yr) (kg/capita/yr) Country Urine Faeces Excreta Urine Faeces Excreta Urine Faeces Excreta

China 3.5 0.5 4.0 0.4 0.2 0.6 1.3 0.5 1.8

Haiti 1.9 0.3 2.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.3 1.2

India 2.3 0.3 2.7 0.3 0.1 0.4 1.1 0.4 1.5

South Africa 3.0 0.4 3.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 1.2 0.4 1.6

Uganda 2.2 0.3 2.5 0.3 0.1 0.4 1.0 0.4 1.4

Adapted from Jönsson et al. 2004 will be much higher than in waterborne further discussion of the agricultural value systems, especially when they mix household and reuse of excreta see Jönsson et al. (2004). and other waste flows. Wastewater is often classified according to strength (i.e. The content of organic matter in domestic concentration of non-water components), sanitation waste streams depends largely on and these classifications can be combined habits linked to diet and food preparation. with food consumption data to estimate Unlike nutrients, the organic matter content approximate levels of nutrients. Table 3.3 of sanitation waste is found almost entirely provides estimated nutrient levels in in faeces. This organic matter has two domestic and municipal wastewater. (The main reuse values, which are not mutually difference between these two streams is exclusive: as a soil conditioner and as a depicted in Figure 3.6.) source of energy. The average person produces around 50 litres of faeces each year It is also worth noting that the vast majority (EcoSanRes 2008). Where it is used, toilet of nutrients in excreta are found in urine. paper is another significant source of Urine is particularly rich in nitrogen. It also organic matter in sanitation waste. contains P and K, but the ratios of N to these other nutrients are higher than in most How much of the organic content in the commercial fertilizers. Urine also has far lower sanitation waste stream can be recovered, pathogen content than faeces. This is one and in what form, depends on treatment of the main arguments in favour of source techniques. As faeces may contain a high separation of urine (see Section 4.4). As a rule pathogen load, treatment and safe handling of thumb, one person’s annual urine excretion are particularly important. In waterborne is enough to meet the nitrogen fertilization systems a large part of the organic content needs of 300–400 m2 of crops, and the can be captured in the sludge that is phosphorus fertilization needs of 600 m2 of produced during wastewater treatment. crops for one growing season (Jönsson et al. Depending on the efficiency of the system, 2004). about 20–30 kg/person/year of dry organic matter can be recovered in this way (Roy Faeces also contains nutrients, though here et al. 2011). Faeces may also be treated P is the most important. The faeces excreted through composting or desiccation. by an average person contains enough P to fertilize 20–40 m2 of wheat grown on low One important factor to note is that for P soil; in soils with normal P content, one soil conditioning, much heavier application person’s faeces can fertilize 200–300 m2 of of faeces is needed than if it is being used wheat production (EcoSanRes 2008). For purely as a phosphorus fertilizer. The faeces

31 32 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Figure: BasedonVögeli etal. 2014 per person(seeFigure 3.3). around theworld ranges from 45to 320kg generation oforganic residues in23cities to datafrom Vögeli etal. (2014)theyearly potential source oforganic matter. According industries alsoneedsto beconsidered asa organic waste fromOther householdsand etal.of agricultural 2004). soil(Jönsson enough organic matter to condition 1.5–3m2 excreted by onepersoninayear contain Adapted from Tchobanoglous etal. 2003 FIGURE 3.3 TABLE 3.3 wastewater Domestic wastewater Municipal

MSW production (kg/capita/yr) 100 200 300 400 500 600 0

Paris, FRA High Medium Low High Medium Low concentration Wastewater Guangzhou, CHI Bangkok, THA Chongquing, CHN Trang, THA Tehran, IRN Cape Town, ZAF Nitrogen (mg/l)

Lima, PER 85 40 20 70 40 20 Composition ofmunicipalsolidwaste in23cities

Metro Manila, PHL untreated domesticandmunicipalwastewater Cluj-Napoca, ROM the onlyreliable source ofirrigationwater wastewater to irrigate crops asitis – often countries already dependheavily on urban andperi-urbanareas inwater-scarce Manyactivities. small-scalefarmersin from humansettlementsorindustrial are competing demandsfor limited water water scarcity, especiallywhenthere strategy for managing is animportant manyIn places reuse ofwater resources Recycled water Nairobi, KEN Cairo, EGY Phosphorus Ougadougou, BFA Typical nutrient concentrations in (mg/l) 15 12

Bamako, MLI 8 4 7 4 Makurdi, NGA Lusaka, ZMB Monrovia, LBR Dakar, SEN Total Organic MSW composition Accra, GHA Carbon (mg/l) Organics Paper Glass Metal Plastic Not defined 290 160 260 140 Semarang, IDN 80 80 Gaborone, BWA Pune, IND Dhaka, BGD available (Sato et al. 2013). The World Health There are numerous examples of ways to Organization (WHO) has estimated that 20 reuse or recycle wastewater (see Figure 3.4). million hectares of arable land worldwide Some common ways include: (approximately 7 per cent of total arable land) is irrigated using wastewater (WHO • agricultural and landscape irrigation, 2006). In 2006 there were over 3,300 water • industrial uses (e.g. recycled process reclamation facilities worldwide, with water, cooling), varying degrees of treatment and for various • potable uses (e.g. mixing in municipal applications (Salgot and Huertas 2006). Most water supply), of these were in (over 1,800) and the • non-potable uses (e.g. toilet flushing, dust USA (over 800), but Australia and the EU control, car washing), had 450 and 230 projects, respectively. The • recharge of natural water bodies (e.g. Mediterranean and Middle East had around groundwater), 100 sites, Latin America 50 and sub-Saharan • replenishing artificial lakes and wetlands. Africa 20. For the management of water demand In addition, the reuse of greywater (water and potential scarcities it may be strategic from washing, showering etc.) is gaining to make an inventory of the main water increasing interest at household and supply flows, and then compare them with community levels (see a case study in wastewater flows to see how the wastewater Section 9.2). Greywater makes up most of a flows could be matched to demand – similar typical domestic wastewater flow and can to the faecal waste flow diagram in Box 3.2. be safely used for toilet flushing, landscape Here it makes sense to try to find wastewater irrigation and similar uses if it is kept separate streams and recovery options that best from excreta and free of toxic substances. match the water quality requirements of each For more on greywater recovery schemes segment of demand, to avoid investment see Section 4.4. in unnecessary treatment. How to deliver separate streams of treated wastewater to

FIGURE 3.4 Wastewater reuse, as part of natural water cycles

Atmospheric water vapour

Precipitation Industrial Municipal water use use Water Wastewater Irrigation treatment reclamation / reus

Potable reuse

Groundwater Groundwater

Irrigation water e Groundwater recharg

S urface water replenishment

Figure: Based on Asano 2002

33 34 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY sources inanurbanarea. wastewaterof typical flows from different widely.vary Figure 3.5provides anoverview content ofthedifferent streams canalso and urbanstructures. The volumes and landusetypes, humansettlements activities, depending onindustrialandcommercial produce ofwastewater awidevariety types, of any wastewater stream. may Alocality By volume, water isthemaincomponent for irrigation. water widespread ofusing drinking practice – for example, to avoid theinefficientbut the end-userisanotherrelevant question Figure: BasedonHelmerand Hespanhol1997

FIGURE 3.5 Cropland irrigatedwithrecycled wastewater indrought-strik Urban run-off Commercial + wastewater wastewater wastewater institutional Residential Industrial Greywater

Origin andflows of wastewater inanurbanenvironment Separate sewerage Combined sewerage Pre-treated Non-treated en Watsonville, California. Photo:Flickr /USDA pathogens andpollutants. water with groundwater andsurface available for reuse, aswell ascontaminating theycanreduceand leak, theamount if sewer networks are poorly maintained does notendupinwastewater. Furthermore, ofwater drunkby peoplethat or theportion water incorporated into industrialproducts; wastewater, suchaswater usedfor irrigation; be madefor water thatdoesnotendupin is usuallyreadily available. Adjustments must estimated basedonwater supplydata,which roughly canbevery within alocality The overall amountofwastewater generated wastewater Domestic drainage Stormwater sewage Municipal However, not all water in wastewater streams of treating wastewater to effluent standards can be considered equal for the perspective (i.e. standards allowed for release to the of recovery and reuse. At one end of the environment), which are the minimum scale, some types of wastewater can be safely standards for all wastewater treatment. This reused for domestic cleaning, irrigation and is relevant, for example, when comparing even drinking after minimal treatment. At with the costs of an alternative drinking water the other, some wastewater streams may production method, such as desalination. be so contaminated that treating them for many types of safe reuse may be prohibitively At the household level, the generation of expensive. domestic wastewater varies greatly between locations, populations and even individual Because of this, it is worthwhile considering households. It depends not only on the different wastewater streams separately. availability of water but also, among other This allows more precise calculations of how factors, on whether household members work much wastewater is available that could be outside the household, types of household suitable for particular types of reuse. There installation (e.g. washing machines or water- may also be opportunities for greater control saving equipment), and lifestyles. Another and separation of wastewater at the source, to way to reduce treatment needs and conserve prevent relatively clean wastewater streams natural water sources is, of course, to reduce being contaminated and allow more targeted the amount of water input into the system. For and (cost-)efficient treatment. For example, example, a ’s water consumption an industrial wastewater stream might alone can consume around 6,000 to 15,000 consistently contain certain micro-pollutants litres per user annually (Larsen et al. 2013). but be otherwise relatively pure. This stream can then be given specific treatment to Combined water and nutrient reuse remove those micro-pollutants near the source, while it would be too expensive to For most types of reuse and disposal, it is treat all the wastewater generated in the necessary to separate nutrients and organic locality in the same way. Chapter 4 discusses matter out from wastewater streams that further the potentials of source separation of include diluted excreta. However, in some waste streams. circumstances it is viable to reuse this wastewater without doing so, particularly When making an economic calculation of the to fertilize and irrigate simultaneously in costs and benefits of wastewater recovery agriculture, forestry or similar activities. In and reuse, it is important to exclude the cost urban areas, particularly in dry and water-

Treated sewage sludge being applied to cropland in Germany. Photo: Flickr / SuSanA Secretariat

35 36 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY streams andscalesofoperationinvolved. over theyears inregard ofwaste to thetypes applicationhasdiversifiedthe early1900s. Its wastewater treatment plantswasfirstusedin (or fermentation) oforganic matter from usinganaerobicBiogas production digestion forandavailabilityDemand ofenergy in Chapter 9). water andnutrientreuse (seethecasestudies and excreta) canbesources for combined (flushingwater blackwater source-separated Both conventional municipalwastewater and acceptable limits(Alderson 2015). bring pathogenandpollutantloadswithin wastewater treatments may besufficientto water stabilizationpondsandotherlow-cost organic matter from thewater content. Often, there isnoneedto separate nutrientsand (reducing investment andenergy use),as of combined reuse cutsouttreatment stages As well aspromoting plantgrowth, thiskind aquaculture. to reuse water andnutrientstogether in ) itisalready common practice and (among themChina,India, to green spaces. several In Asian countries scarce regions, thewastewater canbeapplied District ofColumbia, USA.District Photo: DCWater Part ofthecombinedPart heatandpower bioenergy plantattheBluePlains Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant, approximately 6kWhofenergy, equalto produced inthisway, 1 m3ofbiogasyields terms ofhowIn muchenergy can be al. 2014). waste) et canproduce 1m3ofbiogas(Vögeli sanitation biowaste (e.g. andmarket kitchen figures, roughly 10kg(wet weight) ofnon- sanitation waste streams. additionto these In potentialproduction from sometypical Table 3.4 gives ofbiogas anoverview wealthier consumers) generates more biogas. derived from higher-protein of diets(typical theexcreta content.particular Faecal waste concentration oforganic matter– andin varies widely, dependingonthe The energy potential ofwaste streams manure andorganic waste. cases combine humanexcreta withanimal their own biogasdigesters, whichinmost input. Many ruralhouseholdsinChinahave energy recovery as apotentially important shouldalsobeconsideredindustrial activities Organic waste derivingfrom different as bothcontain significant organic matter. organic waste to thewastewater orexcreta, mostefficientoften to add foodandother communities orcentrally. ordistricts, is It of individualhouseholdsorindustries, of canbedoneat thelevelBiogas production TABLE 3.4 Biogas production potential from excreta and sludge

BiogasMunicipal wastewater Public and private Septic tank Normal domestic sludge septage wastewater

High concentration, Low concentration, Characteristics - low stabilization good stabilization

Biogas (m³/kg total 0.35–0.5 0.1–0.2 - solids)

Biogas 8.0–10.0 0.5–2.0 0.1–0.3 (m³/m³)

Source: Schmidt 2005 approximately 0.6 litres of diesel fuel (Vögeli common method is pasteurization (heating et al. 2014). A very approximate rule of to a high temperature for a period of time). thumb is that human excreta from 10–15 Pasteurizing wastewater sludge with such people can provide enough biogas to cook organic wastes increases the energy input three average meals a day for one person significantly, but it has been shown that (Balasubramaniyam et al. 2008). Thus, energy the process can still generate a positive net recovery from wastewater can only be a energy output (Rogstrand et al. 2012). contribution to energy security and move towards renewable energy, not as a whole Incineration is also commonly used for solution. Furthermore, large-scale schemes energy recovery from sewage sludge are more likely to be economically feasible and municipal organic solid waste. When than smaller-scale schemes. incinerated, the calorific value of dry sewage sludge (12–20 MJ/kg) is close to that of However, anaerobic digestion also serves as a coal (Samolada and Zabaniotou 2014). form of wastewater treatment (e.g. removing Incineration also greatly reduces the volume pathogens), so a biogas digester serves both of waste. However, it also destroys most functions. Nutrients and organic matter can organic matter and nutrients (e.g. nitrogen, be recovered from the waste after digestion. sulphur and plant-available phosphorus) that Digestion can also reduce the high energy could otherwise be recovered (Niwagaba demand and greenhouse gas emissions 2009). Thus incineration should only be typically associated with wastewater considered as part of a sustainable system treatment by replacing energy-intensive when nutrient reuse is not feasible. conventional technologies, and reducing methane emissions. Other energy recovery methods for sludge that have yet to move beyond small- In some jurisdictions, including the scale implementation are pyrolysis and European Union, food waste and animal gasification. Thermal gasification of various by-products are required to undergo biomass residues is a promising technology “hygienization” to remove pathogens before for combining bioenergy production with soil being used for biogas production. The most fertility management through the application

37 38 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Another increasingly approach attractive ofreusetypes (seeSlimand Wakefield 1990). materials ifthere isnomarketfor other bricksor otherbuilding manufacture sludge andashcan beusedto others are available. For example, treated and sanitationwaste, anumberof to recovering resources from wastewater Besides thesemore common approaches resource utilization Other source for energy (Trivedi etal. 2015). development to become acompetitive 2012). and Seenivasan This needsfurther microalgae wastewater treatment (Sriram energy recovery. Anemerging approach is during treatment canbeusedasinputfor many benefits. Biomass grown inwastewater approach thatcanyield land-use-system wastewater treatment isanintegrated Combining and biomassproduction wastewater streams. be recovered from some industrial heat from municipalsewers. Heatcanalso water, whilelarger-scale systems canrecover recover heatfrom drainwater to preheat hot level systems are beingmarketed thatcan with housingheatingdemands. Building- interest,attracted especiallyincountries ofheatfromRecovery wastewater has (Hansena etal. 2015). of theresulting biocharfor soilamendment or inproducing paper, insulation,construction materials Pellets ofcellulose fibre recovered from sewage. Thesepellets, marketed underthenameRecyllose, can beusedasfuel and bioplastics. Photo:Reuters/BazRatner . inthisway.using blacksoldierflylarvae 9.8presents aproject transmission. Section waste volumes andpreventing pathogen protein feed for livestock, whilereducing including sludgeorfaeces, to produce onorganic waste, larvae is breeding insect KEY MESSAGES • One of the most important Oneofthemostimportant • “Closing theloop” requires examining • Whileresource recovery canadd • There isanurgent needfor societies • them backinto agricultural use. matter sanitationwaste andputting recovering nutrientsandorganic food whichinvolves production, potential loopslinkssanitationto could beeconomically recovered. might befor them,andhow they waste streams, whatdemandthere what resources are available inthe and wastewater systems. growing pressures facingsanitation challenges, itcanalsoalleviate and future needs. efficiently in orderto meetcurrent to manage theirresources more 4. TECHNICAL FUNCTIONALITY

4.1 Designing a system “arboloos”9 and/or using minimally treated greywater to cultivate crops may be the most sustainable options for a rural smallholder; A common mistake in many attempts while waterborne systems with sewer to improve sanitation and wastewater networks leading to a centralized treatment management is to start with a preferred plant that recovers and distributes resources technology that has “worked”, even as in bulk may be more appropriate in large part of a sustainable system, elsewhere. urban centres. This approach has left many cities and communities with less-than-optimal systems In between these two extremes are a range that, for example, cannot be easily adapted of possibilities with different functions taking to changes in population density; put heavy place on-site, in decentralized or centralized demands on scarce water resources; break facilities, depending on population densities, down or malfunction frequently, especially geophysical conditions and other factors. during flooding and heavy rains; and in some Fortunately, a wide range of technologies cases are not even used (Wong and Brown, are now available from which to choose. 2009). Furthermore, models for financing This chapter gives a broad overview of and service delivery, and institutional the different functions of technology in a arrangements that work in one city may not sanitation and wastewater system, and looks necessarily work in another. at how to identify and set up technologies to fulfil those functions within a locally No sanitation user interface (see below) appropriate, sustainable system. In doing so or treatment technology is sustainable in it introduces some of the most common and itself – there are only technologies that most interesting technologies.10 serve specific functions within a more or less sustainable system. This system must be Technical elements of a system planned, designed and operated to suit the specific conditions in which it will operate. A sustainable sanitation or wastewater For example, on-site dry composting toilets, management system needs to include

9 Moveable latrines placed over a small pit; a tree is planted in the pit once it is full, and the superstructure moved over a new pit (Mara 2012). 10 For a good overview of available technologies, see the Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies (Tilley et al. 2014). A large collection of Wastewater Technology factsheets from the US EPA can be accessed at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/mtbfact.cfm.

39 40 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY mechanical, biological orchemicalprocesses. can bepassive (storage) oractive, using release into theenvironment). Treatment components for safe reuse andpractical (or or harmfulcomponents andrender other designed to eliminate orremove unwanted Treatment: trucks. plastic containers to fixed pipenetworks to of conveyance canrangefrom andtransport content thatneedsto beisolated). The means in long-term storage (e.g. inthecaseoftoxic environment treatment after ordeposited waste stream may bereleased into the and from treatment to reuse. Parts ofthe point(s); from pointto treatment; acollection to thecollection from theuserinterface and technological for functions, example may needto beconveyed between locations on system configuration thewaste stream Conveyance andtransport: tanks for wastewater. cansfor urine,in jerry andholdingorseptic on-site oratamore central point;for example storage ofwaste streams cantakeplace Collection andstorage: example atoilet orfloordrain. out oftheuser’s immediate environment; for potentially otherorganic waste) isfirsttaken waste stream (excreta, wastewater, and User interface: appropriate manner: following inasafe, functions efficientand to fulfilthe orservices infrastructure Figure: Environment Stockholm Institute WASTE PRODUCTION USER INTERFACE FIGURE 4.1 This isasetofprocesses / This isthepointatwhich STORAGE COLLECTION/ The and collection Depending TRANSPORT CONVEYANCE/ Technical inasustainablesanitation functions TREATMENT projected developments (e.g. • availability ofmaterials for construction, • andaccess institutionalcapacity to local • protection ofhumanhealthand • andcapacity. userneeds, expectations • geographical andgeophysical • identifieddemand for recoverable • They include: to ofsystem broader sustainability. aspects these are purely technical whileothersrelate a sanitationorwastewater system. of Some choice andcombination oftechnologies in shouldinfluence the A rangeoffactors Factors insystemdesign digestion for biogasproduction). overlap withtreatment (e.g. composting, on demandandlocalconditions. Several may the resources inwaste streams, depending methods for recovery andreuse orrecycling Resource recovery andreuse: industrial expansion); urbanization, populationdensity, operation andmaintenance; (seeChapter 8); technical support environment (seeChapters 5and6); menstruation hygiene management; for analrinsingorwiping, needfor These includeissuessuchaspreferences infrastructure, andnaturalhazards); andpopulationdensity,structure existing geology, urbanization and sub-surface ofreceivingsensitivity water, topography (e.g.factors water availability, and quality Chapter 4); resources (e.g. agricultural needs; see and wastewater value chain REUSE RESOURCE RECOVERY/ There are various • availability of financial resources for important in the design of household construction and long-term operation. sanitation systems, since flush toilets have become popular within development Many of these are discussed in more detail programmes – mainly because they are in other chapters, as indicated in the list considered more convenient for users. above, while this chapter focuses particularly on the geographical and geophysical It is also important to look ahead. For example, factors and at technological configurations population growth, industrial or agricultural from a sustainable resource management development and climate change may all have perspective. Comprehensive guidance major impacts on the future availability of on how to plan and design sanitation and water resources in some locations. An example wastewater systems can be found in Tilley is the metropolitan area of La Paz in Bolivia, et al. (2014) and Parkinson et al. (2014). where glaciers, which provide an estimated 30 per cent of freshwater, are retreating fast 4.2 Geographical due to rising temperatures (Buxton et al. 2013). Other areas, for example in sub-Saharan and geophysical factors Africa, have “economic” water scarcity (see Box 1.1) – that is, water scarcity caused by lack The geographical and geophysical factors of economic growth and investment in water that determine what is and is not feasible infrastructure. An increase in water availability when planning new or upgraded sanitation may lead people to change sanitation and wastewater management systems are technologies in their homes, which may in turn often site-specific. This section discusses alter the compatibility of the user interface several of the most important. (For more in- with the downstream parts of the system. depth discussion, see also Cruz et al. 2005.) Topography, surface geology and sensitivity Water availability of receiving waters

An analysis of water availability needs to be Hilly topography can make centralized carried out, covering access to water on the waterborne systems much less feasible, site, availability of energy for water pumping since wastewater needs to be pumped and anticipating seasonal or even daily from one sub-catchment area to another. variability of water access. This is especially Similarly, rock formations close to the

Urine-diverting in Niger (left) and a demonstration urine-diverting toilet at the Tarumitra Bio-reserve and Ecology Centre, Bihar, India (right), with rope to facilitate use. Photos: Linus Dagerskog, Kim Andersson.

41 42 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY droughts (Andersson 2014a). (e.g. toilet) may belessvulnerableduring adry human excretadoes notrely onwater to carry orothersystem component that interface in thedesign process. For example, auser nutrients andwater needto beaddressed processes, andseasonalrequirements for Climate may alsohave ontreatment animpact flooding. frequently recurring events suchasseasonal which thelocalarea isvulnerable, especiallyto or resilient in theface ofnaturalhazards to therefore needto bedesigned to berobust pollutant exposure duringdisasters. Systems adding majorhealthrisksfrom pathogenand of different components ofthesystem, even thefunctioning canaffect water shortages, such asfloods, rains, heavy droughts and andothernatural hazards,Climate-related Natural hazards Cochin 2011). treatment facilities(MunicipalCorporation of (or simplifiedsewers) withdecentralized throughwater collection small-bore sewers included sealingofon-site systems andblack subsoil. The suggested solutioninthiscase properly, resulting inpollutionofwater and tanksandpitlatrinesdonotfunction Septic conventional underground drainagesystem. conditions, whichare notfavourable for a by flat andhigh terrain groundwater are limited ofKochiinIndia open to thecity As anexample, thetechnological options nearby). water orbathe theirdrinking abstract discharge wastewater (especiallyifpeople environment orinlocatingsuitablepointsto needed before waste isreleased to the determining theminimumlevel oftreatment They shouldalsobetakeninto account in water) may thetechnological restrict options. receiving waters (groundwater orsurface current andecological of quality sensitivity addition,biophysicalIn suchasthe factors important. of thelocalgroundwater tableare both or leachpits/fields,type andthelevel thesoil dependent oninfiltration,suchaspitlatrines lay sewerage pipes. For systems thatare canmakeitdifficultand costly to surface awareness-raising campaigns withvarious for work; costly example, infrastructural least improve thesituation without However, there are many ways to at treatment.after ofreuse types unsafe,make certain even wastewater containing substances that systems may receive complex industrial to digestfor biogas. Similarly, combined sludge andrendering itmuch lessefficient of stormwater duringrainy seasons, diluting stormwater) may receive large quantities systems (mixinghouseholdwastewater and systems.connected For example, combined apply to centralized waterborne, sewer- recovery options. These limitationsmostly may limitresource managementand replacing andretrofitting existingsystems of other casesthecosts andpracticalities and recycling ofsomeresources; butin good basisfor improved management are feasible. Existingsystems may provide a major determinant ofwhatinnovations canbea management infrastructure The existingsanitationandwastewater services and Existing infrastructure perspectives. which may bemore from attractive users’ more appropriate, services collection population densitiesmakecentralized be amajorissue. At thesametime, higher the caseinurbanareas, where logistics can waste isgenerated. This isgenerally not close to where sanitation(andotherorganic) and irrigationwater are generally needed plantnutrients,rural context soilconditioner for resource recovery. For example, ina andchallenges theopportunities also affect Urbanization andpopulationdensity economically feasible atlower densities. and on-site systems are and more practical treatment whereas services, decentralized favour underground sewerage andcentralized buildings andlimited publicspace, tends to residential units, especiallywithhigh-rise A highconcentration ofpopulationand conditions canstrongly affect system design. population anddevelopment density) Rural, peri-urbanandurban(withincreasing populationdensity and Urbanization user groups (household, commercial, recovery perspective, there are both industrial, institutional), possibly backed advantages and disadvantages to these up with regulations, can greatly reduce different management schemes. hazardous substances entering the wastewater stream. Building ditches and local Centralized wastewater management is a retention basins and installing permeable common approach in large parts of the world. surfaces in public spaces are examples of The often cited advantage of centralized ways to reduce the stormwater entering management is economy of scale: the per combined systems, also creating possibilities capita investment and operational costs for treatment (see e.g. Charlesworth et of a single large treatment plant are much al. 2003; Poleto and Tassi 2012). Hence, lower than those for several small-scale when planning for improved sanitation plants, while the control of quality standards development it is important to make a and plant operation procedures could also detailed analysis of existing sanitation and be more effective (Wendland and Albold wastewater systems. 2010). Centralized systems can, however, be challenging from a resource management perspective due to the higher level of dilution 4.3 Operational factors and complexity of wastewater composition; source control of contaminants is more Among the most important choices to difficult in a larger system. make in designing a sanitation or wastewater management system are where collection, At the same time, centralized systems storage and treatment will take place, and require large upfront investment in order to with what degree of centralization; whether function, while more decentralized systems the system will be waterborne, low-water can often be developed in phases and still or dry; and what kinds of treatment and function. If reuse opportunities exist locally, resource utilization to aim for. the neighbourhood or locality may be the most relevant boundary for the system, Collection and treatment services can be for example to avoid costly logistics and to organized as centralized or decentralized reduce the risk of dilution and pollution of (see Figure 4.2), but also on-site or off-site waste resources (see Chapter 7 for more on or a combination of these. From a resource system boundaries). Another fairly common

FIGURE 4.2 Levels of centralization of collection services

plant 1 plant

plant 2

centralized partly fully decentralized decentralized

= System boundary plant = wastewater treatment plant

= untreated wastewater/excreta = release of treated product

Figure: Stockholm Environment Institute, based on Parkinson et al. 2014

43 44 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY facilitate logistics. of volume atthesource crucialto isoften for sludgemanagement.Here thereduction septic tanks, may have acentralized service an on-site wastewater schemeincluding andimplications.characteristics For example, site configurations, includingtheirmain centralized/decentralized andoff-site/on- Table 4.1provides ofpossible anoverview on-site. (e.g.fractions sludge)canbecollected using apipedsystem, whilesolidwaste centrally canbecollected liquid fractions atdifferentfractions levels. For example, the isto managedifferentpractice wastewater using urine-diverting dry toilets. Greywater isappliedto dry using urine-diverting Faeces composting foragricultural reuse inaprojectElAlto, Bolivia.Urineandfaeces are collected separately householdconstructed wetlands. Andersson Photo:Kim appropriate userbehaviour –ensuringwastes source separation generallydependson may notbeavailablecapacity locally. However, on asmallscale, andsuitabletechnical be implemented andoperated economically advanced treatment technologies canrarely indecentralized systems,important as case withblendedwastes. This isparticularly ensures more consistent content, thanisthe lower volumes ofthedifferent and fractions, more specific(andsimpler)treatment of of facilitatingresource recovery. allows It toway treatment, acost-efficient isoften separate, through from theuserinterface Keeping different wastewater streams 4.4 Source separation TABLE 4.1 Type of wastewater collection systems and their characteristics

Type of collection system Characteristics

Centralized system, either combined • Different types of sewerage system sewerage (inc. rainwater) or separate possible: high-tech like pressurized sewerage (separate wastewater and and vacuum sewerage or low-tech like rainwater sewers) free water-level gravity sewers

Treatment options: Intensive wastewater • Sewerage system requires system (e.g. activated sludge), extensive maintenance wastewater treatment (e.g. pond) • A number of pumping stations may be required

• Important global development how to design local and sustainable stormwater solutions (possible and necessary for all systems)

Combined on-site and centralized • Sewerage (settled sewerage) less costly system and less complex than conventional sewerage Collection and pre-treatment of wastewater on-site in septic tanks • Advantageous if septic tanks have combined with settled or simplified already been installed sewerage and intensive or extensive secondary treatment

Semi-centralized system • Advantageous if the agglomerations is clustered in several settlements Number of smaller, semi-centralized treatment plants serve one agglomeration • Flexible, can be built modular • Sewerage network is shorter

Decentralized on-site system (no sewerage) household based • Advantageous in sparsely populated areas and/or difficult site conditions for Treatment options: Intensive, extensive and sewerage innovative wastewater system possible • No centralized sewerage required

• Operation and maintenance to be done on-site by either owners or private/public managed services

• Requires public and private rights and obligations properly identified

• Potential to close the local water cycle (on-site water and nutrient reuse)

Source: Adapted from Wendland and Albold 2010

45 46 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Source: Adapted from Tilley 2013 low- andhigh-tech solutionsinrural and on source separation, includingboth been invested inresearch anddevelopment thelast20yearsOver have large efforts 2013). orenergyfertilizer scarcity (Lienert spontaneously asaresponse to water, centrally, source separationhasemerged wastewater streams andmanagethem development to date hasbeento combine insanitation Although thetendency minimal treatment. or released to sensitive receiving waters with separated greywater thatmightbereused by, for example, putting toxic into products are keptseparate andnotcontaminated TABLE 4.2 Faecal matter Urine other waste) excreta andpossibly systems, containing inon-sitecollected Faecal sludge and laundry) and laundry) washing, dishwashing, in shower, bath,hand Greywater and faeces, withnourine) brownwater (flushwater urine andfaeces) or Blackwater Waste stream (water used (flush water, (sludge source amendment,fuel Soil recovery Heat recovery, water gravity amendment, willflow under nutrient recovery, soil Energy (biogas)production, soil amendment Energy (biogas)production, Nutrient (N,P, recovery K) Opportunities Opportunities andchallengesassociated with Opportunities necessarily play amajorrole indetermining water availability andpopulationdensity) dry. While localconditions (especially systems concerned are waterborne or source separation iswhetherthesanitation variablesin One ofthemostimportant presented in Table 4.2. challengesassociated witheachareSome domestic wastewater andexcreta streams. some oftheoptionsfor source separationof and Tilley etal. (2014). looksat This section be found in,for example, Larsenetal. (2013) separating anddecentralized systems can Comprehensive ofsource- overviews andondifferenturban contexts scales. source-separated domesticwastewater odour management; pathogens; responsible for identifying institutions andtransport; Collection separation; pathogens;odour chemicals onsoils;source and ofsalinity impact (sludgeandfoam);products generation ofparallel prevent regrowth ofbacteria; Treatment required to pathogens; odour energy value; production (clogging) and transport Amount ofwater affects levels; odour may bedifficult;highpathogen andlogistics person; transport Small volumes produced per odour ammonia evaporationand inpipes; when transported precipitation andclogging riskfor mechanically; toHeavy transport Challenges whether waterborne or dry systems are Separating waste streams more appropriate, the type of resource recovery aimed at should also play a role. For Source separation is in fact a traditional way example, dilution of excreta makes recovery of handling human excreta by keeping it of concentrated nutrients less efficient; separated from other waste streams. The however, treated blackwater (see Table 4.2) systems involved can be either waterborne can be used to irrigate and fertilize farmland or dry/non-waterborne. Waterborne systems simultaneously, if this is needed. Dilution are generally divided into blackwater also affects how easy it is to produce biogas systems (which combine faeces, excreta and for energy. Some technologies urine) and brownwater systems (combining separate urine and faeces, which can greatly water and faeces only). Conventional non- increase the efficiency of nutrient recovery waterborne excreta-separating systems and pathogen reduction. The different involve different types of latrine. conveyance options – from sewerage to pit latrine emptying services, to on-site Neither type of system has traditionally composting and reuse – should also be taken been constructed for reuse. Instead they into account. deposit or infiltrate the excreta underground, which is a significant source of contamination The major challenge of resource recovery for groundwater, with negative health from more conventional, especially impacts for the population. However, both municipal, combined waterborne systems is waterborne and non-waterborne source the level of contamination. Sewerage systems separation techniques for human excreta commonly receive a mixture of wastewater have good potential for resource recovery, from, for example, residential areas, hospitals, especially if they are designed for that industries and stormwater, with potential purpose from the outset. loads of heavy metals and other toxic substances. Hence, control the quality (and Blackwater and brownwater systems composition) of these streams as close to Source separation of blackwater is a source as possible is important to facilitate conventional approach for wastewater treatment and enable safe resource recovery. management, for example with a flush toilet (often pour-flush) connected to a If waterborne piped systems are found to leach pit.11 Such a system keeps pathogen- be the most feasible but there is no direct loaded excreta separate from the immediate demand for irrigation water, it may make domestic environment (although it can more sense to concentrate the nutrients in contaminate groundwater), but is not useful sludge, making it easier to transport longer for resource recovery. However, various distances. This can be done during treatment. new types of blackwater and brownwater However, low-flushing or vacuum toilets management system more appropriate for can also help to reduce the water content at resource recovery are being implemented source. across northern (see the case study in Section 9.4 for an example from Sweden; One challenge with introducing source- and Thibodeau et al. 2014). Leading reasons separating or low-water user interfaces in for the increased interest include the fact that piped systems is that the piped system may it can be transported in piped systems, and rely on a certain volume of liquid flow to the high availability of nutrients and organic function properly. Reduced flows can increase material in blackwater (less so in brownwater, sedimentation and cause blockages and as nutrients are found mostly in urine). odour (Larsen and Gujer 2013). In this respect, Such systems can be equipped with low- or decentralized systems offer more flexibility vacuum flushing toilets, reducing the dilution and opportunities to adapt to changing of excreta. An indirect benefit is the fact that conditions (for example, urbanization) than greywater will be managed separately, which do large centralized systems. can facilitate safe water reuse – see below.

11 Leach pits are similar to pit latrine pits, but are designed so that water will percolate into the surrounding soil, rather than being retained in the faecal sludge.

47 48 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY urine alsoreduces theriskofeutrophication in faeces, noturine. Source separationof the pathogensare found overwhelmingly benefit ofseparate urinemanagement,since wastewater. Facilitating safe reuse isanother urine separately thanto managediluted most casesitismore efficientto manage This meansthatfor nutrientrecovery in the phosphorous (Friedler etal. 2013). 80 per cent ofthenitrogen andhalfof contains mostofthenutrients–about total domesticwastewater volume, but Urine makesuplessthan1 percent of Source separation ofurine possible additives. opening receiving urineandfaeces and raised pedestalorasquattingpan,withone the context. may bea The userinterface for anaerobic digestion,dependingon pits, acomposting chamber, orachamber facilitate resource recovery includeshallow contaminating groundwater. Alternatives to liquid beinginfiltrated into thesoiland a deeppit,where there isariskofexcess recovery. Conventional pitlatrinescomprise allow leveloften for ofresource acertain built primarilyto contain theexcreta, but the commonly usedpitlatrines. These are without usingwater for flushing, suchas systemsSome mixurineandfaeces but systemsforcombined excretaDry handling Figure: Based onTilley etal. 2014 FIGURE 4.3 faeces FOR

WIPERS urine FOR faeces

WIPERS urine r olt Flushtoilet Dry toilets cleansing water anal separation, the urine-diverting flush toilet separation, theurine-diverting A waterborne technology for urine needed to render itsafe. tanks for storage –usuallytheonlytreatment containers (e.g. cans)to large portable jerry to inanything it),orcollected from small and workers exposed willnotbedirectly (e.g. for irrigationoforchards where the fruit to cultivated land, combined withgreywater urinecanbechannelleddirectly Separated toilets. advantages over urine-diverting been implemented; however, theseoffer few also save water. Women’s urinalshave also available thatavoid dilutionofurineand public facilities. alternatives Butthere are dry users are themostcommon, especiallyin for thispurpose. Waterborne urinalsfor male urine, even thoughtheyare rarely installed Urinals are idealfor source separation of raised pedestalandsquattingmodelsexist. urineandfaeces separately.collect Both settings. UDDTs that are singleinterfaces andhigh-income the world inlow-, middle- UDDTs toilet (UDDT). dry are usedacross separation ofurineistheurine-diverting forThe mostcommon source userinterface waters etal. (Tervahauta 2013). if wastewater isto bereleased to receiving faeces FOR Different types of urine-diverting toilet Different typesofurine-diverting

WASHERS urine urine (UDFT), attracted some interest in Sweden that produced from baths, showers and during the 1990s, but demand has since hand basins, as well as from laundry and been low. However, UDFTs have potential for dishwashing, whether manual or by machine source separation in waterborne systems, (Morel and Diener 2006). The composition as they collect urine and faeces separately, of greywater varies greatly depending on only using water to flush away the faeces. the sources from which it is generated. Figure 4.3. shows the main basic designs of For example, greywater from kitchen sinks user interfaces for . normally has a high content of oil and food particles, while greywater from Source separation of faeces has shampoo, soaps, toothpaste, and if The quantity of faeces excreted daily by one derived from shower or baths it may also person is small compared to other domestic have traces of human excreta. Greywater has sanitation waste streams (100–350 g/person). a far lower content of solids and nutrients Since faeces contain high pathogen levels, in comparison to urine, blackwater and keeping them separate can facilitate efficient brownwater. treatment. In many cases source separation of faeces is a direct result of deliberate urine Volume-wise, greywater generation may separation; the user interface will thus be the vary greatly, from 20 to more than 200 same as for urine separation. litres per person per day, and may make up anywhere between 65 and (in the case of Brownwater can be treated similarly to houses with waterless excreta management), blackwater – for example anaerobic digestion 100 per cent of the total domestic wastewater to produce biogas and reduce pathogen stream (Morel and Diener 2006). load. Separated faeces from waterless systems can be managed with dehydration To date, resource recovery from greywater or composting. The nutrient content in these has mainly been carried out through products will not be as high without the direct reuse, especially for garden or urine, but the additional organic matter is agricultural irrigation in areas with water useful for soil conditioning. scarcity. Greywater is also sometimes reused within the household instead of new potable and other solid waste water for flushing toilets and other non- Many systems may not be able to cope with potable uses (see the case study in Section toilet paper or, especially, paper towels. 9.2). Another option being implemented These may be collected separately and in some places is recovering the heat in managed with other solid waste or added greywater to contribute to domestic heating. separately to sludge for biogas digestion or composting. Also important, for both technical and social sustainability, as 4.5 Treatment well as promoting gender equality, is to provide a safe space for menstrual hygiene A treatment system for wastewater or excreta management (MHM). However, the common and other organic waste should be designed practice of disposing of MHM products (such according to the reuse (or disposal) options as tampons and sanitary towels) in toilets is chosen. This relates not only to the physical generally problematic, raising the likelihood form of the finished product (including its of blockages and other problems, along with volume, water content etc.) but also the level possible chemical contamination of reuse of pathogen reduction and nutrient removal. products. In most cases it is preferable to For example, if wastewater is to be reused in manage menstrual waste through the solid landscape irrigation it will generally require waste management system (Kjellén et al. less treatment than if it is to be used for crop 2012). irrigation (especially if the produce is to be consumed raw and without peeling) or for Separation of greywater recycling into potable water. Greywater is domestic wastewater that does not contain significant amounts of excreta:

49 50 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY remove organic matter andothersolidsfrom content, treatment willneedto particle high standards inrespond to, for example, ofwater reuse thechosentype requiresIf Removal oforganic matter matter. to removesome pre-treatment organic irradiation). Allofthesemethodsrequire or ozone) orultraviolet light(UVgermicidal and treatment withchemicals(e.g. chlorine filtration (e.g. inbiological orinsandfilters) filters) sludge, activated trickling followed by several stages, withbiological stages(ponds, Pathogen treatments are designed often in population density. application to non-food crops inareas oflow much higherstandards thanmechanical 9.1)requires(see thecasestudyinSection example, ofpotablewater production direct degrees oflive for pathogen reduction; Differentrisk. types of reuse, however, require avoid exposinghumansandfaunato disease ofthelivereduction pathogencontent to ofwastewater types reuseMost require ordeactivationReduction ofpathogens mtbfact.cfm). from water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/ Environmental Protection (available Agency publishedbyinfo) theUS andinfactsheets toolboxManagement website (www.sswm. 2014, attheSustainableSanitationand Water technologies canbefound in Tilley etal. comprehensive reading ontreatment available isdescribedbelow. More ofthedifferentA selection techniques removal ofmicro-pollutants. • removal ofnutrients, • removal oforganic material, • ofpathogens, ordeactivation reduction • carried out: are thatmightneedto four be mainfunctions For water recovery from wastewater, there Wastewater 13 In nitrification, bacteria ammonia (NH3) orammonium(NH4+)intoconvert nitrification,bacteria nitrite andthennitrate,13 In under aerobic conditions. 12 Organic matter inwastewater quantifiedin isoften ofbiologicalterms demand(BOD),oxygen whichistheamountof dissolve 14 Struvite isaphosphate mineral thatcanfo organisms inthewater to break itdown. different nitrateconvert bacteria into nitrogen gas. rm naturallyorbeinduced by chemicalprecipitation. levels of micro-pollutants may vary greatly.levels may ofmicro-pollutants vary the sources ofwastewater, and thetypes receiving greater attention. Dependingon inwastewaterof micro-pollutants are The risksassociated with the content Removal ofmicro-pollutants stream (e.g. for struvite precipitation14). strategy to capture nutrientsfrom thewaste also gainedinterest asaresource recovery sulphates. Precipitation ofnutrients has adding additives suchasaluminiumorferric is through precipitation, achieved by approach for chemicalphosphorusremoval biological phosphorusremoval. The primary phosphorus. Acommon process isenhanced andsoluble removing bothparticle-bound Efficient removal ofphosphorus requires oxidation ditches. reactors, rotating biological and contactors systems, biofilmsystems, sequencingbatch removal technologies are sludge activated by denitrification.13Examplesofnitrogen removing nitrogen isnitrification followed The mainbiological treatment process for methods are available for nutrientremoval. Both biological andchemicaltreatment waters, where there isariskofeutrophication. potable water –andfor release to receiving as groundwater recharge, toilet flushing, and not thecasefor ofreuse othertypes –such benefits from ahighnutrient content, thisis While wastewater reuse inagriculture clearly Removal ofnutrients anaerobic sludgeblanketreactor. and biogasgeneration,suchastheupflow combine bothorganic matter reduction high-BOD12 content) canalsofavourably filters. systemsSome (for wastewater with sludge, anaerobic digesters, andtrickling systems are anaerobic ponds, activated available. Examplesofavailable treatment there isawiderange oftechnologies is discharged to water bodies;consequently, in conventional systems where wastewater matter hasbeenthemajortreatment priority the wastewater stream. Removal oforganic In denitrification, In d oxygen neededfor Substances such as hydrocarbons, heavy quality (reducing the odour and the live metals, organochlorides and pharmaceuticals pathogen content). It is common to reduce may be present in waste streams. The the volume of sludge through dewatering,15 biological and chemical processes in more making it easier to manage. The simplest conventional treatment plants may partially approach for sludge treatment is drying beds, remove micro-pollutants, but to enhance which can be either planted or unplanted removal technologies such as ozonation, (Strande et al. 2014). reversed osmosis and activated carbon are commonly applied. Source-separated waste

Treatment of sewage sludge Greywater treatment A by-product of domestic or industrial The type of resource recovery aimed wastewater treatment is semi-solid sewage for will guide the appropriate greywater sludge. The management, and especially the treatment approach. A wide range reuse, of sewage sludge from wastewater of options are available, from the advanced treatment is often complex, since there may (e.g. systems that recycle greywater for be an accumulation of micro-pollutants. One toilet flushing within the same building) solution that has proved efficient to address to low-tech natural treatment systems, this problem is upstream pollution control, such as constructed wetlands. Different which reduces the micro-pollutant content in types of constructed wetlands have become the original waste stream (see Chapter 6). common for greywater treatment in decentralized systems, often in a context Anaerobic digestion is a widely used where the treated greywater is destined for approach for treating sludge, converting irrigation of green areas or kitchen gardens. most of the easily degradable part of the To avoid disturbance in the treatment organic matter in the sludge into methane processes or creating health issues in reuse, (which can be captured as biogas), and at the it is important to reduce the usage of same time generating a residue with higher chemicals (e.g. non-degradable, phosphorus-

Decentralized wastewater treatment plant with constructed wetland, Cochabamba, Bolivia. Photo: Kim Andersson Photo: x

15 Dewatering is reduction of the water content of sludge, for example using a centrifuge, a filter bed (or mechanical filtration system) or evaporation.

51 52 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY incineration. lime orammonia,andthermaltreatment or material suchasash, treatment withalkaline means to reduce pathogensare chemical ormicroorganisms. worms, larvae Other addition oforganic residues orby adding ensuring ahightemperature through the composting process canbeenhanced by itmore suitableforand making reuse. The ofcomposting, reducingsome sort pathogens commonly treated through dehydration or toilets is faeces fromSource-separated dry Faeces treatment from wastewater treatment. similar to thosefor sewagesludgegenerated are farpreferable. The treatment optionsare Treating thesludgeandresource recovery resulting sanitationsystems. indysfunctional into receiving waters) ornotmanagedatall, to bemismanaged(e.g. dumpeduntreated common isunfortunately for faecalsludge It vessel. thecollection periodically emptying Faecal involves sludgemanagementoften user behaviours. system, whatprocesses were involved, and of faecalsludgedependsonthedesign ofthe (Strande etal. 2014). andquantity The quality water, andeven greywater orflushingwater and may alsocontain toilet paper, analrinsing storage contains system.16 faeces andurine, It digested, and dependingonthecollection Faecal sludgemay beraw orpartially Faecal sludgetreatment 9.4). available (seethecase studyinSection andureasuch aswet-composting treatment also more recently developed technologies process may beappropriate butthere are for treatment. Ananaerobic treatment isgenerallypathogen reduction thepriority orbrownwater,managing blackwater reuse isthemainreasonIf for separately Blackwater andbrownwater treatment among users. to becomplemented by awareness raising products. Hence, technical measures need biodegradable cleaningandhygiene rich detergents), andwhere possibleuse 16 Faecal orsemi-solidsgenerated indifferenttypes ofon-site sludgeistheslurry sanitationsystem, inalat and collected septic tankorsimilar. human recreation andwildlife habitat. treatment, for theycanprovide opportunities thatbesides of thesesystems isthefact described above. Apotential addedbenefit or several ofthespecifictreatment priorities ofone enhancingthequality stage, further main treatment stageoralate “polishing” 2014). Naturaltreatment systems canbethe management requirements (Adrados etal. have low set-up costs andlow operation and wetlands, whichcanbehighly efficientand treatment systems, for exampleconstructed to stress thepotential ofnatural is important it outthesefunctions, processes existto carry While many different technologies and Natural treatment systems et al. 2015). and dehydration (Larsenetal. 2013;Senecal distillation, chemicalstruvite precipitation including combined nitrificationand urine volumes are therefore beingexplored, centralized to reduce management.Methods volume, urinecreates logistical challengesfor etal. 2010).Dueto its and sixmonths(Richert faster), buttheynormallyrangebetween one (higher temperatures meanpathogensdieoff on system set-up andambienttemperature depending Recommended storage timesvary optimally. as possiblefor thistreatment to work thattheurineisasundiluted isimportant It pathogens.that raiseitspHanddeactivate processes occur intheurineduringstorage storage insealedcontainers. Chemical The maintreatment methodfor urineis Urine and maintenance. facilitate (andpay for) long-term operation of theintended users, to andtheircapacity into account therequirements andinterests needs, islong-term use. This meanstaking andtheresourcecontext management management systems, besidesthelocal and designing sanitationandwastewater A third keyconsideration inplanning 4.6 for thelongterm Planning anddesigning rine pit,cesspool, FIGURE 4.4 A decision-making process with stakeholder participation

define problem

assess assemble performance design team

identify mechanisms for continuous participation operate initial request for elucidate identify constraints public input stakeholder values stakeholder participation share knowledge brainstorm construct and identify criteria implement for success

provide evaluate feedback alternatives

developed detailed identify potential design solutions

identify optimal solution

Figure: Guest et al. 2009

User and other stakeholder involvement throughout the entire planning and implementation cycle even more important, Many sanitation and wastewater since new technological and logistical management master plans focus on set-ups may be required. These may also put infrastructure, and pay little attention to new demands on users and O&M personnel; the users and other system management for example, in keeping waste streams stakeholders (Parkinson et al. 2014). separate. Even greater attention is needed in order to achieve improved user-friendliness However, it is a mistake to ignore the human and facilitate correct use of the system. dimension of the system; in particular, the user interface and any other requirement Specific user training, as well as clear (visual) for user involvement – for example handling instructions on how to use the system, may composted faeces – should address the also be required. specific needs and expectations of the user group. If not, there is a high risk that A broad range of stakeholders need to be the system will not be used, or will be involved in developing strategies for waste used incorrectly, causing it to malfunction. handling, treatment and reuse. Participatory This is especially important in low-income processes and training also help to build context where users may have little previous awareness and ownership of sanitation and experience of sanitation facilities and wastewater management systems. hygienic sanitation habits. Besides the more technical functions – Participatory planning and the involvement from cleaning and emptying latrine pits of users and other stakeholders in system and septic tanks to fixing broken toilets management (such as those who will be or leaking sewerage pipes – O&M also responsible for O&M) are crucial if their needs includes the administrative and institutional and expectations are to be reflected in system components required to achieve sustained design (see Figure 4.4. for illustration of how functioning of the different components stakeholders can be involved in decision- along the entire system (Bräustetter 2007). making processes around a sanitation system). The technological complexity of the system and its components will determine the Improved resource management, including level of training required for the various resource recovery, makes participation O&M functions. Key factors to achieving

53 54 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY retrofitting thehardware later. is notimmediately used, compared to installing anewsystem, even ifthiscapability the hardware for source separationwhen it isrelatively easyandcheapto buildin resource demandsover time. For example, ofthesystem,flexibility adapt to changingto Furthermore, to consider the itisimportant posssible climate scenarios. inarangeof so thattheyare functional to develop sanitationandwastewater systems ofclimate change, itisadvisable uncertainties floods (seeAndersson2014a).Given the toilets canavoid during sludgeoverflowing and floods. For example, flood-proofed, raised events suchaspower cuts, water shortages designed duringandafter to keepfunctioning 2013). Furthermore, thesystem shouldbe scale decentralized systems (LarsenandGujer which may besignificant, especiallyinsmall- withvariationsinload,to keepfunctioning functionality. The system needsto beable parameter determining long-term Technical robustness isalsoanimportant Technical robustness (Strande etal. 2014). health andenvironmental protection monitoring plans, for exampleonsafety, are constantly available; andestablishing ensuring humanandfinancial resources O&M considerations into thedesign process; include:integratingsustained performance treatment-technologies). The matrix isaimed decision-support-matrix-for-wastewater- www.iwa-network.org/project/Matrix development isthe Wastewater Technology One promising tool currently under processes. and participatory replace) detailedtechnical feasibility studies 2014). These cancomplement to (butcannot of thetechnologies (e.g. Chamberlainetal. and combination to assistintheselection systems andtools availabledecision-support recovery. Fortunately, there are some systems, especiallythosefor resource sanitation andwastewater management be takeninto consideration whendeveloping As thischapter shows, many needto factors 4.7 Decision-support tools Decision-support sanitation technologies andsystems. which provides ofrelevant agoodoverview Systems and Technologies etal. 2014), (Tilley based ontheCompendium ofSanitation sanitation chaininto account. The tool is an earlystage, since ittakestheentire outputs ofthesystem canbedefinedat considered inthetool, where desirable Resourceand localcontext. recovery is economic socialaspects, aspects, aspects, wastewater systems. covers It environmental countries developing urban middle-income at decisionmakersanddonorsinlow- and KEY MESSAGES System design shouldaddress • Awiderangeoftechnical options • Achieving technical functionality • and available waste volumes. analysis oflocalresource demand this system andbeyond requires an management andrecovery within achieving improved resource behavioural addition, perspective. In appropriate from acultural and user groups, includingbeing the diverse needsofthedifferent treatment priorities). on resource recovery andassociated treatment technologies (depending separating approaches, and waterborne systems, source- on-site), waterborne ornon- (centralized, decentralized, off-site, variables includeoperational levels systems more sustainable. Key make asanitationandwastewater and adapted to to thecontext are available thatcanbeused both current andprojected. geographical andsocio-cultural), determinantscontext-specific (e.g. disposal orreuse), andaddressing all treatment,and storage, transport, containment chain (userinterface, designing alongtheentire sanitation management requires planningand of thesanitationandwastewater 5. PROTECTING AND PROMOTING HUMAN HEALTH

A fundamental function of all sanitation and E. coli O157:H7, in both developed and wastewater management systems is and developing countries, with dire social to prevent human contact with hazardous and economic costs. pathogens and chemicals, even when the main aim is resource recovery. Well-designed In some communities that practise open resource recovery systems not only protect defecation or with poor access to properly health but also promote it by contributing functioning sanitation, hygiene and to food and water security. wastewater management systems there is a range of constant health threats, including Open defecation and poor sanitation diarrhoeal disease and helminth infections. and wastewater management facilitate the These infectious diseases are associated with spread of diseases caused by pathogenic chronic malnutrition, child mortality, and lost bacteria, viruses, protozoa and parasites. work and school days. In addition, persistent They do this by exposing people to exposure can lead to undernutrition and pathogens in untreated or inadequately cognitive impairment. It has been estimated treated excreta, either through direct that improved sanitation – with its focus on contact or ingestion, or indirectly through protecting the user household – can reduce contaminated water, food or soil. The rates of diarrhoeal disease by an estimated negative outcomes can be multiplied 35 per cent (Fewtrell et al. 2005; Waddington during natural disasters such as floods and et al. 2009). storms, which are expected to become more frequent and extreme in some regions, Most of the different types of waste that due to climate change. Thus sanitation, enter wastewater streams may contain combined with good hygiene practices, pathogens along with chemicals hazardous is fundamental to breaking the cycle of to public health (see Table 5.1). Exposure to waterborne disease. contaminants can occur at multiple points in sanitation and wastewater systems – not According to a recent estimate 842,000 only at the user interface (e.g. the household people – the vast majority young children – environment) but also during transport, die every year due to water-related diarrhoeal storage, treatment and resource reuse (if diseases, and a large share of these deaths the resources have not been rendered safe can be directly attributed to inadequate through treatment). Health protection in sanitation (Prüss-Ustün et al. 2014). Faecal sustainable sanitation and wastewater contamination has been implicated in major management thus needs to encompass the disease outbreaks such as cholera, typhoid entire system.

55 56 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY directly in the urine itself or through contact intheurineitselforthroughdirectly contact contain somepathogens, eitherexcreted While fresh urineisgenerallysterile itmay the environment. persistent in because theireggsare very are ofmajorconcern insanitationsystems (Shuval etal. 1989).For instance, helminths human immunity, periods andlatency minimum infective dose, to induce ability as theirpersistence intheenvironment, such causing illnessalsodependsonfactors ofthesebiological hazards in importance Giardia the parasiticprotozoa levels ofthecommon pathogen human excreta, high may contain particularly ofthepathogensfoundthe vastmajority in the source population.Faeces, whichcontain streams dependsonthelevel in ofinfection The loadofpathogensindifferent waste Pathogens 5.1 TABLE 5.1 Organic andemerging chemicalcontaminants, • metals, Heavy e.g. arsenic, cadmium,lead, • Chemicals Parasites, e.g. ascaris(roundworm), ancylostoma • Protozoa, e.g. Entamoebahistolytica, Giardia • e.g. Bacteria, Salmonella,Shigella, • Viruses, e.g. hepatitisA,rotavirus, enteroviruses • aadExamplesofpossiblehealthimpacts Pathogens Hazard Hazards inwaste streams metabolites, benzene, oralcontraceptives aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), DDT and e.g. polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),polycyclic mercury, nickel trichuris(whipworm)(hookworm), parvum lamblia Cryptosporidium Campylobacter,cholera Vibrio , particularly inruralareas. , particularly The relative Cryptosporidium Ascaris and and Pathogens andchemicalhazards inwastewater from hospitals is of particular concern. from hospitalsisofparticular resistance thisregard, genes. In wastewater potentially transferable carrying enteric bacteria of reservoirs treatment plantsare important sewage (Silvaetal. 2006). Thus, wastewater coliform existintreated bacteria thaninraw ofmultipleantibiotic-resistant proportions Worryingly, there isevidence thatgreater showering. or diapers, toilet handwashingafter use, and attributable to thewashingofsoiledclothing contributors oforganisms offaecalorigin, and washingmachinesare theprincipal sources,Other suchasshowers, handbasins (Eriksson etal. 2002; Lazarova etal. 2003). streams, dueto thepresence offood particles contaminated ofhouseholdgreywater show thatdishwater themost isoften Reviews ofmicrobial pathogensingreywater causes typhoid. such inasthecaseof pose athreat rates wheninfection are high– with faeces.theseonly Generallyspeaking Acute orchronic toxicity (e.g. • Acute orchronic toxicity (e.g. • Ascariasis, anaemia,diarrhoea, • Amoebicdysentery, diarrhoea, • dysentery, Diarrhoea,bacillary cholera • hepatitis, Infectious diarrhoea,vomiting, • carcinogenic, onreproduction) impacts damage) neurological andkidney abdominal pain malabsorption paralysis, meningitis, fever and theirpotential healthimpacts Salmonella typhi Salmonella , which , which Chemical hazards system and waste streams. They include users, workers responsible for operation and Chemicals such as heavy metals, maintenance of the system, populations pharmaceutical residues or their metabolic living nearby, farmers using recovered by-products, endocrine disruptors, and resources (e.g. sludge and water), and people personal care products may also be present consuming agricultural products grown with in different wastewater streams. High levels recovered resources. For more on health risk of pharmaceutical residues have been assessments associated with components found in the influent and effluent of several of sanitation and wastewater systems see wastewater treatment plants in the United Stenström et al. (2011). Kingdom (Zhou et al. 2009). On-site sanitation and wastewater systems Depending on household water use, greywater may contain as many as 900 On-site sanitation systems can include different organic chemical compounds both waterless and flush toilets, and may (Eriksson et al. 2002). For example, Palmqvist be combined with greywater-separating and Hanæus (2005) found polycyclic systems. Risks of exposure to pathogens in aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs; by-products waterborne on-site sanitation systems are of incomplete combustion, many toxic), not significantly different from those in dry phthalates (plastic additives that are systems. Critical points of pathogen exposure suspected to have a variety of negative health risk are: effects), and triclosan (an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent) among others in greywater • user interface, such as a toilet; from a Swedish source-separated sanitation • storage and on-site treatment system. Their study also found the same technologies, such as simple pits, compounds in blackwater (flushing water ventilated pits, or septic tanks; mixed with urine and faeces). • technologies to collect and convey sludge off site; The health risks associated with chemical • technologies for sludge treatment; contaminants from sanitation systems are • reuse/disposal. insignificant, however, compared with those associated with pathogens (WHO 2006). The pathogen flow and main points of Accordingly, this chapter focuses on microbial microbial pathogen exposure risk in a hazards. Environmental hazards from waterborne on-site sanitation system are chemical pollution are discussed in Chapter 6. shown in Figure 5.1. Infection risks may vary significantly at the different points. For 5.2 Exposure pathways instance, in the case of urine-diverting toilets, and health risks appropriate cleaning and management regimes are needed to reduce risk of disease transmission, such as from faeces that Exposure to microbial hazards can happen remain on the sides of the bowl. In addition, at different points in a wastewater or exposure to pathogens can occur during the sanitation system. They may occur during emptying of septic tanks or pits, especially normal operation (e.g. due to improper use where done manually without any protective and operation, lack of maintenance); during clothing. Rulin (1997) showed that workers partial or full system failure (e.g. power failure, emptying pit latrines were twice as likely to equipment breakdown, faulty infrastructure, be infected with Hepatitis A virus as workers system overloading); or seasonally or due to engaged in non-excreta-related activities. climatic factors (e.g. flooding). The use of leach pits for storage, particularly Depending on the type of system and the in combination with pour-flush toilets, nature of the exposure event, different can result in the contamination of the groups of people may be at risk, usually community’s groundwater (Molin et al. through direct or indirect contact with the 2010). Flush toilets connected to septic

57 58 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY groundwater or surface water contaminationgroundwater orsurface accidental ingestionofgreywater by workers; in agreywater-reuse system chaininclude Typical scenarios for exposure to pathogens 9.2.) recycling inBrazil inSection case studyonbuilding-level greywater recycling are shown inFigure 5.2. the (See points inanon-site system withgreywater pathogenflowThe and exposure typical transmission. water bodiescanalsoleadto disease septic tanksorpitsinto opendrainsand rains.during heavy Discharges from BassIsland,contamination inSouth Ohio andgroundwaterseptic tankleakage Fong etal. found anassociation between rainfall:foris higherduringheavy example, and Custodio 1991). The contamination risk microorganisms (Fong etal. 2007;Falkland resulted indiseaseoutbreaks withenteric in groundwater contamination thathas addition, simplepitshave beenimplicated result ingroundwater contamination. In tanks thatare notproperly sealedmay also FIGURE 5.1 Figure: RazakSeidu E1: crops (workersandconsumers); Usersandcleanersoftoilet; F1 F2 E1 E4: E2: F4 Consumption ofcontaminatedsurfaceandgroundwater Ingestion ofwastewater(workers); PIT Groundwater Discharge toriver Open drains waterborne on-site sanitation andgreywater chain E2 Typical pathogen flows and exposure points: the choice oftreatment technologies may application orrecipient oftheeffluent, and drainage. Depending ontheintended alsotakeinwastewateroften from industries to largeconnection networks ofsewers. They chains combine black- andgreywater, with and reuse. Traditional centralized wastewater treatment and disposalorresource recovery households to acentralized pointfor wastewater from and transport to collect Centralized wastewater systems are designed Centralized systems adequate treatment ingreywater recycling. Stenström 2003). This underlinestheneedfor high rotavirus infection risks(Ottoson and faecal load, thesystem posedunacceptably system inSweden found that,despite alow greywaterfor source-separated atypical health riskassessmentthatwasconducted untreated greywater. For example, amicrobial and consumption ofcrops irrigated with crop irrigation orlandscapeirrigation; during useofgreywater for toilet flushing, inhalationofaerosolswith greywater; F5 Water treatment plant E3: Ingestion ofsludgeandconsumption WELL F3 F6 Pathogen flow Exposure points Overflow/infiltration Greywater Blackwater E3 E4 F E FIGURE 5.2 Typical pathogen flows and exposure points: on-site sanitation system with greywater recycling

Toilet flushing Blackwater E1 Greywater Exposure points E

Pathogen flow F

F2 Storage F1 tanks Treatment E4 E2 E3

F3 Groundwater F5 F4 recharge E5 Community drinking Treatment water supply

E1: Users and cleaners of toilet; E2: Ingestion of raw greywater (workers); E3: Ingestion of treated greywater (workers); E4: Ingestion of greywater and consumption of crops (workers and consumers); E5: Consumption of greywater recharged water

Figure: Razak Seidu range from a simple mechanical process to infected with Ascaris and Trichuris than those an advanced combination of mechanical, living in areas without sewer networks. microbial and chemical treatment processes. An expansion of the sewer network in Figure 5.3 shows a centralized wastewater Salvador to more households also reduced treatment system configuration including the prevalence of diarrhoeal disease exposure points for the transmission of among children by 21 per cent (Barreto et microbial pathogens. al. 2007).

During wastewater transport, the In wastewater treatment plants, workers may surrounding community can be exposed inhale pathogens (see e.g. Fracchia et al. to microbial pathogens, especially during 2006; Westrell et al. 2004). Epidemiological flooding or the maintenance of pipe studies assessing viral infection risk among networks. In Gaza, children under five years workers in wastewater treatment plants old living in an area with poorly constructed have shown conflicting results. In a cross- sewers were found to be four times more sectional survey, no excess infection risk likely to be infected with Ascaris during for Hepatitis A virus was found among winter flooding compared to those in areas plant workers in a large US city (Trout et al. without a sewer network (Smith 1993). 2000). In France, however, wastewater plant workers were found to be 2.2 times more However, in general, communities with sewer likely to be infected with Hepatitis A than connection are generally less likely to be non-wastewater treatment plant workers exposed to pathogens than communities (Cadilhac et al. 1996). without. A cross-sectional study in the city of Salvador, Brazil, revealed that children aged 5–14 living in areas with sewers were between 1.2 and 1.7 times less likely to be

59 60 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY recovery and reuse income countries, which creates major wastewater, especiallyinlow- andmiddle- is frequently unregulated anduses untreated widespread ofwater reuse. types However, it Agricultural irrigationisoneofthemost Wastewater irrigation treatment. through appropriate managementand and wastewater thatneedto beavoided exposure to pathogenspresent inexcreta safely. There are arangeofhealthrisksfrom and wastewater managementifitisdone ofsustainablesanitation considered part other benefits. However, thiscanonlybe and food security, alongwitharange of improve healththrough improved water purposes offers to many opportunities wastewater andexcreta for agricultural Recovering andreusing resources from Agricultural reuse 5.3 Figure: RazakSeidu E6 E5 E1: Figure 5.3 Pathogen flow Exposure points Infiltration Pipe water Sludge Stormwater Wastewater : Directorindirectconsumptionofpotablewater : Exposuretowastewater/sludgeandconsumptionofirrigated/fertilizedcrops(workers,communityconsumers); Usersandcleanersoftoilet; Health protection in Health protection F1 F E E1 E2 and3 F2 F3 : Exposuretowastewater/sludge(workers); E2 E3 E7 : Exposureatlandfillsite(workersandcommunity) F5 to river Discharge Groundwater Typical pathogen flows and exposure points: F4 greater rangeof wastewater-irrigated vegetables canface a etal.2007; Rutkowski 2007).Consumers of et al. 2008;Blumenthal etal. 2001; Trang without protective clothing(e.g. Seidu or poorlytreated wastewater for irrigation amongfarmersusinguntreatedinfections infection, diarrhoealdiseaseandskin Pakistan have revealed ahighriskofhelminth Studies from Ghana, Vietnam, Mexico and have undergone (ifany). ofthe treatment the efficiency reuse products health riskdependsonthelevel, and type the agricultural sites. The level ofmicrobial raw); populationslivingincloseproximity to vegetables eaten been applied(particularly wastewater orexcreta-based have products consumersproducts; ofcrops to which applying thewastewater orexcreta-based groups atriskofexposure are farmers thecaseofagricultural reuse,In themain al. 2016). consumers ofthecrops et produced (Dickin health risksbothfor agricultural workers and centralized wastewater treatment system E4 E4 E5 : Recreational use,e.g. swimming(users); F5 F6 E. coli Landfill and other users O157:H7, rotavirus, E7 E6 and drinking water supply Community norovirus and helminth infection risks the pathogen and pollutant content to (Seidu et al. 2008; Barker et al. 2013; Seidu et levels where the wastewater can be safely al. 2013). One study estimated 0.68 episodes handled and crops grown with it can be of diarrhoea per year associated with eaten with only normal hygiene precautions. consuming wastewater-irrigated lettuce in However, if this level of treatment is not urban Ghana (Seidu and Drechsel 2010). To feasible, lower-standard wastewater can be be weighed against the microbial health used in combination with awareness raising, risk, however, Trang (2007) found that stricter precautions during application and despite the prevailing risks of helminth cultivation, and improved hygiene in the infection children living in an area with handling of the produce. Also, standards for wastewater reuse area had significantly food crops will be higher than for non-food better nutritional status than those in areas crops. The US Environmental Protection using river water. Agency has elaborated comprehensive guidelines for water reuse (see below, which Less attention has been paid to the are based on international experiences and potential health risks to populations living also partly on the WHO’s guidelines for the close to wastewater-irrigated farms. One safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater important means of exposure for these (WHO 2006). populations is aerosols from sprinkler irrigation with untreated wastewater. One Source-separated faeces study found that children living within 600– In the case of a non-waterborne sanitation 1000 m of the sprinkler wastewater-irrigated system, the direct use of untreated excreta field had a two-fold excess risk of clinical in agriculture presents the most significant enteric infection during summer months, health risk, particularly for farmers directly while the average risk for the year was engaged in the use of excreta from dry pits much lower (WHO 2006). and consumers of excreta-fertilized crops. Several studies have found high risks of In order to ensure that wastewater infection among both farm workers applying irrigation is safe, one approach is to treat the dried but otherwise untreated faeces and applied wastewater sufficiently to reduce consumers of food crops grown in soil

Unsafe faecal sludge management by “froggers” in the Kibera slum, Nairobi, Kenyan. Photo: Reuters / Antony Njuguna

61 62 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY took downwind aerosol samplesfrom the biosolids landapplication sites. The study associated withthebioaerosols from Class B (2005) evaluated healthrisk thecommunity in anationalstudytheUSA, Brooks etal. sensations ineyes, throat and lungs. However, rashesandburning complained aboutskin oftheapplicationsites and lived within1km Canada andthe USA. The affected residents fieldsin close to sewagesludge-applied amongpopulationsliving and mortality ahigherincidence ofdisease (2002) reported biosolid applicationisunclear. Lewis etal. The riskto surrounding communities from and d)aquaticotherwildlife. c) consumers food ofbiosolid-fertilized crops; biosolid orsludgeapplicationsite; workers; b)populationslivingcloseto the land applicationofbiosolidsincludea)farm and exposure scenarios associated withthe with wastewater reuse, themainriskgroups USEPAB (for restricted useonly; 2003).As (which canbesoldfor publicuse)andClass classifiesbiosolidsinto ClassA Agency content, theUSEnvironmental Protection referred to asbiosolids. Based onmicrobial wastewater treatment plantsissometimes Digested orstabilized sludgefrom Biosolids 2006). potentially someparasites (WHO a minimalriskfor allpathogens, except on climaticconditions, generallypresents stored for 12to 18months, depending reduce thepathogenriskfrom faeces. Faeces However, storage cangreatly extended Jiménez. 2007). 2004; (Westrell Trang etal. 2010; 2007;Seidu to whichdriedfaeces hadbeenapplied microorganisms, somelivingonplantroots, remove nutrientsfrom theeffluent.Photo: Organica wastewater ofalow-energy Part treatment systembasedaround acascade ofbiological stages. Biofilmsof with laundry greywater.with laundry greywater thanfrom eating lettuce irrigated eating lettuce irrigated withbathroom the norovirus infection riskwaslower from against thepractice). The study found that with greywater (despite government advice grown lettuce irrigated thathasbeendirectly Australia, to assessthe risksofeatinghome- et al. (2013)carriedoutastudyinMelbourne, source ofthegreywater. For example, Barker dependingonthe although risksmay vary Greywater isgenerally low inpathogens, Source-separated greywater advocated itsuseasa crop fertilizer. and reusing urinewere acceptably low, and the healthrisksfrom source-separating (4°C orlower). The studyconcluded that unstored orstored attoo low atemperature rotavirus infections whentheurinewaseither low (<10 use ofurineasacrop were fertilizer quite scenarios. The microbial risksrelated to the was acceptably low for arangeofexposure ingesting urinestoreddirectly for 1–6 months concluded thatthemicrobial healthriskfrom assessment inSweden (Höglundetal. 2012) both handlingandagricultural reuse. An of urineposesmuchlower in healthrisk, Compared withfaecalsludge, thereuse Source-separated urine field applicationoffaecalsludge. exposure to aerosolized rotavirus duringthe (2010)foundSeidu alow infection riskfrom A similarfindingwasmadeinGhana,where found to bebelow WHO target values. operations. The was annualriskofinfection Class Bbiosolids, alongwithbackground loading, unloadingandlandapplicationof - 3 perexposure), except for possible However, as a rule, treatment of greywater is potable reuse schemes may not completely critical, irrespective of the source if it is to be remove microbial pathogens (Gennaccaro used for irrigating vegetables consumed raw. et al. 2003; Rose et al. 1996). This means that even though there have not been any Potable reuse reported outbreaks, such schemes must be robust to avoid any potential failures that can The highest safety standards are necessary significantly affect consumers. when recovered water is to be used for drinking. Studies of the microbial health risks associated with direct and indirect potable 5.4 Health risk management wastewater reuse schemes are limited. The few studies that have been undertaken Over the years several risk management have not shown a statistically significant approaches have been implemented to association with excess disease incidence or optimize sanitation systems to reduce or outbreaks. An ecological study of the health eliminate pathogens in wastewater; and risks associated with the consumption of restrict human exposure (contact, inhalation water from the Windhoek potable reuse or ingestion) to pathogens in the sanitation scheme (see the case study in Section 9.1) system chain. concluded that diarrhoeal disease prevalence was associated with socio-economic factors, The most widely used health risk but not water supply (NRC 1998). Other management approach in sanitation studies have found no significant relationship systems is multi-barrier risk management. between microbial health risks and the More recently the sanitation safety planning consumption of water from direct or indirect (SSP) approach has been developed by the potable reuse schemes. WHO to facilitate the implementation of risk management strategies by stakeholders in The low health risk does not, however, mean the sanitation sector. These risk management that potable reuse schemes are completely approaches are briefly described below with immune to failures that might lead to disease reference to specific case studies. outbreaks. Failure events (e.g. inadequate treatment or complete failure in a treatment Multi-barrier approach step) that have triggered disease outbreaks in regular drinking water supply systems The multi-barrier approach involves can also occur in advanced potable reuse interventions (barriers) to human contact schemes. For instance, studies have shown with pathogens at the different potential that many of the treatment methods in exposure points in the sanitation chain,

Figure 5.4 A multi-barrier approach to agricultural reuse of urine

Greywater

Source-separated faeces Pre-application measures

z

Post-harvest measures A multi-barrier approach to urine recyTaking samples for quater quality sampling, Bihar, India. Photo: Rajive Ranjan

Figure: Based on Richert et al. 2010

63 64 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Source: BasedonUS EPA 2012a reuse Africa, schemesinSouth Namibia(see successfully implemented inpotablewater national guidelines. The approach hasbeen standards andcompliance withlocalor controlled to ensure consistent water quality treatment steps are carefully monitored and amulti-barrierapproach,In thetechnical approach for agricultural reuse ofurine. chain. Figure 5.4shows amulti-barrier and attitudinalchanges)alongthesanitation barriers (improved andbehavioural practices combination oftreatment andnon-treatment involve aseriesoftreatment barriersora groups, themulti-barrierapproach may system, microbial exposure pointsandrisk and/or reuse. of Dependingonthetype atthestagesofdisposal, release particularly TABLE 5.2 Cost End uses Processes exposure human levels of Acceptable

Sedimentation recommended None treatment Primary + + ++++ +++ + ++ + ++

treatment Secondary Industrial cooling Industrial augmentation habitat, stream Wetlands, wildlife aquifers non-potable recharge of Groundwater and disinfection Biological oxidation impoundments landscape Restricted non-food crops of Irrigation vineyards of orchards and irrigation Surface Table 5.2 summarizes USEPA guidelineson example ofafit-for-purpose approach. microbial level quality (seeabove) isanother The treatment ofbiosolidsto ClassAorB strategiescost-effective (USEPA 2012a). USA andAustralia, andhelpsinselecting approach inseveral ispractised states inthe risks intheintended useofwastewater. This specific potential health(orenvironmental) The degree oftreatment iscalibrated to the referred to asthe types of waters orspecific reuse) is commonly of wastewater (e.g. discharge into receiving intended fate ofthewater orotherfractions Designing treatment according to the the USA. 9.1),Australia and the casestudyinSection + ++++ +++ and disinfection removal, filtration chemical nutrient biological or coagulation, Chemical Industrial systemsIndustrial impoundment recreational Unrestricted Food crop irrigation Vehicle washing Toilet flushing irrigation and golfcourse Landscape disinfection Filtration and be appropriate what level after oftreatment? What typesofwastewater reuse might fit-for-purpose potable reuse. augmentation and water reservoir Surface of potableaquifers Groundwater recharge including: potablereuses,Indirect treatment etc. processes, soilaquifer advanced oxidation reverse osmosis, Activated carbon, treatment Advanced approach. Efficacy of treatment and non-treatment interventions at TABLE 5.3 different critical points of the “farm-to-fork” chain

Risk mitigation Pathogen log Comments Primary target measure reductiona risk group

Treatment

Wastewater 1.6 Pathogen reduction Farmers exposed to treatment depends on the wastewater type and degree Consumers of crops of treatment technology selected

On-farm options

Alternative 6–7 In Ghana, Farmers exposed land and water authorities to wastewater source supported urban farmers by drilling Consumers wells. In Benin farmers were offered alternative land with access to safer water sources

Crop restriction 6–7 Depends on (a) Consumers (i.e. no food effectiveness of crops eaten local enforcement uncooked) of crop restriction, b) comparative profit margin of the alternative crop(s)

On-farm treatment:

Three-tank 1–2 One pond is being Consumers and system filled by the farmer, farmers one is settling and the settled water from the third is being used for irrigation

Simple 0.5–1 Sedimentation for Consumers and sedimentation ~18 hours farmers

Simple 1–3 Performance filtration depends on filtration system used

Pathogen die-off In line with WHO Raw faecal sludge Farmers and people (faecal sludge) (2006) used in cereal farming living in close in Ghana should be proximity to sludge dewatered on-farm for: farms ≥ 60 days or ≥ 90 days depending on the application method (spread vs. pit) to minimize occupational health risk.

65 66 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY reduction inthenumberofpathogens, a2-logreduction isa100-fold(or 99.9 percent) reduction, andsoon. ª Log (forlogarithm) reduction isaway ofmeasuringpathogenelimination.A 1-logreduction isaten-fold(or 90 per cent) etal. 2010;Seidu Sources: 2013;Mara Seidu 2010;US EPA 2012a TABLE 5.3 In-kitchen produceIn-kitchen –preparation options Post-harvest optionsatlocal markets Method ofwastewater application: (wastewater) Pathogen die-off disinfection Produce peeling Produce prior sale preparation Produce splashing of Reduction irrigation Low-cost drip irrigation Furrow measure mitigation Risk cooking cooking Produce storage baskets Overnight 1–2 2–3 1–3 2–3 Fruits, root crops 2 6–7 0.5–2 perday 0.5–1 reductiona Pathogen log 1–2 2–4 1–2

different criticalpoints ofthe “farm-to-fork” chain Efficacy of treatmentEfficacy andnon-treatment interventionsat reduced and yieldmay be Crop density cooked food diet andpreference for Options dependsonlocal Comments which canbeminimized) to crop surfaces, particles adds contaminated soil cans are used(splashing splashing whenwatering Farmers trainedto reduce without overnight storage) or sellingfresh produce overnight storage insacks baskets (ratherthan overnight storage in produceSelling after clean water solution andrinsingwith appropriate disinfectant vegetables andfruitwith Washing saladcrops, high-growing crops for4-log unitreduction low-growing crops for2-log unitreduction leaves oncabbage, lettuce c) Removing theouter with runningtapwater vegetables and fruits b) Washing saladcrops, with cleanwater vegetables and fruit a) Washing saladcrops, climate, crop etc) type (valuedependson harvest irrigation cessation before through support Die-off Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers risk group target Primary continued... BOX 5 .1 $

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness $ $ of interventions for wastewater irrigation in urban Ghana

In urban Ghana, diarrhoeal diseases associated with the consumption of wastewater- irrigated lettuce account for 12,000 DALYs, representing about 10 per cent of the diarrhoeal disease burden in the country. A study assessed several treatment and non-treatment interventions for their cost-effectiveness in reducing diarrhoeal disease among consumers of the crop. The treatment intervention included the rehabilitation of existing wastewater treatment plants to improve the microbial quality of irrigation water for farmers. The non-treatment interventions focused on the farms and post- harvest points (kitchens and restaurants where wastewater-irrigated lettuce salad are prepared); and aimed at stimulating good risk management practices at those points through a campaign.

The study found that, depending on the risk management practices used at different stages, between 41 and 92 per cent of the diarrhoeal disease burden could be averted. The average cost-effectiveness ratios were:

• On-farm non-treatment intervention: US$13/DALY averted. • Post-harvest intervention (75% of kitchens adopting hygienic food preparation and handling): US$ 27/DALY averted. • Combination of low-cost wastewater treatment, on-farm and post-harvest non-treatment interventions (75% adoption rate): US$61/DALY averted.

The assessment revealed that the adoption rate of the non-treatment interventions at the critical points was the most important determinant of both the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

Source: Based on Seidu and Drechsel 2010; Drechsel and Seidu 2011

the treatment requirements for different and non-treatment barriers along the entire types of wastewater reuse. path from “farm-to-fork” , in order to protect public health in agricultural reuse schemes, A multi-barrier approach based on particularly in low- and middle-income fit-for-purpose strategies underpins microbial countries. In this approach, health outcome- guidelines for wastewater treatment and based targets instead of water quality disposal/reuse in many developed countries. standards are used. In many low- and middle-income countries, however, the implementation of treatment The WHO guidelines use disability-adjusted barriers in the protection of public health life years (DALYs) to define the health remains an intractable challenge. outcome-based targets. They currently define the maximum tolerable additional disease The most recent WHO guidelines (WHO burden from reuse as ≤10-6 DALY lost per 2006) advocate a combination of treatment person per year. In areas where high levels of

67 68 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY hazards andrisks. Successful implementation may have apoorunderstanding ofthe consumers ofwastewater-irrigated crops, farmers engagedinsuchreuse, aswell as countries. Formiddle-income example, in unplannedreuse schemesinlow- and there are obstaclesto implementation dollar invested (seeBox 5.1).However, effective diseaseburden in per averting effective and inpathogen cost- reduction and treatment strategies canbeboth An optimalcombination ofnon-treatment alongthefarm-to-fork chain. interventions of different treatment andnon-treatment target. Table 5.3summarizes theefficacy inachievingtheassess theirefficacy WHO been implemented orexperimented withto Several riskmanagementstrategies have treatment isnotpossible. especially where conventional water inhow they flexibility reduce therisks, steps offers authoritiesmore optionsand treatment instead ofspecifyingmandatory targets Defining healthoutcome-based has beenappliedcanbeconsumed. beforereduction food to whichwastewater roughly into 6–7logunitsofpathogen contamination are thistranslates expected Crops fertilized withtreated excreta:Crops fertilized extra precautions maybeneededinfoodpreparation. Andersson Photo:Kim comprehensive assessmentofthedifferent Assessment the system; andmanagement ofthesystem. sanitation system, monitoring operation of butinterrelateddistinct steps: assessingthe purposes. The approach involves three systems that are notconfigured for reuse be adapted, however, to cover sanitation can 2006).It excreta andgreywater (WHO WHO guidelinesfor safe useofwastewater, The SSPapproach isderived from the andproducts.sanitation-related services to authoritiesand thepubliconsafety of healthrisks;andprovideson actual assurance sanitation chain;informs investments based and managementofhealthrisksalongthe provides guidelinesfor theidentification specifically 2015).It health protection (WHO to optimize asanitationsystem for public developing andimplementingstrategies The SSPapproach provides aframework for planning safety Sanitation regulation. investments;practices; andeffective local changes inlong-standingtraditional the riskandbenefitsofinterventions; requires:often improved understandingof : This step involves a units that comprise the sanitation system. The in the case of a reuse scheme, to ensure that assessment identifies the different microbial specific guidelines are met. exposure points in the system; potential hazardous events at the exposure points, In a non-waterborne system, monitoring including technology failure and risks related regimes may cover the use, containment, behaviour and practices; the groups exposed emptying and disposal or agricultural use of to risk at the different exposure points; the excreta. Ultimately, the outputs of operational severity of the health risks for different risk monitoring will help system managers to groups; and prioritization and ranking of the decide whether new risk reduction or control exposure points. measures are needed in the system.

Monitoring: Monitoring mechanisms are Management: Procedures are needed to needed to quickly detect problems in the maintain the integrity of sanitation system system and mitigate hazardous events. A components – and minimize microbial risks monitoring regime may involve sampling – during normal operation. There should and microbial analysis of treated wastewater be a plan of action and control measures to

BOX 5.2

Local guidelines for faecal sludge application in northern Ghana

In Northern Ghana, farmers applying sludge to agricultural lands employ two traditional sludge treatment methods – random spot spreading and pit containment – to process raw sludge into “cakes” for health risk mitigation, easy handling and application. Dehydration of the sludge is undertaken in the dry season (November to April) when temperatures across the northern zone of the country can reach 39º C.

Although the treatment methods are perceived to be safe by farmers, and provide an alternative option to conventional sludge treatment technologies, they are considered illegal by public health authorities. No alternative health risk reduction measures have been made available to the farmers, however, and they continue to apply sludge using the traditional methods. Varying sludge drying times ranging from 7–60 days and 90–105 days for the random spot spread and pit methods, respectively, were used by farmers.

An assessment of the two methods showed the WHO health-based target for direct exposure to rotavirus and ascaris could be achieved if sludge is dewatered for ≥ 60 days and ≥ 90 days under the random spot spreading and pit methods, respectively. This simple treatment provides farmers options of choosing between the random spot spreading method and the pit method depending on their needs. It does not require the collection and analysis of samples for microbial analysis and is therefore easy for farmers to implement and manage.

Source: Seidu 2010

69 70 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY local andnationalguidelines inthese There istherefore aneedfor specific specific ofthecomponents WHOguidelines. to implementandmonitorlack thecapacity income countries. Local authoritiesoften to mediumterm inlow- andmiddle- short however, remain adauntingchallengeinthe guidelines for wastewater irrigation will, targets, describedabove. the Implementing barrier framework with health-based through offlexibility themulti- levvel current WHO guidelinesprovide some wastewater andotherwaste fractions. The regulations for theagricultural useof Many countries lackguidelinesor implementation. where there isariskthatcosts could prevent or free loans treatment facilitiesorsoft incentives orassistance suchassubsidized costs into account andprovide economic management strategies shouldtakethese cessation ofirrigationbefore Risk harvest. of crops (e.g. lettuce andcabbage)dueto related to thelossofprofits due wilting to for workers); costs, andindirect for example plant to apitlatrineto protective clothing technologies ormaterials (from atreatment costs,include bothdirect for examplein Costs associated withriskmanagementmay public understanding. can play asignificant role inimproving raising campaigns andtrainingprogrammes andimplementedwell-designed awareness- in behavioural andattitudinalchange. Here, risks theypresent, itisthuscrucialto invest sanitation system andthepotential health of thecriticalmicrobial exposure pointsinthe areasIn where there ispoorunderstanding management strategies. for theeffective implementationofrisk guidelines andregulations are necessary users, workers andcommunities. addition, In as well asappropriate behaviours from appropriate technologies butalsofinancing, and wastewater systems requires notjust managementinsustainablesanitation Risk practice Improving in healthriskmanagement malfunctions. mitigate potential healthrisksduringsystem involved. identifying thestakeholdersthatshouldbe for example. The SSPprocess canhelpin institutions, andresearch institutions, treated excreta and/orgreywater, financial users ofsanitationfacilities, usersofthe potential beneficiariesandrisk groups: with allstakeholders, includingboththe regulations shouldinvolve broad consultation The development oftheguidelinesand GhanadescribedinBox 5.2. in northern traditional sludgetreatment andreuse local practices, likethoseproposed for and implementablebasedonexisting guidelines shouldbeeasilycomprehensible 2010). countries (Seidu The national KEY MESSAGES • Mitigating risksto humanhealth Mitigating • Recognizing potential risks • There are highrisksassociated • andreuse Recovery ofresources • combination. (e.g. behavioural) measures in treatment andnon-technical achieved through bothtechnical resource recovery andreuse, canbe in management, particularly in sanitationandwastewater pathways. standing oflocalexposure basedonanunder- perspective and reuse requires anintegrated associated withresource recovery excreta. improperly treated wastewater and with thereuse ofuntreated or disease. reduced burdens ofwater-related food andnutrition, security and well-being through improved greatly improve humanhealth in wastewater andexcreta can 6. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND PROTECTION

Inadequate management of wastewater has ecosystems (Grant et al. 2012). In addition significant implications for environmental to the harm to aquatic life, degraded sustainability. When large volumes of ecosystems have less capacity to provide a wastewater are discharged untreated into number of important services that humans rivers, lakes and oceans containing nutrients, rely on such as coastal protection, water toxic substances and organic matter, they purification and food provision (Barber et al. can severely compromise the integrity of 2011).

BOX 6.1

UNEP GEMS/Water Programme: a pioneer in water quality monitoring

The UNEP GEMS Programme was initiated in 1978 with the aim of providing global capacity for storing data on water quality from monitoring programmes. Until April 2014 it was supported by Environment Canada. It is now co- hosted in Nairobi, Germany and Ireland.

The GEMStat (www.gemstat.org) database shares surface and ground water quality data sets collected from the GEMS/Water Global Network, including more than 4,100 stations. It holds close to 4.9 million records, and the over 100 parameters that constitute the World Water Quality Assessment. It includes global data sets showing water quality trends in natural and polluted drainage systems. GEMStat is currently hosted by the German Federal Institute of Hydrology.

GEMS also has a new capacity building centre based in Ireland, supported by a consortium of Irish universities and institutes. The centre runs training workshops in developing countries in monitoring and water quality management.

Source: www.unep.org/gemswater/

71 72 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY usually dependsonwaste streams having a ofvariousformsviability ofrecovery andreuse resources management(seeBox 6.2).As the based approaches suchasintegrated water and technology-based steps andsystems- measures, includingbehavioural, regulatory generally technology-based, andpreventive minimize harmfrom wastewater, whichare measures to tohas shifted end-of-pipe monitoring. Increasingly, however, thefocus create aglobaldatabasefor water quality GEMS/Water programme, whichsoughtto on monitoring. Box 6.1describestheUNEP management were originally focused largely ofsanitationandwastewater context Environmental inthe protection efforts income countries. development andstillfound mainlyinhigher- environmental risks, thisisarelatively recent wastewater treatment canmitigate While there isgrowing interest inensuring BOX 6.2 BOX and/or significantly increase agricultural profits (MurrayRay 2010). and agricultural wastewater ofwater inlocal rivers reuse 35Mm eachyear could conserve of Pixian, aperi-urbandistrict China, IWRMplanningwasusedto showIn that AmericanGreat LakesandChesapeakeBay. North BalticSea, Sea, including theNorth The IWRMapproach has beensuccessfully carriedoutinanumberof watersheds, Sustainable Water Network (CAP-Net). Management Partnership (GWP) andtheUNDevelopment Programme’s Development Capacity in have subsequentlysetupglobalIWRMprogrammes, includingtheGlobal Water for entire drainage basinswasdeveloped duringthe1990s, andseveral organizations coordination. IWRMusesthewater basinasthe operational scale. The concept ofIWRM and industry. Integrated Water of thiskind Resources cansupport Management management iscoordinated suchasagriculture, withothersectors silviculture Environmental protection ofcoastal zones andlakesorrivers requires thatwastewater Management andwastewater Integrated WaterResources that helpto reduce environmental damage. for bothpreventive measures andend-of-pipe provide anaddedincentive (andfinancing) andcomposition, itcan quality predictable or anoxic littleorno oxygen). (i.e. withvery of thewater, creating zones thatare hypoxic decomposition depletes theoxygen content When theexcess biomassdies, itsbacterial plantspecies, especiallyalgae. certain by temporarily boostingthegrowth of of freshwater andmarineecosystems andfunctioning thestructure impact water bodies. Excessive nutrientsnegatively and otherbiodegradable organic waste into and therelease ofhuman andanimalexcreta two mainsources: agricultural run-off, Nutrient contamination originates from Nutrients andorganicmatter 6.1 Environmental risks This can lead to losses of critical habitats and agricultural sources (commercial fertilizers biodiversity, including mass die-offs of fish and animal manure) are typically the primary (also referred to as “fish kills”) or other fauna sources of nutrient pollution in waterways (Diaz and Rosenberg 2011). In addition, algae in Europe and North America, while urban may produce toxins, sometimes known as wastewater is often the main source of red tides or harmful algal blooms (HABs), or nutrients in the coastal waterways of South may prevent sunlight penetrating the water America, Asia and Africa. Biodegradable surface, which further aggravates the oxygen organic matter, such as faeces, contained in deficit. Figure 6.1 shows that eutrophication untreated wastewater can also deplete oxygen is widespread and occurs in many parts of the resources in water bodies and contribute to world, representing an important global water degradation of water quality and damage to quality challenge. aquatic life.

Nutrients affect different ecosystems Promoting environmental sustainability in specific ways, so appropriate nutrient through wastewater management has largely management solutions are very important. focused on waterborne systems. Less effort For instance, phosphorus has traditionally has been invested in researching more indirect been the key factor in determining the impacts such as pollutants leaching into soils, primary productivity of freshwater ecosystems, for example from poorly sited pit latrines, and thus high levels are most likely to lead to being passed on and concentrated through eutrophication. In coastal and marine systems, food chains. While more than 1.77 billion nitrogen has been the most important people use pit latrines, research to date has contributor to eutrophication (Schindler and only focused on a few indicator contaminants Vallentyne 2008). (Graham and Polizzotto et al. 2013). Discharge of waste into subsoils may also generate an There are also significant variations in excess of nutrients in groundwater, which the relative importance of nutrient may reach toxic levels that affect human and sources around the world. For example livestock health when used as a drinking water

FIGURE 6.1 Eutrophication impacts worldwide

1b 1c 1d 16 15 11 14 12 13 1a 28b 10 17 28a 28a 25 18 9 19 30 22 23 31 8 7 2a 6 20 24 33 26 34b 34a 27 2b 5 21 50 36 41a 51 32 37 2d 4 52 65a 3a 49 55 3c 41b 43 53 2c 42c 54 65b 3b 42a 47a 42b 56 65c 47b 46a 42e 42d 47c 46e 46b 62 57a 57b 57c 40b 40a 59a 47d 46c 62 39c 45b 58a 39b 46d 59b 45a 58b 60 38a 39a 44 62 61a 61b 63 38b

GIWA assessment scoring Severe impact Moderate impact 66 Slight impact

No impact reported © GIWA 2006

Numbers refer to GIWA region/sub-system

Figure: UNEP 2006

73 74 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY pharmaceuticals, personalcare products Emerging contaminants suchas metals suchasmercury, leadandcadmium). hydrocarbons (PAH) andplasticizers, orheavy compounds suchaspolycyclic aromatic to dangerous concentrations (e.g. organic case ofsubstances thatpersistandbuildup inthe to longer-term impacts fish mortality) acute toxic effects(e.g. ammonialeading to in wastewater onecosystems rangefrom ofhazardousThe substances impacts found Harmful substances research andmanagementsolutions. pathways willincreasingly require new source. These environmental contamination Figure: Adapted from Ternes 1998 BOX 6.3 BOX pathways ofthesecompounds intheenvironment are illustrated inthefigure below. andpicogram-per-litrethey are identifiedatnano- levels, needs beaddressed.to The response to water, theidentificationofpharmaceutical compounds indrinking even if responsible for treating householdsewage. Muchliketrace levels ofradioactivity, public among thepublic, whichpresents achallengefor municipalauthoritiesthatare research, therefurther hasbeenasignificant to these concernsreaction onhumanhealthandtheenvironmentof potential impacts requires significant environmental risks. Whileunderstandingthefullextent anti-inflammatories into municipalwastewater systems may pose Cumulative excretions ofantibiotics, analgesics, hormonesand Pharmaceuticals inwastewater Surface water Pharmaceutical Wastewater Pathways ofpharmaceutical compounds intheenvironment compounds Treatment Excretion Agricultural reuse Drinking water disposal Waste Food Soil improve understanding of the transport improve understandingofthetransport However, research isneededto further wastewater canendupintheenvironment. shows how pharmaceutical compounds in and wastewater onagricultural land. Box 6.3 when reusing sanitationwaste products food into production terrestrial ecosystems potential transmissionpathways viasoiland aquatic ecosystems, althoughthere are also hazardous substances primarilyimpact aquatic life (Holeton etal. 2011). These onfishandother and behavioural impacts may have developmental, reproductive have shown thatemerging contaminants onhumansandecosystems.impacts Studies attention dueto theirpotential negative and pesticidesare also receiving increased Groundwater Landfill and fate of these diverse chemicals in the outweigh the environmental costs (see e.g. environment (Luo et al. 2014). Gallego et al. 2008).

Many existing wastewater treatment plants In addition to end-of-pipe treatment, are not capable of eliminating such emerging there can be upstream control of pollutants contaminants, as they were not designed in households or within industries (including to do so. This is illustrated by a monitoring e.g. replacement of hazardous substances, survey of wastewater treatment plants as on-site reuse and recycling, and modification part of a Chemicals Investigation Programme of processes). Box 6.4 describes the potential in the UK, which revealed that the treated impact cleaner production strategies can have effluent from more than half of the plants on industrial emissions. exceeded environmental quality standards for chemicals including PAHs, zinc and a range of Environmental monitoring is an important pharmaceuticals (Gardner et al. 2012). tool for keeping track of progress in wastewater management and for follow-up 6.2 Protection responses on the efficiency of treatment measures. For instance, some pharmaceutical Technological responses compounds that persist in surface water may be considered indicators of wastewater Technological approaches to reduce contamination. Recent advances in analytical environmental risks from wastewater and techniques have made it possible to detect excreta can be both preventive and end- even trace levels of contaminants (Richardson of-pipe treatment. Different processes, or and Kimura 2016). combinations of processes, are more effective at reducing different problem substances. Regulatory mechanisms When new contaminants appear they require new technologies, and new investments. As Tools for effective implementation of production and consumption patterns change, wastewater risk management strategies wastewater treatment and environmental often include a range of regulatory protection responses must thus be able frameworks. An example is the US system, to adapt (Thomaidi et al. 2015). All of the centred on the 1972 Clean Water Act. technologies described in the case studies in This system includes water quality criteria Chapter 9 are designed at least in part with for wastewater treatment, the issuing of environmental protection in mind. discharge permits for industries and effluent regulations. The best combination of treatment steps to include in a wastewater management Defining what substances must be regulated system is determined by the (current and is a continuous process, given the constant projected) characteristics of the wastewater, emergence of new compounds and materials, the substances (and pathogens) that need to and uncertainty about their possible short- be removed, and the characteristics and long-term impacts. The European Union and sensitivity of surrounding ecosystems. has chosen to address this challenge with the There are also trade-offs to be made Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and between the efficacy of the treatment and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation, the operating costs, energy requirements requiring companies themselves to identify of the treatment processes, the creation of and manage the risks associated with dangerous by-products and concentrated chemicals they manufacture (if they are used residues that then need to be handled safely in Europe), and demonstrate how they can (Luo et al. 2014). A lifecycle assessment be safely used. EU member states’ authorities approach can be useful to determine whether are responsible for enforcing REACH and can the environmental benefits of a particular restrict the use of hazardous substances (see treatment or type of resource recovery really echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach).

75 76 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY streams. cost-effective This isparticularly it isdischarged into combined wastewater require companies to treat effluentbefore and regulations ofactivities, onthesetypes discharges. Many countries impose food processing produce often complex pharmaceutical tanneriesand production, suchasmining,activities pulpandpaper, environment. andcommercial Industrial appropriate strategies to protect the generating wastewater iscrucialto identify ofactivities Understanding thetypes Figure: Based onAF&PA 2012 BOX 6.4 BOX 2015). address theindustry’s emissionsofgreenhouse gasesare beingintroduced (Isaksson toxic biofuelsthatcan effluents.In addition,bio-refineries producingclimate-friendly and digestionprocesses thatsave onraw materials anddecrease waste streams and 88 per cent (seethefigure below). New technologies are introducing cleanerbleaching depletion (i.e. biochemicaloxygen demand)inthereceiving stream wasreduced by 2010 theamountofdissolved organic material discharge thatcancontribute to oxygen total suspendedsolidsandBODvalues. theUSA,for In example, between 1975and hassignificantly the worldreduced wastewater thepulpandpaperindustry volumes, in effluents, largely from bleaching. Since the1970s, however, inmany places around ondownstreammajor impacts aquaticecosystems dueto toxic compounds haslongbeenassociated pulpandpaperproduction with Industrial millsto bio-refineries from dirty The pulpandpaperindustry: Units per ton of production 10 15 20 25 Effluent discharge inpulp andpapermillsintheUSA(1975–2010) reductions 0 5 1975 1985 9520 0220 082010 2008 2006 2002 2000 1995 for environmental managementwithin manyIn countries, regulations orguidelines compounds. that mightbeadversely affected by toxic reuse methods)usebiological processes wastewater treatment methods(andresource would makelittlesense. Also, many the entire volume ofcombined wastewater treatmentstream: to applyingthenecessary enter thewastewaterwould nototherwise when theeffluentcontains substances that All valuesimperial. BOD =biologicaloxygendemand. TSS =totalsuspendedsolids; Volume (Mgal./ton) BOD (lb/ton) TSS (lb/ton) sanitation systems are inadequate or lacking. and by providing alternatives for hazardous In particular, many countries do not have waste disposal, such as locations where specific guidelines or regulations for the people can dump paint residues. For example, agricultural reuse of wastewater. In this case, to avoid elevated heavy metal content in WHO guidelines (WHO 2006) propose a wastewater, awareness campaigns have been flexible approach of risk assessment and risk used to stop people disposing of household management linked to health-based targets dust in their toilets (Kim and Ferguson 1993). (see Section 5.4 and Amponsah et al. 2015). Sweden managed to halve the level of heavy metal contamination in wastewater between Behavioural responses 2000 and 2013 due to a range of upstream measures, very few of them involving Behavioural interventions, like awareness treatment (Finnson 2013)). campaigns targeted at households to promote safe disposal of various products, can Environmental protection is generally not also make important contributions towards the first priority in the design of on-site environmental protection (Malmqvist and sanitation systems or in arrangements for Palmquist 2005). While individual households disposal of sludge from treatment systems, contribute to a smaller range of potential but it is important to build awareness of the toxic compounds, some of these can be easily associated challengesin order to encourage avoided through behavioural interventions more sustainable behaviour.

BOX 6.5

REVAQ: certification of wastewater treatment plants in Sweden

REVAQ is a unique system that aims to support measures by wastewater treatment utilities to reduce flows of dangerous substances to wastewater treatment plants, in order to achieve sustainable reuse. REVAQ is operated by the Swedish Water and Wastewater Association, the Federation of Swedish Farmers (LRF), the Swedish Food Federation and the Swedish Food Retailers’ Federation, in close cooperation with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.

REVAQ was launched in 2008, and by 2013 about half of Sweden’s population was connected to a REVAQ-certified wastewater treatment plant, with the share steadily growing. In 2013 REVAQ-certified sludge contained almost 3000 metric tons of phosphorous, of which 1300 tons was used in agriculture. It has been calculated that if the whole Swedish population were connected to a certified plant, and acceptance of agricultural reuse were further improved, the sludge could replace 50 per cent of the mineral fertilizers currently used in Sweden.

Treatment plants can obtain REVAQ certification after a third-party audit based on four criteria: a structured work programme for improving quality, upstream activities to reduce contamination of wastewater flows, transparency about quality and treatment processes, and quality of sludge output.

Source: Persson et al. 2015

77 78 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY considerations into account whenreviewing Finally, to takeenvironmental itisimportant lead to environmentally hazardous run-off. management andexcessive applicationcan As withany useoffertilizers, however, poor environment andcausingeutrophication. instead ofbeingdischarged into the nutrients are usedto boostproductivity is generallyawin-winsolutionsince the agricultural (orsilvicultural)reuse ofsludge management andenvironmental protection, From ofnutrient theperspectives for agricultural reuse (seeBox 6.5). treatment plantsasproducing sludgesuitable system sewage encourages thisby certifying operations. The uniqueSwedish REVAQ oftheirbusiness measures to dothisaspart place, andmay includearangeofupstream substances reaching theplantsinfirst have astrong incentive to prevent harmful agricultural fertilizers, and sludge-based treatedreuse water products, particularly treatmentSewage plantshopingto sell monitored (USEPA 2012a). must becarefully managed, planned, and for irrigation. Thus, different reuse scenarios substances thataccumulate insoilifused metals,heavy pharmaceuticals andother time, treated wastewater canstillcontain salts, 9.5and9.6).Athesame the casesinSections orgrowingproduction protein insect (see of biological processes suchasbiogas recovered resources andtheefficiency risks –aswell asreducing thevalueof unacceptable health andenvironmental sludge unsuitablefor reuse. They cancreate released by households, canmakewater and of toxic substances, atthescaletypically reuse orrecovery. Even smallquantities are safe enoughfor of theplannedtype Contamination must bekeptatlevels that concerns associated withwastewater. role inaddressing environmentalimportant Resource recovery andreuse canplay an environmental protection reuse asdrivers for 6.3 Recovery and to irrigate non-food crops (e.g. energy forests). Alternatively, thewastewater could bereused lead to unacceptably highGHGemissions. required to achieve thesestandards may of food crops. Similarly, theenergy input standard for potablereuse orirrigation crops rather thanto treat itupto therequired (El Ayni etal. 2011)orto irrigate non-food a coastal intrusion barrieragainstsaltwater wastewater to recharge aquifers andprovide some areas itmightmakemore senseto use reuse inaspecific context. For instance, in anddifferent options for possible trade-offs Resource recovery andreuse • Sustainablesanitation and • Optionsto prevent therelease • Ecosystems by impacted •

KEY MESSAGES wastes. contaminants outoftreated environmentally harmful sources offinancing– for keeping can provide incentives –and phosphorus, into aquaticecosystems. nitrogen and nutrients, particularly damaging pollution,pathogensand a keyrole inlimitingtherelease of wastewater managementcan play streams inthefirstplace. such substances entering waste measures toand regulatory prevent effective technological, behavioural treatments andarange ofcost- substances includebothend-of-pipe of environmentally harmful thathumansrely on. services to provide anumberofimportant and humanexcreta have lesscapacity discharge ofuntreated wastewater

7. INSTITUTIONAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABILITY

7.1 Governance systems for The governance system for conventional wastewater management is already recovery and reuse complicated, involving several sectors with different focus areas; for example, water Even the best-designed technical discharge is regulated by one department, system for sanitation and wastewater health and safety by another. The addition of management cannot be truly sustainable resource recovery can introduce additional unless all of the responsibilities for service components and actors into this system. For delivery and system management are clearly example, agricultural reuse directly affects assigned, and the stakeholders are aware the farmers as well as the consumers and of their responsibilities and both able and traders of products produced using recovered willing to fulfil them. resources. It is thus particularly important to understand interactions between major This is an even bigger issue for sanitation components of the governance system. and wastewater management systems aiming for resource recovery, as they involve Analyses of users and the public good an even greater diversity of actors than employ a common terminology for conventional systems, and many of these discussing these interactions. One important actors have no prior experience of the sector. distinction from a governance perspective The additional complexity of linking in new is between the public and private “spheres”, sectors and stakeholders, while also raising reflecting whether the interests most closely the bar in terms of service quality, requires affected at different stages of the process something beyond conventional institutional are public goods (public health, healthy arrangements and governance. environments) or private (the interests of the different types of users and consumers); and This chapter discusses special institutional linked to that, where primary responsibility and social challenges for a system designed might lie for proper functioning of the for safe and efficient resource management, respective spheres. It should also be noted including recovery and reuse. It highlights that in a rural setting, the entire chain, private management roles and responsibility and and public spheres included, can be fully on- provides examples of proven solutions – both site (see Box 7.1). formal and informal – for reuse-enabling institutions.

79 80 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY protect healthandprovide convenience. For are to waste containment andotherfunctions withintheprivate userspheremain functions the immediate householdenvironment. The away andtransportation fromcollection, generally coveringcontact, theuserinterface, chain withwhichindividualusershave direct oftheservice systems includesthe parts The The private usersphere of sanitationandwastewater systems. discussing theinstitutionalandsocialaspects pointforprivate spheres isausefulstarting sphere. thedivisioninto Nevertheless, public- inthepublic example ofauserinterface in theprivate sphere, publictoilets are an much isusuallyvery While theuserinterface are carriedoutby often private contractors. inthepublicsphere whileservices support, regulation to and public-sector subject example, theprivate sphere shouldremain ForSuch adivisionisnecessarily imperfect. BOX 7.1 BOX private usersphere peri-urban systems Private andpublicspheres inrural and establish anappropriate governance framework. rural andperi-urbanareas. This requires localgovernments to takeresponsibility, and ofsanitationandwastewaterto bepaidto systems thepublicsphere functionality in or untreated sludgeisdumpedintheenvironment. general, more In attention needs the householdand/oraninformal emptier. Too latrinesare often, allowed to over-run, dependsontheknowledge, capabilitiesandresponsible behaviour of functionality alackofformal services. A challengeisoften emptying This meansthatthis environment. onpublichealthandthe canimpact of thepublicsphere, becausepoorfunctionality and septictanksto maintainfunctionality. shouldbeconsideredThese part services suchasfor pitlatrines private usersmore emptying rely services often onexternal composting toilets andurinestorage, reuse withdirect ontheirown land. However, fully on-site; for example, householdsmay diganewpitwhentheoldoneisfull, oruse excreta are atleasttemporarily. stored ontheirproperty ruralsystems canbe Certain and peri-urban residents rely onon-site orsmalldecentralized systems. This meansthat haveoften centralized, away pipedsystems wastewater, to carry many rural between rural (andperi-urban)andurbansettings. While urbanareas oftheprivate andpublicspheresThe limitsandfunctions vary for sanitation household compound –mainlyconveyance/ ofwaste streamsManagement outsidethe The publicsphere for theservice. household level anduserspay monthlyfees utilities manageindividualsystems atthe the user. There are situations, however, where these components are theresponsibility of initial investments andrunningcosts for standards), whichmeansthatinmostcases, according(often to regulated minimum ofthesystem components the functionality or private company) hasresponsibility for general, theindividual user(e.g. household and responsibility willlookdifferent. In similar to householdfacilities, butownership issueswillbevery facilities, functionality while for institutionalandpublicsanitation touser sphere publicregulation), (subject environment may fallwithintheprivate and subsequentreuse ordisposalinto the on-site systems, suchastreatment functions A man fishing in sewage-polluted water at the junction ofthe Wei and Zao rivers. Photo: Reuters / Stringer transportation to a treatment facility, of the recovered resource products often treatment and disposal – are regarded as takes place in the public sphere; for example, being in the public sphere (see Valfrey-Visser distribution of recovered water that and Schaub-Jones 2008). Functionality in the households purchase. public sphere is often the responsibility of the local government, though it may contract or As with the functionality in the private user partner with private service providers. Poor sphere, activities in the private re-user sphere functionality in this sphere can impact public also need to be regulated and supported goods and the population at large, for example by public entities in order to protect public through degradation of the environment and health, the environment and consumers’ ecosystem services, or high risks to public rights. For example, procedures for applying health – particularly in urban settings. different qualities of treated wastewater to agricultural land or urban green space Resource recovery and reuse may also fall need to be regulated in order to protect within the public sphere, for example in both agricultural workers and surrounding the case of water recycling and reuse, and communities. Further along the chain, excreta-based energy generation, fed into hygiene standards need to be monitored and public grids. This is also the case where disseminated for the sale and consumption of resources are used to restore ecosystem the resulting agricultural products. services within the public domain. 7.2 Governing the The private re-user sphere user private sphere Finally, depending on the nature of resource recovery, the treated products from the Achieving functionality in the user private public sphere may also move into the private sphere is one of the critical and most re-user sphere of the service delivery chain. challenging management issues for the entire This is the case when, for example, recovered sanitation and wastewater system. While nutrients, organic matter and water are private actors generally have ownership and applied on private agricultural land. Products responsibility for maintaining both the user linked to resource reuse, such as foods, fuel interface and part of the collection system or treated water, also return to the user within their domain, they often do not private sphere when they are purchased (and understand their role within the larger system consumed) by individuals. The acquisition of wastewater management. In addition, the

81 82 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY strategies thatenablemutualunderstanding Accordingly, there isneedfor communication regularly provide benefits. are properly used, cleanedandmaintained in thepublicsphere, asonlyfacilitiesthat however, onmanagement impacts directly use oftechnology intheprivate sphere, by theusersthemselves. The choice and sphere chosenandpurchased isoften technical infrastructure withintheprivate BOX 7.2 BOX Project for thePromotion ofLocal for Initiatives Development inAguié (PPILDA). Environmentclose collaboration withStockholm andthe localorganization Institute The wasimplemented project by CREPA (now Water andSanitationAfrica; WSA) in proved one. powerful to beavery the messagethatfarmerscould produce theirown ataminimalprice fertilizer alsohelpedtousing urineduringtheproject convince people. a relatively In poorarea, produced better thanotherfields. The improved yieldsdemonstrated incrop trials thatthefieldsclosest well thevillage(whereto known defecated) localpeopleoften difficult to convincefertilizer. the farmersofbenefitsusingurineas Itwas already which drainedinto thestreet outside).From anagricultural itwasnot perspective odour around thefamilycompound (previously thefamilyurinated intheshower Women were especiallypositive to thenewtechnique since itgreatly reduced jugs inholes, thusenablingasquattingposition. avoiding withtheurine. contact The familieswere encouraged to place thecollection theurineinclosedjugsandapply ittowas to thefieldsusinggloves, collect thus handling urine, andapreference amongmento squatwhileurinating. The solution The mainbarriersto overcome were localIslamicbeliefs forbidding peoplefrom andexchangefertilizer between villages. valueoftreatedfertilizer humanexcreta, withcrop inconjunction trialswithurine hygiene promotion methodology(see WaterAid 2013),adapted to communicate the associative strength, resourcefulness, planning, action responsibility) sanitationand Hygiene andSanitation (Participatory Transformation)–SARAR (for self-esteem, and reuse athouseholdlevel –waseasierthananticipated. The usedaPHAST project however, found theproject thatchanging behaviour –establishingurinecollection Through closework withreligious leaders, women’s groups andagricultural assistants, population to usetreated owing urineasafertilizer to religious andculturaltaboos. Before many started, theproject believed thatitwould bedifficult to convince the the power ofusingtherightmessageinorder to motivate behavioural change. toA project increase access fertilizer for shows smallholderfarmersinruralNiger urine reuse inNiger Capturing theright message: Source: Dagerskog 2010 is aimedfor. Source separation,inparticular, and especiallysowhere resource recovery chain, delivery ofthefullservice functionality menstrual hygiene issues)inorder to ensure and preferences, easeofcleaning, (suchashygienesocial aspects practices the userprivate sphere needto consider general requirements for system design in providers andothersincharge ofdefining within bothspheres. Regulators, service of userneedsandsystem functionality relies on the correct design, functioning and convenient, comfortable, clean and dignified use of components in the user private sphere. (Cairncross 2004; Jenkins and Curtis 2005; Consequently, users must be made aware Jenkins and Scott 2007). Additional factors of and be willing and able to follow directions can include legal requirements, improving for proper use, for example avoiding excess household status, available subsidies, and water in dry systems, and avoiding dumping protecting health and the environment. chemicals or other hazardous wastes into a toilet. It can be difficult to motivate users to install and correctly use a reuse-oriented system, There are three key aspects that should be especially if it is designed differently from the addressed in the user private sphere in order system they are accustomed to or involves to achieve functional reuse: appropriate additional costs such as fees or added drivers for proper use of a sanitation facility maintenance. Strategies and management with reuse; technical solutions that facilitate structures need to be put in place to proper use, operation and maintenance; communicate reuse benefits to individual and effective communication with users to users and ensure that they are willing to pay raise awareness, create ownership and when and use the systems properly (see Box 7.2 for necessary, effect behaviour change. a successful project in this regard).

Promoting behaviour to facilitate reuse Creating “willingness-to-pay” in private users in the user private sphere can involve both economic and ideological drivers. In some cases, economic benefits To facilitate resource recovery in sanitation may be felt directly in the private sphere; for and wastewater management, the example household-level biogas production, governance system needs to create an fertilizers for household gardening or enabling environment. An initial step is agriculture, or water reuse. to identify the key motivations of users in However, especially in urban areas, benefits investing in, and then using, a specific type may not be felt directly by users. In such of user interface. For domestic sanitation cases, it may be advisable to redistribute the facilities, studies show that users generally system’s net benefits through, for example, desire an interaction with their system that is reductions in service fees or tax rebates. In

Demonstration of urine-diverting dry toilet prototypes, eThekwini, South Africa. Photo: Kim Andersson

83 84 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY to bethestrongest driver for reuse, followed 2014)showed(Wallin desire for personalgain motivate otherusers. AstudyinSweden conscious canalso, users. It however, driver forpowerful highlyenvironmentally Resource recovery can,ofcourse, bea that itwillmakeapositive difference. change theirconsumption habitsiftheyfeel choices matter andtheymay bewillingto Increasingly, peopleare aware thattheir children’s health,orreduce climate impacts. to protect thelocalenvironment, protect This could belinked, for example, to a desire and properly useand maintaintheirsystem. whentheyinstall of personalsatisfaction Ideological drivers aimto give usersasense . Section 9.4) been ableto doso(seethe casestudyin wouldareas nothave where theyotherwise owners canupgrade orbuildnewhousesin resource-recovery systems,certain soland permits can,however, beobtainedfor in environmentally sensitive areas. Building on-site wastewater treatment technologies prohibit buildinghouseswithtraditional Sweden environmental discharge regulations create economic incentives. For example, in some cases, regulations canalsobeusedto

An information panel to support asustainable sanitationproject inBihar, informationpaneltosupport Andersson An India.Photo:Kim cleaned andsoonbecome non-functional. to dothere isariskthattheywillnotbe routine cleaningisdifficult and clean.If such astheshower, shouldbeeasyto use ofsanitationfacilities, toilet andotherparts makes, theregulations orhow are. strict The toilet, nomatter how it muchfertilizer dirty with thetoilet. Noonewantsto useasmelly, positive personalexperience, particularly that thekeydriver intheprivate sphere isa provideIt mustbe benefits.remembered cleaned regularly andgenerallymaintained Only facilitiesthatare usedproperly, design User-oriented being reused. is, show users thattheirwaste isactually to communicate results:important that of ideological drivers. particular, In itis with theusersare criticalfor thesuccess forMechanisms communication two-way users’ behaviour. environmental motives canhelpto change for users. Thus, are ifallotherfactors equal, these, theywere nonethelessalsoimportant environmental motivationslaggedbehind distribution ofcosts andbenefits). While by concerns aboutfairness(for examplein Dry and source-separating toilets can be Changing behaviour and attitudes particularly sensitive to cleaning issues since excess water used for cleaning can create In cases where private facilities are lacking problems such as strong odours in dry faecal or misused there is likely a need for both collectors or diluted urine with lower fertilizer awareness raising and behaviour change. value. Consultations with users, particularly There are a number of successful tools women who traditionally are responsible available for promoting sanitation use. In for household cleaning, are strongly particular, community-led total sanitation recommended during the design and testing (CLTS) has been used to stop open defecation of new toilets. In cases where special cleaning practices (Kar and Chambers 2008) and methods are required these will need to be the Participatory Hygiene and Sanitation clearly communicated to the users. In the Transformation (PHAST) approach (see case of public and institutional toilets the Box 7.2) aims at providing communities involvement of caretakers and janitors is with techniques to improve their hygiene clearly needed. behaviour (Simpson-Herbert et al., 1997). The key messages in these tools are generally The user interface should be suitable for related to health and improvement of the both sexes, and adapted to certain cultural local environment. norms and preferences; for example for squatting or sitting, or wiping or washing These methods use participatory and social for . The facility should also be marketing techniques to educate and create designed so that it is easy to use properly. If social pressure to change. Other marketing the system requires source separation, this techniques, such as subsidies and awareness- should as far as possible be accomplished raising campaigns, have been shown to be by the toilet itself and not require manual effective drivers for investment in and use of action by the users. private household toilets. At the same time, it is crucial that the social intervention has An additional issue for women is menstrual a technical capacity component to ensure hygiene and how the toilet interface and appropriate design and operation. facility are designed to accommodate it. For example, it will require ways of safely From a reuse perspective, it is of course storing or disposing of reusable cloths/ important that people adopt hygienic pads or disposable sanitary products, that household practices. It can, however, do not interfere with the system’s proper be harder to motivate adoption of functioning. Failing to provide disposal particular reuse-oriented systems. As facilities can result in blockages and rapidly mentioned above, the development of a filling pits/tanks as women discard used social marketing reuse programme will need sanitary material in the toilet (House et al. to communicate the right drivers for private 2012); alternatively, if the pads are discarded users. In rural settings, the fertilizer benefits outside the toilet but not properly enclosed, of reuse can be communicated in both words they can spread pathogens. This is particularly and demonstrations (see Box 7.2, the case an issue with facilities, because study in Section 9.3, and Andersson 2014b). of the lack of surrounding private space and Demonstration units, where future users the risk of spreading communicable disease. can experience and try out different However, information campaigns may also technologies is key to gaining acceptance be needed to inform private households for new technologies (see the case study in concerning the proper disposal of sanitary Section 9.5 and Andersson 2014c). products. There is a need, however, to develop Water availability for cleaning reusable better communication tools, messages material, as well as how this water and techniques for driving behaviour is disposed, should also be factored into change in relation to wastewater reuse. system design. While some existing tools can be adapted for this purpose, others, such as CLTS in its current form, may actually be directly

85 86 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Source: Adapted from ElinorOstrom’s Nobel lecture (Ostrom 1990 2009) andOstrom BOX 7.3 BOX wastewater management in thecontext ofsanitation and Translating Ostrom’s principles • collective-choice • collective-choice arrangements: This combines two ofOstrom’s principles: ingovernanceAllow userstoparticipate enterprises. organized inmultiplelayers ofnested resolution andgovernance are activities monitoring, enforcement, conflict enterprises, provision, where service This covers Ostrom’s principleofnested multiple layers forgovernanceBuild responsibility in thepublicgood:clearboundaries • users:clearandlocallyunderstood • should beclearlydefinedboundaries for: Ostrom’s principlesstate thatthere users andthepublicgoodaffected Clearly defineboundariesofthesystem,its flows andexcreta. recoverable resources inwastewater public good” while “resources” refers to resources willbereferred to as “the confusion common-pool inthistext, orderIn to avoid terminological establishing successful publicinstitutions. as ameansto setguidelines for sanitation andwastewater management principles canbebroadly appliedto of common-pool resources. These for successful management suggested anumberofguidingprinciples Nobel laureate ElinorOstrom modifying them; in operational rulescanparticipate most individualsaffected by the ecological system are present. good/question from alarger social- that separate aspecificpublic and non-usersare present; boundaries between legitimate users • conflict-resolution mechanisms: graduated sanctions sanctions: • benefits: equitable distributionofcosts and principles, aswell astheneedfor an This covers anothertwo ofOstrom’s methods forconflict-resolution equitabletariffs, and Apply sanctions monitoring apublicgood:users or • monitoring users:usersorindividuals • and appropriator behaviour: audit resourcewho actively conditions Ostrom highlightstheneedfor monitors Establish amonitoringsystem and environmental conditions. should becongruent withlocalsocial Ostrom states thatgovernance structures and conditions tolocal delivery needs Match service minimalrecognition ofrightsto • officials. amongusersorwith conflicts mechanisms existfor resolving responsive, local low-cost, violations; become stronger withrepeat weak but for ruleviolationsstart relevant publicgood. them monitor thecondition ofthe individuals whoare accountable to and system. and theusers’ own useoftheservices provisionmonitor to service users who are accountable to them governmentalexternal authorities. institutions are notchallengedby members to devisetheirown organize: therightsofcommunity 1 3 2 User participation in designing a toilet as part of a sustainable sanitation project in Colombia. Photo: Kim Andersson counter-productive, since they play on recovery. In instances where acceptance is disgust about human excreta, which conflicts low, communication and marketing strategies with the idea of them as valuable resources will be needed in order to increase (Kar and Chambers 2008). Some tools for acceptability. analysing sanitation behaviour and designing messages for change exist, such as the 7.3 Governing the public SaniFOAM framework (Devine 2009). New tools and intervention strategies that apply and re-user private spheres psychological knowledge on behavioural change are needed (Mosler 2011), particularly Within the public sphere, governance and in relation to reuse. functionality of the sanitation and wastewater management system assure benefits that Awareness raising may also be extend beyond the individual. A properly necessary with regard to resource reuse functioning sanitation and wastewater products. For example, consumers may service delivery chain protects water sources, have concerns regarding the quality and the living environment and public health. safety of vegetables fertilized with human Water sources, the living environment and excreta in areas where this has not been public health can be considered “common traditionally practised. In some cases, legal pool resources” or “public goods” – that frameworks reinforce this low acceptance, is to say, resources from which the public as in the case of European Union legislation benefits but the protection of which may be regarding organic certification, which in conflict with private interests. For example, does not allow for fertilization with treated it may be convenient for an individual to human excreta. discharge untreated wastewater (e.g. by flushing the toilet) into the public drain, In designing resource recovery systems it will but such behaviour results in a downstream be important to identify acceptance levels public health hazard and deterioration of the for proposed products and how existing receiving water body.19 legislation may be hindering or promoting

19 An example of the “tragedy of the commons”. See Hardin (1968)

87 88 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY of agovernance institution–ofthe entire that is, whatfallswithin theresponsibility To define thegovernance boundaries– affected thepublicgood its usersand defineboundariesofthesystem, Clearly is usedinthefollowing subsections. in thepublicandreuser private spheres, and good framework for considering governance resources presented inBox 7.3provide a principles for managing common-pool The interpretations ofElinorOstrom’s BOX 7.4 BOX collection, transport andtreatment offaecalsludgefrom transport on-site systems.collection, for participation on-site systems, haschosento useprivate-sector although theutility (ONAS) isresponsible for sanitationandthemanagementof bothsewer-connected city, Dakar In Senegal’sbased ongeographical jurisdiction. NationalSanitationOffice incorporated towns andvillages, includingon-site users. Hence, itsmandate isnow taken over andtown from councils district water inall supplyandsanitationservices expanding (piped)water supplyandsewerage networks. practice, In WUC hasnow larger reforms. water sector WUC’s previous mandate wasbasedonmaintainingand of mandate to hasrecently deliver water changedaspart andsanitationservices Another exampleisthe inBotswanawhose Water UtilitiesCorporation (WUC), housing programme. untilthesesettlementscanbeupgraded through thenational and washingservices to which eThekwini Water andSanitationtemporarily provides publictoilets, showers match different abilities to pay Durbanalsohas500informalfor services. settlements, withinthewater-borne sanitationzone, delivery inorderwater-borne to service policy.) offersfree different basicservices Ontop ofthat,thedepartment levels of zone. (Outside are thiszone, African implemented basedontheSouth national services boundaries. withinadefined delivers water-borne sanitationservices The department to arangeofdifferentSanitation delivers services types ofcustomers within municipal Africa, Durban,South theeThekwini of In municipalDepartment Water and organic waste) withinageographic area. sanitation andwastewater management(andpotentially alsomanagementofother increasingly common approach isto instead give oneinstitutionresponsibility for all cooperation neededforsectoral resource recovery andreuse more complicated. An in kind ofcross-or conflicts responsibilities, whichcanamongotherthingsmakethe to covera utility users),thisapproach onlysewer-connected posesareal riskofgaps been dividedupaccording to (itisespeciallycommon technologies for orfunctions While institutionalmandates have inthewater andsanitationsector traditionally ofutilities jurisdictions Using geography, notsystems, toset For example, wastewater effluent from an as thelocalenvironment or receiving waters. to cover thelocalpopulationaffected as well orprotected,good to beserved itiscritical definingtheboundariesof public In boosting food, water orenergy security. spread, pollutionoreutrophication, or systems, suchas avoiding pathogen or upgrading ofsanitationandwastewater public goodissuesdrive implementation particular managed, and theusers. Often to defineinitiallythepublicgood to be resource recovery system, itisimportant urban treatment plant will affect a particular unregulated, more expensive than sewer recipient locally, but also have potential services, and operate under the radar of the negative effects for users in other settlements authorities. All too often, they dispose of downstream. sludge improperly, harming water resources and the urban environment in general. For sanitation with resource recovery, the Thus, for both public goods and service public good will also have to include the final delivery, it makes more sense to define application of the recovered resource. In the user boundaries geographically, instead case of agricultural reuse, for example, the of according to sewer connection or other land on which the resources are reused has technical criteria (see Box 7.4). to be included within the boundary of the system; for energy reuse, air quality may have With the boundaries of the public good and to be included as a potentially affected public users clearly defined, the boundaries of the good. entire system more easily fall into place. A sanitation or wastewater management It is also important to define the system’s system’s boundaries are the settlement legitimate users. For a utility or other in question (including its inhabitants and entity responsible for service delivery, user physical environs) and the recipients (that boundaries are defined by the customers is, bodies of water or land) receiving the accessing the services. Traditionally, many treated waste of the treated effluents – both utilities serve only customers with sewer solid and liquid – from the wastewater and connections – hence the type of sanitation sanitation systems in that settlement. technology sets the user boundary. This generally works in settlements with high The addition of resource recovery to the sewer coverage rates, including in newly service chain complicates system boundaries, developed areas. It works less well, however, adding more (re)users and affected public in settings where the conventional sewer goods, and leading to the additional system covers only a fraction of the city. challenge of engaging and motivating In many cases, citizens without sewer sectors normally not involved in sanitation connections have to rely on services to service delivery, such as agriculture or energy. support on-site systems, which often are However, most forms of resource recovery

A constructed wetland in Beijing Olympic Forest Park helps to clean wastewater released to the environment, as well as providing a valuable ecosystem for birds and other wildlife, and a pleasant urban leisure facility. Photo: Claus Holzapfel

89 90 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY at the same time being part of a wider district ofawiderdistrict at thesametimebeingpart managing localresourceslocal actors while geographicallyoften organized, with A multi-level governance is structure corresponding institutions. the agriculture orenergy andtheir sectors private sphere may introduce from actors governance layers. For example, thereuser more stakeholdersand thusmultiple include reuse, thesystem necessarily involves When sanitationandwastewater services governance inmultiple layers for Build responsibility orfossilchemical fertilizers fuels. for exampleby reducing theneedfor and reuse thepublicgoodpositively, affect BOX 7.5 BOX on existingagricultural reuse, sure thatreuse whilemaking safely. isconducted theBengaluru case, chain.In thatwould entailcapitalizing delivery sphere oftheservice withinthepublic pointwhenformalizing services andusethemasastarting services providers consider thatauthoritiesandservice existing functioning, itisimportant develop order what already toIn existsand notto further break whatisalready ofthechainoperational. part Control andinstitutionalrecognition are two thingsneededto getthepublicgood probably onlycater to the “private good” chain. delivery ofthesanitationservice manner. stay undertheradar oftheauthoritiestheywillmost As longastheservices from theauthorities. They operate inaninstitutional “grey zone” and anuncontrolled haveThese developed services organically without institutionalorfinancialsupport production. in Bengalurutakethefaecalsludgeto peri-urbanfarmerswhothenreuse itincrop the sludgeisdumpedindiscriminately intheurbanenvironment. operators Some thefaecalsludgeto atreatment plantinthe bestcases,transport butmore often there are many private operators. These septictanksandpits, operators empty and radar oftheauthorities. where ofBengaluru, India, Onesuch exampleisthemegacity underthe services emptying on-site sanitationcustomers, private entrepreneurs offer unregulated authoritiesofferto network islimited andthecity noservices manyIn citieswhere coverage oftheconventional sewage management services, Bengaluru, India Organically developed faecalsludge Source: Kvarnström etal. 2012 Such organizations existinparallelwith often describedinBox 7.5. management services developed on-site sanitationandwastewater around theworld, suchastheorganically thissituation reflecting delivery service examples ofwastewater andsanitation local ecosystem services. There are numerous over ofgovernments theinability to protect governance arose from grassroots frustration Originally, theneedfor nested layers of 2006). (WHO clearly understood andrespected by all private andnon-profit shouldbe sectors) at alllevels ofgovernance (includingpublic, The roles andresponsibilities oforganizations of governance isofcourse criticalfor success. coordination between thedifferent layers or nationalorganization. Cooperation and formally recognized services such as utilities starting point when firming up sanitation providing connections to sewer systems. In governance for improved public good a city, other types of service may also exist, protection and resource reuse. such as services offered by local or external non-profit organizations. These informal Allow users to participate in governance governance structures, however, are usually unable to protect the public good since they One of the fundamentals of the principles are normally not connected to waste flow shown in Box 7.3 is that of public treatment systems. participation, for example involving users in setting the operational rules of the system Multi-level governance structures should (and having their input respected by the be planned and managed from the initial authorities). In a wastewater and development stages. Experience shows sanitation system there is also a need for that spontaneous and free development of strong user participation, especially within layered governance has clear limitations in the user private sphere. It is valuable, terms of service delivery (Nordqvist 2013). however, also to involve users in planning An analysis of sanitation service delivery and shaping the service chain functions in Kampala, Uganda, found that services within the public sphere. This is particularly showed the desirable adaptive capacity, but important in countries that lack strong that the provided services did not produce institutions for service provision and system sustainable outcomes, either within the management. private or the public sphere. Better linking of property owners to a wider governance In the water and sanitation sector, structure might improve this situation, stakeholder participation is often seen, and especially with effective structures for promoted, as a means to understand the monitoring and sanctions (see below). existing problems, create a common vision of necessary improvements across the spectrum The steering of layered governance needs of stakeholders, understand citizens’ to be even stronger for services that include demands for improved services, and set reuse, given its necessary involvement of realistic priorities and trade-offs in the actual actors from other sectors, and its raising context. Involving users and existing service of the service delivery bar towards more providers in the process of formalization of sustainable services. The expansion of the service delivery can assure better customer governance system to also include resource satisfaction, compliance with use of the recovery will require: higher investments system and payment of fees: and ultimately a within all responsibility spheres; and financial more functional system. costs, as well as organizational implications and related behavioural change. Increasingly, sectoral planning tools put stakeholder participation at the core of their Improvements in service delivery, with full processes. One example is the Community- connection between the different elements Led Urban Environmental Sanitation (CLUES) in the service delivery chain, will not happen process, developed at EAWAG-Sandec (Box organically. Rather, they demand different 7.6). Another is the strategic approach to types of incentive and instrument to steer urban sanitation planning described by development, such as political engagement, Tayler et al. (1999), which also involves the resource recovery policies, regulation and stakeholders and has an iterative approach. legislation, inter-sectoral work at the local The well-established PHAST-SARAR government level, information, financial methodology is another example. PHAST- incentives available for households, SARAR relies heavily on participation in order external funds for service providers to improve the sanitation situation in rural aiming at resource recovery, and extensive areas (see Box 7.2, WaterAid 2013 and communication between stakeholders. Simpson-Herbert et al. 1997). As stated previously, however, organically developed services, which are part of existing When service delivery also encompasses layered governance, should be used as a resource recovery and reuse, there is a

91 92 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY participation and functional structures structures andfunctional participation A keyto establishingmeaningful 9.4). Sweden (seethecasestudyinSection the research isthecaseofHölö, community cooperation between autility, farmersand match thefarmingcycle. Agoodexampleof chain canbeadapted to and thattheservice that farmers’ andmet, demandsare known trust between thesectors, andto ensure agricultural reuse, theaimbeingto develop in anearlyphaseany aimedat project to involveincredibly important farmers targeted for potential reuse. is, for It example, need to involve (re)users from thesectors BOX 7.6 BOX Source: Sherpaetal. 2013 implementation, Nalahadpoorsanitationsitua Urban Environmental Sanitation(CLUES) approach for planningand Before usingtheCommunity-Led asanitation intervention Nala isavillageinNepalwithapproximately 2,000inhabitants. using theCLUES approach planningandgovernanceParticipatory involved inmonitoring andinshapinggovernance arrangements. processes, butalsoofhow userscanbe is agoodexamplenotonlyofparticipatory This committee isresponsible for O&Mofthesystem. Hence, theNalaexperience Sanitation Users Committee, registered whichisalegalentity withthelocalauthority. the project’s implementationhasnow beenmerged into theNala Water Supplyand ownership throughout theproject. The community-level committee setupto facilitate improvement, and from localleaders, andextensive userparticipation support Success intheNalaCLUES factors process includethestrong demandfor sanitation thesystem.and inconstructing involvedactively intheimplementationstage, plan bothindeveloping anaction and horizontal-flow constructed wetland treatment.for blackwater The users were also decision to implementasimplifiedsewerage system withananaerobic baffle reactor of userneeds, information andcommunity exchanges. Nalathevillagecameto a In multi-stakeholder process involved householdsurveys, identification andprioritization as hygiene promotion wasproduced duringtheplanningphase. The participatory form orotherfractions, greywater, ofblackwater solidwaste andstormwater), aswell surroundings. atallwaste streams (humanexcreta Asanitationplanlooking –inthe and thenmoves onto consider theneighbourhood, thelarger settlement,andits The CLUES approach needs, focuses firstonhouseholddecisionsaboutservice groups. improvement from community inanarea localleadershipandsupport withactive water table. The situationhadcontributed to strong localdemandfor sanitation that of, for example, atechnical consultant. isnotalwaysknowledge valued ashighly to theneedsoflocalresidents yet their be better placed to understandandrespond noted above, providers informal may service stakeholders canbringto discussions. As knowledge thatvarious differentkinds of Establishing trustalsomeansvaluingthe of utmostimportance. stakeholders, includingthe food industry, is human consumption, trustbetween thekey of agricultural reuse cultivatingcrops for the variousactors. Especiallyinthecase for governance isto create trustbetween tion, withover-full latrinesandahigh Stakeholder trust and communication webs for FIGURE 7.1 resource recovery and reuse systems

Food business Food business

Regulators Regulator Municipal park Users, Farmer, Users, department consumers, crop producer consumers, house owners house owners Municipal tech. departments

Treatment Transport Treatment Transport

Municipal system: A municipality that opts for Rural system: Resource recovery and reuse in resource reuse within its own sphere of influence subsistence farming means easier trust and information (shaded box) has to build trust and exchange flows; in this case, the same farmer could represent all information with fewer stakeholders. the stakeholders except one: the regulator.

Green arrows = material flows; blue arrows = trust and information flows

Figure: based on H. Jönsson, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

An analysis of stakeholder relationships In many cases, developing a service and levels of trust can be a critical step in delivery model that matches local needs achieving functional participation (see Figure demands internal reform of a utility or local 7.1). Based on this analysis, well-defined government body in charge of service communications plans and trust-building delivery. Focus needs to be shifted from activities can be developed to overcome engineering and infrastructure to customers areas where there is a lack of trust between and service delivery. stakeholders. Achieving this shift may require Match service-delivery to context implementing different management models and distributing roles and responsibilities There is a widely acknowledged need to for service delivery between different adapt governance and service delivery stakeholders. For example, the local systems to local needs and conditions. One- government body can set a strong focus size-fits-all policies and large national or on customer service, accountability and regional roll-outs of wastewater technologies, appropriate service delivery in the contracts it regulations and approaches have been signs with different types of entities. shown to be largely ineffective, and probably not the best way to achieve improved Management responsibility can reside with: services and resource recovery (see Ostrom 2009). • A public utility, • private operator(s), In contrast, a customer service perspective • community-based organization(s), or allows for the ultimate adaptation to local • combinations of the above. needs and conditions. Too often, however, the local government body responsible For the resource recovery step, there for sanitation and wastewater focuses on may or may not be a different set of service infrastructure expansion rather than providers with whom to engage, and who service delivery; sets tariffs according to in turn can be public, private or community- political agendas rather than realistic levels based. There are a number of factors that will for financial sustainability; and under- influence the most suitable management prioritizes O&M, all of which often lead to model for a system with resource recovery. substandard service delivery as well as low These cover the combination of operator(s) in accountability (McGregor 2005). a given context (see Figure 7.2), including:

93 94 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Figure: Adapted from Lüthi etal. 2011 capacity to operatecapacity proposed technical providers have andhuman theknowledge Key questionsto beaskedare: Doservice are andcapacity currently knowledge lacking. critical questionsto identifyareas inwhich ofpotential operatorsweaknesses andasking mean understandingthestrengths and appropriate managementmodelwill locally adapted model. Determining an are therefore crucialfor deciding ona strongly linkedto and thelocalcontext, The first four bulletsabove are all • government support. existingregulation andlegislation, • acceptance oftechnical socio-cultural • localdemandfor recovered resources; • and cost-recovery expectations • of andefficiency capacity service • level(s), andappropriate expected service • FIGURE 7.2 recovery; and recovery; resourceincluding thoseimpacting solutions andrecovered resources; possibilities; providers;potential service as defined by thecustomers;

LEG

F AL

I

N AN

A D

N R

C EG

I Technical norms

A U

and standards

L L

A

A T

N O D R

Cost-recovery opportunities Y

H F Funding schemes U R

Laws, regulations, Public sector A M resource reuse spending M inc. affecting Financial investors

A protection E

N Water

laws W

C O A

development

Capacity, efficiency R Research & P

defined byusers K

Service level(s)

I

T REGULATORS/GOVERNMENT

REGULATORS/GOVERNMENT

A Key inthedesign ofawastewater factors andsanitation L

SERVICE PROVIDERS

CUSTOMERS NATIONAL

LOCAL

User aspirations, expectations User practices

on-site systems. operators coming to the house to empty an area where customers are usedto The situation may, however, bedifferent in an appropriate operator to deliver theservice. organizationcommunity-based may notbe retrofitted for resource recovery, andthusa standard,service for example, even ifitis tosystems maintainasimilar willexpect deliver Areas thatservice. withexistingsewer operators, aswilltheoperators’ to capacity strongly ofpotential influence theselection The models. development ofefficientservice-delivery knowledge gapswillhelp solutions to fill Answering thesequestionsanddeveloping thatcanbelinked to thissystem?sectors Is there withinother managementcapacity be ableto effectively usethe waste product? the proposed reusers (e.g. farmers)needto sector? What information orresources do therefore canbeoutsourced to theprivate chainthatcangenerate aprofitdelivery and systems? Are there elementsoftheservice

government Social acceptanceoftechnology Level of support

Climate change

Water tablelevel

service levels expected service recovered resources

Taboos, religion

Local demandfor

& reusedresources

Water scarcity G

P O Population densityand E

L O I G

T development

I R

C A

A P

L H

I

A C

N A

L

D F

S A

O C

T

C O

I R A S management system L A

by customers will C CE PTA NCE BOX 7.7

Service delivery associations: the SISAR and COPANOR models

Two models have been developed to meet the challenges of providing a sustainable water supply to small, isolated, communities in poor regions of Brazil: the SISAR model in Ceará state and the COPANOR model in the semi-arid Minas Gerais state. In both states, the water and sanitation service utility had difficulty properly serving isolated communities. Water and sanitation service systems had been built for these communities following participatory, demand driven planning processes, but they often fell into disrepair a year or so after construction when the social capital imparted in the planning and construction process gradually dissipated and the water users’ associations that had been created consequently failed to keep the systems running.

The SISAR model has been in use for two decades. Its approach is to create a federation of water users’ associations (the SISAR) in a sub-region, under the auspices of which daily operation and maintenance of the systems are carried out by the local operator but other functions which benefit from an agglomeration of scale (heavy maintenance, procurement of reagents and spare parts, water meter calibration, training of operators, billing, social capital capacity building, etc.) are centralized under the federation. Communities with a SISAR have universal provision of metered household water connections; sanitation systems include condominially designed sewers and lagoon treatment systems or communal septic tanks.

The COPANOR model was established around 10 years ago through the creation of a subsidiary of the state water utility, COPASA, which allowed for a differentiated salary structure for COPANOR staff and tariffs tailored to the reality of poor, isolated households. COPANOR provides all households with metered household connections and simplified sewerage with wastewater treatment by an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (a kind of anaerobic digester) or lagoon system. Both SISAR and COPANOR are run like professionalized utilities, with indicator-based management and decision making, annual business plans, etc.

Source: Personal communication Martin Gambrill, lead water and sanitation specialist at the World Bank.

It is important to recognize that the entrepreneurs’ associations in Senegal and capacity of potential operators will vary, and Burkina Faso (see Bassan et al. 2012). efficient service delivery may require the involvement of a combination of operators Financing system operations is another whose capacities complement each other. critical aspect of functional service delivery. One efficient way to increase access to Sanitation systems operating with cost- capacity is the formation of associations recovery will, for example, allow for public- through which the members gain clout and private partnerships for the operation of negotiating power, can share resources, infrastructure, which could be implemented exchange experiences and facilitate peer- under different models. Some examples are to-peer learning. Examples of this exist both design-build-operate contracts for treatment for associations of utilities in Brazil (see facilities; franchising or licensing of emptying Box 7.7.), and for faecal sludge emptying services; or long-term contracts for treatment

95 96 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY legal frameworks thatcanwork against One common and problem withregulatory (see Lüthi etal. 2011). precedents to argue for legislative change the existinglegalframework andcreate possible to pushfor positive changewithin interpretation. With boldleadership, itmay be and identifygrey areas thatare opento framework existing legalandregulatory to lookpragmatically atthe be important resource recovery itmay perspective thus frameworks cantakealongtime. From a rarely thecasetoday. Changing these not prevent, resource recovery. This is andenable, oratleast should support The 7.2). the userprivate sphere (seeSection means recognizing theneedsofcustomers in solutions needto besociallyacceptable. This conditions. For example, proposed technical will require consideration ofthesebroader modelsto localconditions service-delivery chain.Matching oftheservice in allparts for achievingfunctionality are important to thebroader that conditions andfactors called source separation are related to theso- appropriate managementintheliston The lastthree indetermining the factors entrepreneurial basis. outtreatment forfor reuse carrying onan could alsoconsider thefarmingcommunity to consider. The localgovernment body available farmlandandfarmersisakeyfactor provider andfarmingcommunity, locally cooperation between thesanitationservice case ofagricultural reuse, anestablished the withinexistingoperator(s). In capacity of additionaloperators, oratleastadditional this demandmay require theinvolvement resources existence of recovery, may themostcrucialfactor bethe orderIn to establishsustainableresource systems, seeChapter 8. sanitation andwastewater management more discussionon financing ofsustainable operating costs from thepublicpurse. For by coveringwith public-private partnerships recovery isnotrealistic, itispossibleto work and reuse. Even insituationswhere cost- legal and regulatory frameworklegal andregulatory enabling environment . The creation andmanagementof local demandfortherecovered , whichrefers monitoring agentisalsorecommended. Once provider by oranexternal theservice ofsystem componentsRegular inspection option. isone delivery problems withservice report bodies. Asystem where userscandirectly orthrougheither directly representative goods itisadvisableto involve users, but to ensure better protection ofpublic monitoring, andpassive, bothactive There are different ways ofsettingup protects bothprivate andpublicgoods. to ensuringthatthesystem important of therecovered resources iscritically proper useofthesystem, andthecondition provided, ofservices Monitoring thequality Monitoring and usersotherstakeholdergroups. key politicians, government departments, target audiences for lobbying, suchas messages promoting reuse andidentifies developed whichcontains locallyadapted A clearcommunications planshouldbe thesesystems.and usersto support to convince localpoliticians, decision-makers 7.2) use ideological arguments (seeSection systems can proponents ofreuse-oriented additiontoproducts. economic In gains, recovering costs through extra salesofreuse- of abating climate change;andthepossibility compliance withinternational targets; for increased reuse.support These include: that canbeusedto garner political support issecuring factor A finalimportant inSweden.the on-site sanitationsector to bemethasspurredfunctions innovation in a few technologies demanding to actually regulation haschanged from onlyallowing of treatment isneeded. thatthe The fact of receiving waters –decideswhatlevel –forcontext examplethevulnerability sets thescene for thatcase, butthelocal EU andnationalregulation undoubtedly Sweden isdescribedinBox 7.8.Overarching technology-prescriptive in to function-based on-site sanitationthathasgonefrom being example oflocallyadapted regulation for thatneedsto beachieved.function Agood technologies andmethods, ratherthanthe innovation isbeingtoo specificabout . There are anumberofarguments political again, if agricultural reuse is envisaged, it is Institute of Sweden (Box 7.9). The Federation important to involve the farming community of Swedish Farmers was heavily involved in the monitoring. One example of user- in setting up this system, along with developed monitoring and regulation is the municipality representatives and researchers. certification system for agricultural use of sanitized blackwater and other wastewater The functional sanitation ladder fractions from small wastewater systems (Figure 7.3) is a tool that can be used for operated by the SP Technical Research monitoring of service delivery. A variation of

BOX 7.8

On-site sanitation regulation in Sweden: function-based and locally decided

In Sweden, regulations for on-site sanitation have undergone a makeover during the last decade or so, going from being technology-prescriptive to function-based. In the past, local environmental authorities, following national guidelines from 1987, only have permits for soil-based technologies (soil infiltration or sand filters) in combination with three-chamber septic tanks. This hampered technical development and made it difficult to apply new technologies in situations where the approved ones were not feasible.

In 2006, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency published new national guidelines for on-site sanitation, which focused not on sanitation technology per se but on its function. In particular, the new guidelines emphasize the need to reduce phosphorus emissions to receiving water bodies and highlight the importance of nutrient recycling. The guidelines outline mandatory basic functions, as well as “normal” and “high” levels for health protection and environmental protection functions, which local authorities can apply depending on the local context.

One effect of these guidelines has been an explosion of new products and innovative technologies coming to market. One example is the increase in high-level water- saving blackwater systems that make it possible to reuse nutrients for farmland after sanitization. Other innovative technologies that are increasingly popular in Sweden are: (i) compact treatment plants for on-site use, (ii) filters containing highly reactive P-absorbing materials, and (iii) urine-diverting toilets as complements to conventional soil infiltration or sand filters.

The new technologies are also producing new types of wastewater fractions from households. This has spurred technical departments in municipalities to organize systems for reuse of collected fractions, and national actors are now engaging in research and development for the establishment of a functioning service chain. This is a development that reuse advocates had been trying to bring about since the mid-1990s.

97 98 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY by theusersthemselves, groups community Proper useofthesystem canbemonitored hygiene communities. statusofpartner de/) for monitoring thesanitationand NGO Welthungerhilfe(www.welthungerhilfe. ladderiscurrently usedbythe functional the BOX 7.9 BOX Source: SPTechnical Research InstituteofSweden 2012. from floormoppingdoesnotgointo the toilet bowl. thatwater systemnot flush; itisimportant for example, inablackwater-collection wastewater andto educate fraction, themregarding whattheyshouldand responsibility to inform isbeingproduced householdsthatfertilizer from their dose perha.basedonconcentrations metals. ofheavy The producer alsohasa producer, anddetailsofthecontent provided onthelabel, alongwithrecommended iscarriedoutby (includingpathogen)testing products ofthefertilizer the Quality any crop. different crops; one andafter year ofundisturbedstorage itcan beused to fertilize Depending onstorage timesandtemperatures, for useon urinecanbecertified for cereals andothercrops thatgothrough aprocessing stagebefore consumption. to specificlimits. from urine, sanitization,beused Wastewater can,after apart fractions need wastewater betreatedto fractions All certified to reduce microbial pathogens isnotimpaired. products the fertilizer of sothatthequality monitoring. hasto beundertaken Alltreatment andtransport from origin to thefieldwhere itisused, control, quality routine sampling, andself- “SP” guarantees certificate. Certification An approved allows theproducers certification products displayto of the fertilizer is notincludedinthiscertification. toilets. tanksludge,from Septic whichhascomparatively dry low nutrientcontent, precipitated sludge, phosphorus-saturated filt – for perspective fertilizer exampleurine, blackwater, phosphorus- systems. The must beinteresting wastewater fractions from a on-site and small(<50personequivalent)wastewater system a certification fromfor wastewater fractions The SP Technical Research ofSweden Institute manages wastewater fractions, Sweden Certification standards for traceability of the wastewater fraction traceability ofthewastewater fraction services andcorrect useofthesystem. services regarding of thequality monitor orprovide information to monitors responsible for O&Mare well often placed to providers. ororganizations Individuals representing theusers, orby theservice er-bed material, orfaecalsludge Apply equitable tariffs, sanctions and presents a good example from Durban, methods for conflict-resolution South Africa of congruence between costs and service received.Increased compliance Service tariffs should achieve congruence along the service delivery chain may require between the costs incurred by users and a “sticks and carrots” approach, with the the benefits they receive (see Felice service provider applying both sanctions and Vatiero 2012). In other words, and incentives. In the Durban case, faecal the distribution of costs and services sludge emptying contractors are paid per should be equitable for all citizens within ton of sludge delivered from on-site systems the service jurisdiction in question. Firstly, to the treatment plant, rather than a flat rate the tariff setting should be equitable per area or number of households served. between different types of customers. On- This gives the contractors an incentive to site customers often pay more overall than bring the sludge to the treatment plant sewered customers in situations where rather than cut corners by illegally dumping informal service providers provide services it. Durban also provides another good to on-site sanitation customers, and sewered example of incentives and sanctions in the customers are served by a utility. form of its debt relief scheme. Incentives and sanctions can be applied at different levels The second congruence step between in order to influence the use of a system. costs and services is to apply a progressive For example, a national government that tariff, where a higher level of service within wants to inspire local governments to take the private good and higher consumption actions on resource recovery can provide is connected with progressively higher financial incentives for those that present costs for repeated violations. Box 7.10 good plans and ideas. At the same time, local

Function-based sanitation ladder, FIGURE 7.3 with proposed indicators for monitoring

Management Function Indicators needs

Environmental 7 Integrated resource Indicators will differ and depend on flowstreams from the management full environmental sanitation system (urine, faeces, functions greywater, faecal sludge, wastewater as below but also including water provision, stormwater management and solid waste management and context

6 Eutrophication risk Indicators will differ and depend on flow stream from the reduction sanitation system (urine, faeces, greywater, faecal sludge, wastewater)

5 Nutrient reuse (i) X% of N, P, K excreted is recycled for crop production, (ii) Y% of used water is recycled for productive use

Health functions 4 Pathogen reduction Indicators will differ and depend on flow stream from the in treatment sanitation system (urine, faeces, greywater, faecal sludge, wastewater) and also whether the flowstream will be used productively afterwards or not

3 Greywater (i) No stagnant water in the compound, (ii) no stagnant management water in the street, (iii) no mosquitoes or other vectors

2 Safe access and (i) 24-hr access to facility year-round, (ii) facility offering availability privacy, personal safety and shelter, (iii) facility is adapted to needs of the users of the facility

1 Excreta containment (i) Clean facility in obvious use, (ii) no flies or other vectors, (iii) no faecal matter lingering in or around latrine, (iv) hand-washing facility in obvious use with soap, (v) lid, (vi) odour-free facility

* Note that moving up the ladder means that the functions below are also fulfilled.

Figure: Based on Kvarnström et al. 2011

99 100 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY BOX 7.10 BOX diverting toilet and9m diverting includeaurine- These free services than 250,000rand(around US$16,700). less for familieslivinginhousesworth Sanitation provides thefree basicservices Durban,eThekwiniIn Water and backed upwithnationalfunds. thatis minimum water access –apolicy five every years andfree service emptying improved pitlatrine, withfree basic have therightto access aventilated Africansof water andsanitation,allSouth for allofitscitizens.basic services terms In ofproviding AfricaSouth free hasapolicy provision insettingwaterservice tariffs. strong congruence between costs and provider thatdisplayssanitation service good exampleofamunicipalwater and eThekwini Water andSanitationisa provisionservice Congruence costs between and AfricaSouth Sanitation: Durban, eThekwini Waterand full andontimefor 20months. For each customer to pay their current account in The debtrepayment schemerequires the customers backto beingpaying ones. to getnon-paying schemesto try amnesty withdebtreliefworking schemesand eThekwini Water andSanitationisalso relief Debt consumption rate of30m3. same price percubicmetre atamonthly full-pressure paying the customers start monthly consumption. Semi-pressure and metre ofwater risingwith increased progressive tariffwiththeprice percubic customers. Householdcustomers pay a paid for by bothhouseholdandother level isfullpressure,service whichis rises withwater consumption. The third is the tariff reduced,for thisservice but the housethrough roof tankplacement); a roof tank(fullpressure isachieved in for water isasemi-pressure system with month. ladder step uptheservice The next and ofwater per its employees. addressing issuesbetween eThekwini and can beregistered asacustomer –aswell as can live with–for exampleregarding who changes thatbothcustomers and theutility reach agreement andadaptotherpolicy platforms have alsobeenusedto address, three days ata fixed reduced tariff. The which willallow itunlimited supplyfor theutility,upcoming funeralcancontact householdswithan this issueamicably: able, through auserplatform, to solve eThekwini Water andSanitationhasbeen guestsduringfunerals. extra to serve levelthe free isinsufficient basicservice frustration expressed by customers that platforms have worked well isinaddressing policies. Oneexamplewhere these andexplainingnew corporateconflicts user platforms continuously for resolving eThekwini Water andSanitationuses its customers better. communication asameansto understand delivery.It alsoviewsinfluence this service appreciation, aswell allowing themto customers to raisetheirconcerns andvoice and Sanitationprovides channelsfor eThekwiniconsumer satisfaction, Water andraise improve delivery itsservice As anefficientmeansto continuously Conflict resolution purchase itfrom aneighbour. water from thenearest municipaloffice or removed andthecustomer hasto collect istamperedconnection withthenitis level, andthe fulldebtisreinstated. the If down to thefree delivery minimum service taking limiter isinstalledintheconnection, thecustomer stopsIf paying, thenaflow to become afullpaying customer again. it muchmore likelythattheywillbeable trained into paying amonthlyfee, making there isnodebtandthecustomer hasbeen of thedebtiscancelled. After 20months payment madeontime, one-twentieth Sanitation, Durban, South Africa South Durban, Sanitation, Gounden andNeilMacleod, eThekwini Water and Based onpersonalcommunication withTeddy BOX 7.11

Building a system for the municipality, especially since resource recovery, and not the system using it: Kullön, Sweden was more sustainable and The residential area Kullön is located the proposed roles on an island in the coastal municipality and responsibilities of Vaxholm, about 50 km north of were in conflict with Stockholm, Sweden. The area has 250 national legislation. The houses, built in 2001, and has attracted inhabitants approached local politicians, mainly young, well-educated families with and the municipality decided that children. Kullön has high environmental responsibility for reuse in fact rested with ambitions; the environmental initiative Roslagsvatten. that has attracted the most attention is the sanitation system. The wastewater The process of organizing a system took treatment plant is managed by the several years (!) and in the meantime the municipally owned water company separated urine from the households was Roslagsvatten, and it is complemented still not reused. It was not until 2008 that by double-flush urine-diverting toilets, the first urine was collected, transported, with separate collection of urine in tanks stored and reused by a farmer in a at neighbourhood level. The reduced neighbouring municipality. In 2013, discharge of nutrients to the Baltic Sea however, this farmer, who was under and the greater reuse of nutrients in urine contract with Roslagsvatten, changed help to make the system more sustainable the focus of his agricultural practices and than many conventional systems. stopped taking the urine. Roslagsvatten subsequently could not find a new Hoever, there has been little or no reuse solution for collection and reuse, and the of the collected urine. Instead it has urine is once again overflowing into the been allowed to overflow into the local wastewater treatment plant. wastewater treatment plant. The main reasons for this are that the institutional Kullön clearly illustrates the need for an and management aspects were not appropriate institutional set-up and clear prioritized in the initial planning phase, responsibilities, not just technology and which led to unclear roles and conflicts infrastructure, to make a sustainable around responsibilities and economy. The sanitation system. It is also an example of initial capital investment for installation costs for new, more sustainable but also of the system added a little to the cost slightly more expensive systems being of the houses (less than 1 per cent of placed in the private as opposed to the the houses’ total cost). However, the public sphere, where responsibility for the companies selling the houses did not protection of public goods more properly calculate the costs for management of the resides. reuse system and ignored the problem; the municipality had declared that Source: Johansson and Kvarnström 2011; and responsibility for reuse rested with the personal communication with Mats Johansson, future house owners. Ecoloop, Sweden.

Kullön inhabitants were unwilling either to take responsibility for finding a farmer willing to reuse the treated urine or for the extra financial costs for O&M of a system that was initially imposed by

101 102 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY financed involving project nationalexperts an arena for conflict resolution. Anexternally The casedescribedinBox 7.11initiallylacked an arena for conflict resolution. planning, theplanning process as itselfserves stakeholders are involved inparticipatory Felice and Vatiero caseswhere 2012).In thereby accessible to allindividuals(see shouldbelocalandpublic,conflicts and Arenas andmechanismsto resolve these stakeholders, potentially causingconflicts. between differentinvariably betrade-offs managing publicgoodsthereIn will system theyuse. whateverwithin thewastewater jurisdiction, providers by auniform tariffincrease for users costs for theutilitiesandotherservice One way to dothisisto cover any additional neutral compared to conventional systems. of systems withresource recovery cost- have beentakento make themanagement othermunicipalities,In politicaldecisions systems.diverting providers to charge higheruserfees for urine- a casewhere localauthoritiesallowed service behaviours andsystems. Box 7.11highlights providing adisincentive for reuse-oriented system mustbecarefully balanced to avoid finance O&M and recover costs –thetariff –especially While tariffs to are important enable reuse. households to installsystems thatbetter government canusefinancialincentives for Decentralized planttreating hospitalwastewater, Thanh Hóa,Vietnam. Photo:Flickr /frapoberlin services. arisingaroundconflicts water andsanitation platforms canbeanmeansofresolving e-Thekwini case(Box 7.10)shows, user the reuse ofurineonfarmland. As the capacity, greatly contributed to establishing which, incombination withincreased local provided anarena for conflict resolution, KEY MESSAGES As arule, involving newsectors • Sanitationandwastewater • Whileagrowing rangeof • mechanisms. arrangements andgovernance require innovative institutional not happenorganically, butwill will quality increasing service and stakeholderswhilealso sanitation sector. not involved inthewater and many ofwhom are traditionally involvement ofdiverse actors, for resource recovery require the management systems aiming their use. acceptance asbarriersto canact constraints andissuesofsocial recovery andreuse, institutional technologies are available for 8. ECONOMICS AND FINANCING

8.1 The economics of the together cost an estimated 1.5 per cent of global GDP, while regions such as sanitation and wastewater and sub-Saharan Africa experience much management gap higher economic losses: estimated at 2.9 per cent and 4.3 per cent of their GDP, Inadequate sanitation and wastewater respectively (Hutton et al. 2007; and see management places a heavy burden Figure 8.1). The sanitation gap across the on national economies (see Chapter 2). While world correlates with low GDP and consumer attempts to quantify the costs of inadequate poverty (Rosemarin et al. 2008), underlining wastewater management at global and the fact that the gap is strongly connected regional estimates are rare, it has been to broader issues of development and estimated that water supply and sanitation inequality.

Economic losses associated with inadequate water supply and sanitation FIGURE 8.1 by region, as percentage of GDP

4.3% 4

3 2.9%

2 1.6% 1.4% 1.5% Percentage of GDP 1.2% 1.1% 1 0.9% 0.7% 0.7%

0

CCA SSA LAC E Asia S Asia W Asia N Africa SE Asia Oceania WORLD CCA = Caucasus and Central Asia LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean SSA = sub-Saharan Africa

Figure: Based on Hutton 2012

103 104 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Targets 6.1and6.2willcost globallythree billion peryear SDG upto 2030.Meeting globally willcost somethingaround US$200 up to 2030. Thus, to achieve theseSDGs about thesamelevel ascapitalexpenditures From thesamestudyO&Mcosts would runat up to 2%GDPand0.85%GDP, respectively. AsiaSouth –thismeanscapitalspending greatest Africa and needs–sub-Saharan resource recovery). For theregions withthe (this doesnotincludeinvestments to enable for “safe” meetingtheSDGtargets services estimates about0.4 percent the samereport terms ofpercentageabout 1:1.75.In ofGDP, be inruralareas, atanurbanto ruralratioof ofthisinvestment2016). Most would needto 166 billionperyear (Hutton and Varughese WASH (Targets 6.1and6.2)by 2030isUS$74– cost ofmeetingtheSDGtargets for safe A newestimate for thecapitalinvestment was US$134billion. 2011–2015. The figure for ruralinvestments for urbancapitalcosts duringtheperiod 2012) gave afigure ofalmostUS$200billion The firstattempt estimateto this(Hutton universal sanitationcoverage?functioning What mightitcost to provide theworld with 20 This canbecompared withtotal healthexpenditures (notincludingwater andsanitation) ofanaverage of6 percent ofGDP Figure: HuttonandVarghese 2016 WatSan =waterandsanitation Note FIGURE 8.2

base/ViewData/Indicators/en. countries in2013,andanOECD average of9.3 percent. Figures from the WHO GlobalHealthExpenditure Database(http://apps.wh US$ billion per year 100 120 140 : Ending open defecation (OD), or open defecation-free, has a target year of 2025. WASH: Endingopendefecation(OD),or defecation-free, hasatargetyearof2025. =water, sanitation,andhygiene; 20 40 60 80 0 n DWtrSntto yin AHWtrSntto WatSan Sanitation Water WASH Hygiene Sanitation Water End OD 3.6 4.2 2.7 11.6 3.6 6.9 Basic service, universal access Safely managed service,universalaccess Safely managed Basic service,universalaccess Annual globalcapitalcosts ofdifferent levels,WASH service Upper estimate 19.5 32.5 8.6 Baseline estimate 1.6 2.0 2.6 high levels of poverty (UNDP2006). high levels ofpoverty income countries withlimited coverage and contribution”) proposed by theUNDPfor low- such asusertariffs, and “community retrieved through cost-recovery strategies, GDP (supplemented withanother1 percent is well below thebenchmarkof1 percent of countries (vanGinnekenetal. 2011).20 This both urbanandruralareas insub-Saharan of GDPduringtheperiod2000–2008for expenditure averaged just0.32 percent for example, publicwater andsanitation the needisgreatest, low; spendingisvery someofthosecountries where2015). In and between 2008and2014(Martin Walker government spendingon WASH stagnated arecent showsNevertheless, that report national investment insanitationisstrong. times over (seeFigure 8.3),thecasefor and thatsanitationpays for itselfseveral related costs dueto inadequate sanitation, adequate sanitationare lessthanthehealth- Given thatthecosts ofproviding inadequate sanitation. but thisisstilllessthanthehealthcosts from WASH asillustrated inFigure services, 8.2, times asmuchproviding universal “basic” 13.8 28.4 6745.6 46.7 Lower estimate 29.4 37.6 in sub-Saharan African insub-Saharan 31.5 49.3 77.2 140 countries o.int/nha/data- 122.8 60.9 86.9 Figure: BasedonHutton2012 management sanitation andwastewater long term. This isnotonlyinorder to access andreliablebe bothpredictable over the For system sustainability, financingmust credit. borrower, thepurposeandavailability of and corporate equity, dependingonthe from microfinance up to government bonds madeusing creditoften whichmight range whether by usersorinthepublicsphere, are recovery from users. Capital investments, are publicspending, aidandcost- external sanitation andwastewater management for capitalexpenditure onconventional Ultimately, themainsources offinance whole lifecycle ofthesystem. entire system andvalue chain,andover the anticipate thecosts (andbenefits)alongthe isessential to ofdevelopment. It aspects of effluent, creating demand, and related reform andenforcement, testing quality costs related suchasregulatory to the factors the system. There may bearangeofother recurring costs for operatingandmaintaining and equipmentalongwithreal estate –and items such asinfrastructure, technologies, investments in one-off particular “hardware” provision are capitalexpenditures –in consider insanitationandwastewater ofexpendituresThe two maintypes to 8.2 FIGURE 8.3 Financing sustainable

Benefit-cost ratios 5 0 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 LAC =Latin America andtheCaribbeanSSA =sub-Saharan Africa CCA =CaucasusandCentral Asia

CCA 4.8

N Africa Benefit-cost ratiosBenefit-cost ofinterventions to attain universal access to 4.3

SSA 2.8

LAC 7.3

E Asia 8.0

S Asia 4.6

as away ofpaying theuserfor someofthe development aims. They can alsobeseen waycost-effective helpachieveto calibrated andtargeted, theycanbea separating toilets. subsidiesare well If or abiogasdigester, orinstallsource- to helpuserspurchase animproved toilet For example, subsidiesmay beused of developing aid. countries –external the publicpurseor–incase subsidized, oreven paidfor entirely, from wastewater managementare often For thesereasons, sanitationand outcome. needed to achieve thedevelopment may to bereluctant maketheinvestments Consequently, theusersorgovernments alongthevaluechain. can becollected operating asystem andtherevenue that between thecosts ofinstallingand There willalmostalways remain agap economic benefitsare non-monetized. there isresource recovery, many ofthe over (Hutton 2012),especiallywhen usually pay for themselves many times sanitation andwastewater management of adevelopment strategy. However, while and society, aspart serve andalsooften the userandfor thesurrounding community management provide benefits for Sustainable sanitationandwastewater possible. the system operates efficiently foraslong debts,credit but alsoto ensure andservice SE Asia 5.0

W Asia improved sanitation, by region, 2010 6.1

Oceania 3.6

WORLD 5.5 105 106 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY the publicsphere and financed by bondsorequity. government orpublic-private partnerships plants requires majorinvestments, usuallyby sewer andwastewater networks treatment based systems. (orupgrading) Installing Urban sanitationgenerally requires utility- aid, inthecaseofdeveloping countries). combination ofthetwo (alongwithexternal recovered through usertariffs, taxationora keeping themrunning. These costs may be sludgeorotherwastes, and to transport for faecalsludge;orpurchasing vehicles resource points recovery plant;collection wastewater treatment facilitiesorcentralized andoperating networks; constructing might includelaying andmaintainingsewer for financing. Costs inthepublicsphere Chapter 7), eachwithdifferent implications andpublicspheres (see and re-user) must bemadeinboththeprivate (user Capital expenditures andO&M expenditures Capital expenditure sources offinancing(seeISF-UTS 2014). advantages ofcombining differenttypes and in developing countries demonstrates the at leastsomedomesticfinancing. Experience thereforeinsufficient. Sustainability requires wastewater management,aidislikelyto be universal access to adequate sanitationand Also, given theinvestment neededto achieve of thesystem. periodsthanthelifetimebe for muchshorter system, notleastasaidcommitments tend to stable basisfor long-term financingofalarge 2013). However, aidisgenerally notagood, nearly US$8billionannually(OECD-DAC almost doubledduring2000–2011,reaching above), aidto water external andsanitation sanitation hasstagnated inrecent years (see Even asgovernment spendingonwater and in sanitationandwastewater management. will continue to cover –someinvestment donorfundinghascoveredExternal –and 8.3 wastewater management. benefits ofsustainablesanitationand more societaland environmental indirect Financing in a common pitfall thatresults in systems consider theinitialcapitalinvestments is Failure inO&Mcosts to andonly factor Operation andmaintenance 2014). areas (WSP most common form ofsanitation in urban 1983). However, on-site systems remain the of350persons/ha.(Sinnatamby a density to become economically competitive at tariffs), while centralized systems started ha. (assumingusers’ to pay ability adequate increaseddensity to around 200personsper piped systems wasviableaspopulation from on-siteshift systems to decentralized out inBraziltheearly1980sfound thata planning investments. Auniquestudycarried ofdifferenteconomic viability systems when the mightaffect rising populationdensity to consider howgaps, itisimportant sanitation andwastewater management inareas thatcurrently haveparticularly large Given theprojected urbanizationtrends, provider.the service taxes (especiallylocal)andthenpassedonto providerby through orcollected theservice public sector. User tariffs are directly collected regulated (andperhapssubsidized) by the suppliers, will beborneby private-sector points)andutilities,collection butmostcosts need for (suchassludge publicinfrastructure for treatment ordisposal, there may alsobea awaybe transported from theuser’s property sludge, urine, food waste orotherwastes to latrines, septictanks, etc. thatrequire faecal toilets, pit thecaseofurine-diverting In are notaffordable now. future ambitionsinthis regard, even ifthey infrastructure, whichiscompatible withany sensible to invest inasystem, including and wastewater istherefore treatment. It in resourcemaximum efficiency recovery components needto bealigned for As discussedinChapter 4,allsystem to cope withgrowing userpopulations. and treatment plantshave enoughcapacity newcommunities, to serve easily extended so that,for example, canbe infrastructure future developments inthearea served recover to planfor costs, itisimportant cases, andthelengthoftimeittakesto Given thescaleofinvestment inthese The wastewater treatment plant at the US military’s Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam has been retrofitted to capture methane gas for future energy use. Photo: Flickr / US Navy / Denise Emsley functioning inefficiently or breaking down ties disbursement to outputs. The service entirely over time. In the public sphere, O&M providers need to pay costs up front, often is usually carried out by private contractors. through private-sector credit, giving them a They may be employed or contracted by strong incentive to perform. OBA and other the government or utility (for example, to results-based financing (RBF) approaches maintain a treatment plant or sewerage or are described in Trémolet (2011). Figure 8.5 drainage network), or directly by the user or shows how functions can be “packaged” for community (for example, in the case of on- the purposes of OBA. site systems, faecal sludge emptying services, community toilets or decentralized systems). O&M may require capacity building for users, especially in systems that require Because the services are so important for source separation (see Chapter 4) or the health and environmental protection, even operation of unfamiliar resource recovery service providers employed by the users systems such as a biogas digester or need to be regulated, and measures put in composting toilet. It is also necessary to place to ensure that service providers can invest in training and maintaining a workforce and do keep operating. Subsidies and state- of specialist O&M service providers. Scientific provided services might help to do this and quality testing of treated wastewater or other to ensure that users do not get unregulated, recovered products is another service that unqualified service providers. However, this has to be provided. needs to be balanced against the interests of long-term financial sustainability and “Software” costs building the strength of this economic sector. In many cases, especially where innovations Subsidies can also be used to encourage such as source separation and resource service-providers to serve poor communities, reuse are being introduced, new sanitation or others that are not economically attractive. and wastewater management systems Traditionally, subsidies have been paid need to be supported by investment in in advance, or at predictable intervals. awareness raising, stakeholder training and However, an emerging subsidy model for demonstrations in order to build local market service provision, output-based aid (OBA), interest (see Chapter 7).

107 108 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY Waterkeyn 2013). development and approach (Waterkeyn demand for sanitation withinabroader example ofanapproach aimingto build improved sanitationandhygiene, isan demand for healthy practices, including members’community awareness ofand concept,(CHC) whichcentres on building The successful Community HealthClub Trémolet 2011). firms impliesbothstaffandcapital costs(see entrepreneurs, universities orengineering developmentproduct by sanitation producing marketingmaterials. Similarly, along withthecost ofdeveloping and costs for marketing,salaries andtransport Costs related includestaff to theseactivities government, ministriesorentrepreneurs. organizations,or community-based local iscommonlyMarketing carriedoutby NGOs development.mobilization andproduct demand includemarketing, social “Software” related activities to creating Figure: BasedonTrémolet 2011 FIGURE 8.5 Demand creation Disposal/reuse Treatment Value chain Collection Transport with reuse On-site Payments forreuse Potential ways ofpackagingoutput-basedaidsupport demand, communityorganization Promote sanitation, create Dispose ofsludgeintotheenvironment Payments topit latrine emptiers also helphouseholds to access credit. accounting ofthesesavings andreturns can – resource recovery andreuse. Acareful especially inthecaseofon-site systems household level from installation,and– potential savings andincome atthe investments). This shouldtakeinto account pay (includingto usecredit for capital to assessusers’ andwillingness to ability include investments by users, itisimportant planningfinancingarrangements that In recovered resources. ofthecycle, themeansto reuse another part urineorfood2012), collected waste; or, in remove faecalsludge(Chowdhry andKoné toand storage tanks;accessing services maintaining septictanksorothercollection excavatingor otheruserinterfaces; and installation andmaintenance oftoilets Costs intheprivate sphere caninclude the private sphere 8.4 Partial on-site treatment without reuse treatment facilities On-site Decentralized Financing in (energy, agriculture) Reuse sludge Sewer connections to off-sitenetwork along thevalue chain Treatment plants In poor rural areas, it can be challenging local government and research institutions to persuade users to invest in new on-site (Andersson 2014b). A composting toilet was systems, especially when they currently also installed in a popular environmental practise open defecation. Many past education centre for demonstration and government- and donor-supported projects learning purposes (Andersson 2014c). have provided systems free of charge. However, this is not a sustainable model One advantage of longer-term, community given the scale of the gaps in adequate development-oriented approaches such sanitation. Experience also suggests that a as CHCs is that the communities can install sense of ownership is often an important systems once there is sufficient demand, incentive for users to properly use systems helping to ensure a sense of ownership. The once installed, so approaches should aim to reliability of the system and the perceived build sufficient demand that users are willing value of the services it provides to users to make at least some investment. will help to increase local demand and willingness to pay. Regarding willingness to pay (and the perceived utility of the investment to the Microcredit is proving valuable in rural users), various strategies can be employed projects, which have previously had difficulty to increase demand. Some of these were attracting commercial credit. The Financial mentioned above – marketing, developing Inclusion Improves Sanitation and Health products that meet users’ needs and programme (FINISH; http://finishsociety.org/) expectations (while still fulfilling the desired has applied micro-financing and output- functions), awareness-raising etc. Another is based aid to achieve an integrated model demonstration endeavours to let potential that addresses both the demand and supply users observe the benefits for themselves. sides of the sanitation challenge in India (Post For example, in a rural sanitation project in and Athreye 2015). The initiative helped more Bihar, India, community members set up a than 400,000 households gain sanitation demonstration field test growing the same access between 2009 and the beginning of crops with either urine or chemical fertilizer, 2015. Some more examples of innovative and hosted visitors from nearby communities, financing schemes are described in Box 8.1.

Urine-based fertilizer and composted faeces packaged for commercial sale. Photo: Kim Andersson

109 110 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY constructed wetland , South Africaconstructed wetland ,South Photo:x Decentralized wastewater flow treatment plantwithsub-surface while households were responsible forbuilding thesuperstructure. Andersson Photo:Kim inBihar,This project thefinancingissue India,tackled providingby the concrete forflood-resistant substructure toilets, BOX 8.1 BOX and reuse (see www.epa.gov/cwsrf). and reuse (seewww.epa.gov/cwsrf). infrastructure projects,range ofwater includingwastewater quality management communities apermanent,independentsource financing oflow-cost for awide The Clean Water State Revolving Fund thatprovides isafederal USpartnership help drive broad reform water sector (seePaul 2011). therulesofgameto access manner; apolitical andobjective commercial loans public fundscandrive transparency, sector-wide and inan accountability efficiency lessonhasbeenthatprivate financing financing. coupledwith sector Animportant available to by thewater leveraging sector limited publicfunds withODA andprivate The Philippine Water Revolving Fund usesaway to increase thepooloffinancing solutions/watercredit) An exampleis WaterCredit, provided by theorganization Water.org (seewater.org/ Microcredit schemesproviding loansto smallenterprises andhouseholds. (seewww.uncdf.org).poverty educational andentrepreneurial investments to enablethetransitionoutof to overcome economic shocks, ensure smoothconsumption, andprovide areproducts madeavailable atareasonable cost, andonasustainablebasis, aswell assmallandmediumenterprises.– andmicro-enterprises Financial payments andremittances) are available to individuals–notablythe “unbanked” to ensure (savings, thatsuitablefinancialproducts credit, insurance, institutions, banks, cooperatives andmoneytransfer companies UN Capital Development Fund microfinance –supports schemes andtheirbasicfeatures Examples ofinnovative financing 8.5 Financing implications up to municipal level. They bring additional environmental, social and economic benefits of recovery and reuse that can be clearly linked to the investment, including through the sale of commercially Improving sanitation and wastewater viable reuse products such as biogas, management leads to diverse direct and fertilizers and irrigation water, and their value indirect benefits for society, and these to society can be included in the overall benefits increase in value with more financial calculation as revenue or benefit ambitious investment in sustainability (ISF-UTS 2014). terms (see Figure 8.6). As pointed out in the previous chapters, wastewater and A study comparing the pros and cons of excreta can be seen as an economic asset. different types of sludge treatment – aerobic However, the indirect, external returns are and anaerobic digestion, natural and rarely included in cost-benefit analyses, not mechanical dewatering and composting – least because it is difficult to ascribe them found that anaerobic digestion with energy confidently to a sanitation or wastewater recovery had both the lowest costs and the investment, and they do not produce direct lowest environmental impacts (Ghazy et al. monetized returns (without innovative cost- 2011). However, scale can make a difference: recovery mechanisms). in wastewater treatment plants designed to serve populations smaller than 90,000, In conventional systems, the direct drying beds were more cost-effective in monetized returns will never cover the Egyptian conditions. total costs of installation and O&M. However, resource recovery and reuse can Resource recovery and reuse can offset transform the economics of sanitation and the costs of sanitation and wastewater wastewater management from household management systems – sometimes

Ladder of increasing value propositions related to wastewater treatment FIGURE 8.6 based on increasing investments and cost recovery potential

Potable water recovery

Water recovery for industry Fresh Energy recovery drinking and carbon Industrial water Internal credits production production of Decreased fish feed, fish Avoided fresh internal/ Treatment or biofuel water use external value Nutrients and energy organic matter Feedstock, proposition demand recovery protein and ethanol Water recovery Carbon Yield increase production Safe disposal for irrigation emissions offset for Avoided environmental Yield increase eutrophication health Surface water Avoided fresh Soil quality water use amelioration

Environmental Water reliability flows Recovery value proposition from wastewater and biosolids Groundwater Public health recharge

Figure: Based on Wichelns et al. 2015

111 112 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY source separation ofnutrient-richurine nutrient loadsreaching recipient waters, to reduce wherein contexts itisnecessary andlivelihoods.productivity For example, are offset andnewsources of revenue, economic benefitsin terms of costs that resource recovery andreuse isitspotential one ofthemainarguments infavour of a system withresource recovery. However, the different costs ofinstallingandoperating Table 8.1illustrates anattempt to categorize the Grubbensdeflaker(see Figure 8.7). disintegrationKrima system, and installed two systems to break upsludge:the sewage treatment plantinSweden, whichhas ratiointhecaseofKäppala to-cost This isclearlyillustrated by thegoodbenefit- digestion process. up thesludgeduringanaerobic can bemadeeven more efficientby breaking Cudney 2012).Biogas recovery from sludge treatment, seeLazarova etal. 2012;Long and (for more onenergy needsinwastewater represent halfthetotal operating costs in conventional wastewater treatment can because theenergy neededfor processes economically attractive, not least particularly substantially. Energy recovery isoften Figure: BasedonSundin2008 thousand euros FIGURE 8.7 1000 1200 200 400 600 800 0 0% 5% 10% Cost-benefit analysis for addingsludgeprocessing technologies increase ingasproduction 15% 20% to boost methane production fromto boostmethaneproduction sewage sludge, 25% cent (Maurer 2013). reduce operatingexpenditure by 25per potential to halve capitalexpenditure and waterborne systems. This hasademonstrated wastewater treatment costs incentralized 4.4)cansignificantly reduce(see Section Bolivia. Photo: Kim Andersson Bolivia. Photo: Kim Storage tanksforsource-separated urine, ElAlto, Käppalasewage treatment plant, Sweden 30% 5 40% 35% Annual cost,deflaker Annual cost,disintegrator Savings +increasedincome TABLE 8.1 Major costs of wastewater reuse systems

System segment Major cost elements

Physical facilities and associated costs Other costs

Wastewater generation Pre-treatment (especially by industry) to Source control prevent constituents toxic to humans or regulatory system crops being discharged into sewers

Sewage collection system Construction, operation and maintenance costs for pipes, pump stations

Wastewater treatment for Construction, operation and Regulatory system to set discharge or reuse maintenance costs for treatment treatment or effluent quality facilities standards and to monitor treated water quality, worker protection

Additional wastewater Construction, operation and Regulatory system to set treatment for reuse maintenance costs for treatment treatment or effluent quality facilities standards and to monitor treated water quality, worker protection

Untreated wastewater or Construction, operation and reclaimed water distribution maintenance costs for pipes, system canals, water storage

Reuse site Construction, operation and Additional water purchase to maintenance costs for pipes, canals, leach salts from soil, worker meters or water measurement devices, protection, negative effects on valves, irrigation equipment; re- farm production and income, plumbing of existing sites to separate education of local residents, potable from non-potable pipes groundwater monitoring, regulatory surveillance

Effluent discharge system Construction, operation and Regulatory surveillance maintenance costs of pipes

Source: Winpenny et al. 2010

These costs and benefits naturally vary Improved wastewater treatment was depending on a wide range of contextual needed to address urgent challenges linked factors. Table 8.2 shows a tool developed by to recurrent drought and eutrophication in Winpenny et al. (2010) to estimate the many an environmentally sensitive area. The costs and benefits for different stakeholders planned system included a constructed in a given context. There are both costs and wetland in the public park surrounding benefits for all, and costs are shared along the treatment plant to “polish” the treated the value chain. It is always important not effluent up to agricultural reuse standards to overlook the positive impacts of effluent and simultaneously provide recreational reuse when costing out capital and operation space. The study concluded that, taking expenses, as a possible investment incentive. into account factors such as net present An illustrative financial feasibility study was value, benefit-cost ratio, pay-back period, carried out for a system in the Po valley and internal rate of return, the project was in Italy with agricultural reuse of treated financially feasible. Most of the benefits wastewater (Verlicchi et al. 2012). were non-market in nature.

113 114 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

Source: Winpenny etal. 2010 ** According allcosts mustbeincludedinfinalprice. toEUpolicy * NotethatinmostEuropean countries water cannot besold, butthecosts can berecovered. investments) andrecurring costs (suchasforoperation andmaintenance (O&M). investments one-off todistinguishbetween In usingthistabletoestimatebenefitsand costs ofa reuse system,itisimportant and inpurchasing fertilizer. cost of pumpingirrigationwater from rivers, Two were factors savings: inthe important outweigh thecosts by €9.5millionperyear. 2011). Overall, thebenefits were calculated to benefits in relation to costs (Heinzetal. million m3peryear) resulted ineven higher treated (butnotseparated) wastewater (13.2 A casefrom Spainwithagricultural reuse of TABLE 8.2 Farmers Municipal utilities government Central Benefits Stakeholder authorities regional water State governments,

major infrastructure orothernew projects inter-state freshwater Avoided cost ofmajor revenue yields andsales increase in fertilizer; pumping; savings in and in abstraction of effluent; savings Greater reliability charges reduced pollution urban water sales; revenuesExtra *from effluent treatment costs; solutions; savings in alternative water Avoided costs of greater water security and ruralareas dueto development ofurban revenues from further to cities;fiscal of bulkfresh water Revenues from sale Financial benefitsand costs ofeffluent reuse formajorstakeholders

transfers entailed any fiscal WWTPs; effluent from municipal costs; purchase(*) of schemes andO&M Capital fundingof restrictions onamenity restrictions health measures and costs ofpublic and infrastructure; costs ofnew facilities Capital andoperating Key factors other stakeholders compensation paidto cost oftransfers and netfiscal of project; capitalcost Initial Costs price ofland amenity, reflected in reducedrestrictions; Cost ofproduce (3,000 inhabitants) in Erdos, northern China. (3,000 inhabitants) inErdos, northern ofanewblock apartment toilets inevery dry 8.8). The installedurine-diverting project Environmentby Stockholm (Figure Institute led ofaproject complex aspart apartment on-site reuse system installed inanurban a conventional sanitationsystem withan prehensive cost-benefit analysis comparing Tsinghua University carriedout acom-

restrictions entitlement; severity ofproduce to sellexisting water ability water; effluent, comparedto thatof fresh groundwater; price charged for alternatives available, e.g. own by andrecovered from farmers; How cost muchofproject borne urban shortages degree ofcurrent andfuture between usersandauthorities;** ofcosts apportionment water; Tariff for effluentand policy fresh health regulations local environmental andpublic regional andlocalgovernments; responsibilities between central, Division offinancialandfiscal environmental standards (e.g. EU) healthand funding; mandatory access to external pricing policy; layers ofadministration; water responsibilities between different Delineation offiscalandfinancial

(e.g. capital Using a social discount rate of 8 per cent, the 8.6 Sanitation and on-site reuse system was found to be more economically viable than the conventional wastewater management in one (Rosemarin et al. 2012). The benefits of a development context the reuse system included water savings, recycling of nutrients from the excreta, In many developing countries, wastewater and reuse of wastewater, and amounted to management and sanitation form part of approximately US$20,000 per year, which a larger development need, along with was approximately twice those from the community and household improvements conventional system. External benefits were, such as better housing, drainage, energy however, approximately US$2 million per services, land-use reform/zoning, healthcare, year: 35 times the figure for the conventional food security, employment, literacy, system. community governance, tax systems and others. However, often water and sanitation It is also notable that the construction costs investments are not well integrated with of the reuse system were twice as high as for other development priorities, which can the conventional system, partly as the system cause project inefficiency and even failure. was so novel, and there were few similar Financing sanitation and wastewater experiences to learn from. The construction management without integrating it with costs for such a reuse system are likely to fall these other development areas can be as the technologies become more mature, counterproductive. and benefit from increased policy support. It was suggested that support mechanisms In both the North and the South, the might include a water rights system, water and sanitation sector is commonly incentives for reduced wastewater discharge, financed with subsidies. However, these and a rational wastewater tariff. subsidies overwhelmingly target urban

Compartments included in the cost-benefit analysis comparing on-site FIGURE 8.8 reuse sanitation system with a conventional system for the Erdos project

On-site reuse system Conventional system

Building Buildings in the (dry toilet) Faeces Urine community collection, Collection of storage and conveyance Greywater collection kitchen refuse and utilization Sewer Decentralized Composting wastewater facility Disposal treatment plant Excess Centralized facility sludge wastewater Excess (landfill etc.) treatment plant sludge Advanced treatment reclaimed water for irrigation, landscape etc.

Treated Compost Treated wastewater wastewater fertilizer discharge discharge

Figure: Based on Rosemarin et al. 2012

115 116 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY costed outandfinanced onits own. itself, cannotbeisolated, andthesector particular, isthusrooted indevelopment universal WASH, andsanitationin The dilemmasurrounding financing andhealthservices. agricultural extension rural development, landtenure, and needsto bestrongly linked to support At thesametime, inmany ruralareas, ofAuditorsCourt 2012). recurrent andfrequent failures (European balanced approach we are likelyto see and managementcapacities. Without this and atthesametimedeep-rooted O&M of urbanandperi-urbaninfrastructure, comprehensive development interms to takeonamore resilient role requires receive muchlower levels. For thesector systems, whentheyexist,are on-site) peri-urban areas (where of themajority centres, whilerural areas andinformal and othercombustible waste. Bioenergy Photo: /Janicki Secretariat Flickr /SuSanA A combined heatandpower plantthatrecovers potablewater energy (heatandelectricity), andashfrom faecal sludge Resource recovery andreuse can • Innovative financingmechanismscan • Safe WASH are affordable services if • The benefitsthatcan andindirect direct • KEY MESSAGES with indirect economicwith indirect value. societal andenvironmental benefits both monetized returns andbroader and wastewater investment, providing change theeconomics ofsanitation and wastewater systems. financing gap for sustainablesanitation be considered to address thesignificant of broader development. O&M canbeincreased withinacontext forand supplycapacity bothcapitaland consumer demandcanbestabilized investments required. are many timesgreater thanthe and wastewater managementsystems be obtainedfrom sustainablesanitation 9. SHOWCASING TECHNICAL SYSTEMS FOR SAFE RESOURCE RECOVERY

This section presents some successful resource reuse and recovery solutions that are being implemented in various parts of the world. The descriptions focus on technologies, but also try to set out key issues and lessons in relation to other aspects of sustainability.

Members of an indigenous community in Munchique, Colombia, participate in designing a sanitation system (top) and learn to make their own urine-diverting toilets (left) for home use (right). Photos: Kim Andersson

117 118 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

Photo: Wingoc CASE STUDY 9.1 with chemical treatment TOTAL VOLUMEOF RECYCLED WATER: Drinking waterDrinking supply and aquiferrecharge WASTE STREAM: TYPE OFREUSE: 5.8 millionm3/year Multiple barriers RECOVERED: TREATMENT: Potable water RESOURCE and filtration Municipal sewage

sewage. Reclaimedwater constitutes upto 35 percent standards from sewagepiped municipal secondary-treated potable water thatmeets allrequired water drinking New Goreangab is ableto project consistently produce Using advanced multi-barriertreatment processes, the The system control. (managed groundwater recharge) andwater pollution of water savings, water reclamation, water banking strategy withtheaimofsecuringsupplyby acombination implemented anintegrated water resource management away.300 km As aconsequence, Windhoek has isapproximatelyNamibian Atlantic coastline (2,650km) perennial river, whilethe theOkavango, to thenorth-east, separates from thecity thenearestRoughly 700km Windhoek thussuffers frequent water shortages. evaporationrate isapproximatelysurface 3,400mm/year. erratic, totalling around 370mmayear, whilethepotential groundwater (borehole water) for water supply. is Rainfall water (damsfed byon surface ephemeral rivers) and annually atarate ofaround 5 percent. reliesThe city The populationof Windhoek isabout350,000,growing meetrisingwater demandintohelp thecity thefuture. 2002, madetheprocess even more efficientandshould New Goreangab Water ReclamationPlant,completed in has reclaimed potablewater from municipalsewage. The For more than45years, of thecity Windhoek inNamibia Namibia Water Reclamation Plant, Windhoek, municipal sewage: New Goreangab Reclaiming water from of the water supplied to the households. No health problems have ever been reported, and safety has been verified by epidemiological studies. This has been achieved, moreover, in a country with limited technical and financial resources. Despite its success and obvious utility, Windhoek’s direct potable water reclamation from sewage remains unique in the world.

The plant can treat 21,000 m3 of secondary treated sewage per day. It uses at least two removal processes for each contaminant that could be harmful to human health or aesthetically objectionable. Industrial and other potentially toxic wastewater streams are separated from the main municipal wastewater stream.

Results Since 1997, the Windhoek municipal authorities have practised water banking by recharging the local aquifer with potable water – a mix of purified water from the Goreangab plant with conventionally treated drinking water. The water injected into the aquifer is fit for human consumption.

The total volume of water that had been banked in this way up to 2013 was 3.3 million m3. The capacity is being further expanded in order to provide water over extended drought periods of up to three years, covering up to 60 per cent of the expected water demand by 2020. Very strict water quality guidelines are enforced to prevent deterioration of groundwater quality and additional treatment steps prior to injection prevent clogging of the aquifer by controlling biodegradable dissolved organic carbon.

The total annualized costs of purifying water at the plant is €0.95/m3, of which €0.75/m3 is O&M costs. User tariffs for the recycled water are linked to consumption, and range from €0.75/m3 to €2.3/m3.

Sources: Lahnsteiner et al. (2013); personal communication with John Esterhuizen, General Manager, Windhoek Goreangab Operating Company (Pty) Ltd (WINGOC); and the WINGOC website (http://www. wingoc.com.na/).

119 120 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

flushing, outdoorfloor/patio Photo: UNSPLASH / Oliver Wndel washing, garden irrigation, CASE STUDY 9.2 Greywater reused fortoilet including anaerobic steps On-site foreachbuilding,On-site decanting, filtration and 432 m3/month/building Domestic non-kitchen non-kitchen Domestic within eachequipped followed by aeration, WASTE STREAM: apartment building apartment TYPE OFREUSE: Non-potable water WATER SAVING: EXAMPLE NET RECOVERED: TREATMENT: RESOURCE chlorination greywater

supplies showers, sinks, washingmachines andtanks. water andone for recovered greywater. water The drinking water supplysystems: onefrom themainsfor drinking The buildingsaretwo fitted with independentpiped The system release fewer by-products. non-potable reuse, andtheycanoperate more stablyand are adequate to maketheremaining greywater safe for greywater) are smalleron-site diverted, treatment plants separation: asfaeces andurine(alongwithkitchen illustratesThis theadvantagesofsource practice cent ofpotablewater asaresult. buildingsareirrigation. Some ableto save upto 30 per flushing toilets, washingpublicspaces andgarden itavailable formaking variousnon-potableuses, including separated greywater, minimallytreating it,andthen reuse. This relies onon-site systems, source- collecting blockshave instituted building-levelapartment greywater and reuse. themetropolitan area In of Vitória, several water savings andwastewaterboth voluntary recovery been implemented inthelargest Braziliancities, including have practices water conservation A rangeofdrinking third ofthepopulation,are atriskofwater supplycollapse. At least19metropolitan areas, including thehomesofa ofthewater,and thequality whiledemandisgrowing fast. supply isthreatened by problems withboth thequantity Water scarcity isareality inseveral Braziliancities, where Background buildings, apartment Vitória, Brazil Greywater reuse inindividual The greywater generated from these uses is carried to the building’s greywater treatment plant. Following treatment, the recovered water enters the second water supply system, which feeds toilet and dedicated taps. Blackwater and kitchen sink greywater are channelled directly to the sewerage network.

The treatment plants produce only a small amount of liquid sludge, which can be released directly into the sewer. Several indicators of treated greywater, such as pH, turbidity, residual chlorine and E. coli content, are measured monthly to ensure they are within safe limits, and the treated water is low-risk, according to WHO standards. Moreover, the treatment plant and immediate environment represent a small risk for bacterial transmission, chiefly via aerosol routes for personnel carrying out maintenance work.

Results In the 30-apartment Royal Blue condominium block, the first to have a greywater reuse system installed, the system has produced a large surplus of water for reuse. The consumption (91 litres per day) accounts for about 32 per cent of the available water, leaving a surplus of around 68 per cent that is not used in the building. The potential for increased reuse could mean even greater savings of drinking water in the future. At present, the untreated greywater is released through a bypass system into the public sewer. The system produces a net water savings of 432 m3/month.

The monthly costs associated with the greywater treatment plant are related to O&M, energy, removal of sludge and laboratory analysis. Spending on O&M is approximately US$260 per month for the entire 30-apartment building. The cash flow based on costs and revenues from the installation and operation of the reuse of greywater system becomes positive in 103 months, which means that in 8.5 years the amount invested will be recovered, based on current operation practices. Greywater reuse in buildings is still a very recent development in Brazil. The absence of a legal framework contributes to uncertainty among the various stakeholders involved. Nevertheless, given the obvious economic and practical advantages, implementation has been expanding quickly across the country.

Source: Bazzarella 2005; and Gonçalves, da Silva and Wanke 2010.

121 122 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

Photo: Reuters / Erik De Castro CASE STUDY 9.3 432 m3/month/building chlorination, filtration silvicultural irrigation WASTE STREAM: mechanical screens, TYPE OFREUSE: WATER SAVING: Municipal sewage oxidation ponds, Agricultural and EXAMPLE NET RECOVERED: irrigation water TREATMENT: and nutrients RESOURCE Non-potable Centralized;

experimental farm’s total requirement wasabout2.35litres farm, thenappliedto thecrops usingdripirrigation. The anddelivereda reservoir by pipelineto theexperimental wastewater treatment plant. Treated water wasstored in The farmwaslocated closeto theGerga municipal The system alsoincludedolives.Subsequent harvests were planted inthewinter 2013. seasonofSeptember summer, andbroad (fava) beans, lentilsandchickpeas and hibiscuswere inthe choseninApril2013for harvest regions. Crops suchaswhite figs, pomegranate, sunflower agricultural development and urbanexpansionindesert sewage inthecultivationoftimbertrees, aswell asfor ofthecountry’sThe planto ispart project usetreated for Environment, LandandSea. Ministry and Wastewater, incollaboration withUNEPandtheItalian managed by theCairo-based HoldingCompany for Water to meetgrowing demandfor food. The 2.5-acre farmwas relieving pressure onscarce water resources andhelping soils, andinfertile simultaneously dry crops onotherwise reusing treated sewagewastewater to irrigate andfertilize Gerga demonstrated thepotential inSohag benefitsof of experiment (2013-2015)inafarmoutsidethecity Egypt witharound 4.5million inhabitants. Atwo-year region inUpper GovernorateSohag isasemi-desert Background Governorate,Sohag Egypt and nutrients from sewage: Gerga, Farming withwater inasemi-desert per second, and trees and crops were irrigated for up to 5.5 hours a day, depending on water demand.

The treated wastewater showed itself to be a competitive substitute for nutrients for the chosen crops. Analysis found that the heavy metals content was high for root or bulb crops such as potatoes, sweet potatoes, carrots, turnips, onions and garlic. However, it was within both Egyptian national and European standards for irrigation of leaf or stem food crops. For the cultivation of fruit crops those with a thick skin such as citrus and pomegranate were chosen. Industrial wastewater was source-separated and thus did not enter the waste stream.

Results As well as demonstrating the technical feasibility of this system, the project had wider aims. It raised awareness and educated farmers not only with regard to agricultural questions but also concerning economic, social and health issues related to the dangers of using untreated wastewater for food crop production as compared to the benefits of using safer treated wastewater. The project showed that it is important to consider distances between farms, treatment plants and groundwater wells (additional sources of water) when planning and deciding study locations – proximity means feasibility.

The study also engaged scientists and other specialists to look at the most suitable soil types (preferably light sandy soil textures with deep profiles in desert regions) and crops for sewage wastewater reuse in the specific local climatic conditions and in relation to the degree of sewage treatment and water salinity. A survey was also taken of the potential markets for the crops.

The expansion of drinking water delivery to underserved areas will increase wastewater volumes, thus providing more opportunities for building in reuse strategies from the start. Another lesson learned in Gerga is that institutional collaboration needs to be further emphasized and the appropriate state agencies need to be involved in such projects.

Source: HCWW 2014.

123 124 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

Photo:Photo: KimKim AnderssonAndersson CASE STUDY 9.4 liquid composting and used as liquid fertilizer used asliquidfertilizer 432 m3/month/building for crop andbiomass plant adjacent tothe WASTE STREAM: TYPE OFREUSE: urea treatment ina Decentralized, with Treated blackwater WATER SAVING: Combined water RECOVERED: TREATMENT: EXAMPLE NET andnutrients RESOURCE production blackwater Household cropland

500 to 700households. The plant ismanagedby alocal itto atreatment plantdesigned towhich transports serve by for tankertruck, oftheblackwater utility collection at householdlevel. Householdspay afee to themunicipal Greywater istreatedto ahouseholdtank. andinfiltrated volumeblackwater anddilution. The toilets are connected low flush(max0.6 very l./flush) orvacuum toilet,to reduce At thehouseholdlevel, system theblackwater is either a The system municipal policy. treatment, with aviewto by safe reuse. wassupported It tanks athouseholdlevel, and organizing transportation approach, installingspecialtoiletsa whole-system and discharge ofcontaminated wastewater. The took project and thustheassociated eutrophication, andavoiding the farmland –reducing theneedfor syntheticfertilizers, scheme wasimplemented, withresource reuse onnearby As aresult, adecentralized wastewater management from addingto theproblem. led to afreeze onbuildingpermits, to prevent wastewater wastewater. Severe eutrophication oftwo nearby lakes were malfunctioning, causingdischarge ofcontaminated about 40 percent oftheexistingon-site sanitationsystems relatively low populationdensity. Prior to theproject, municipality, hasa It southofStockholm. of Södertälje andresearchers.community Hölöislocated inanarea is ajointinitiative by themunicipal utility, thefarming The decentralized system blackwater atHölö, Sweden, Background technology, Hölö, Sweden in agriculture, liquidcomposting Reuse ofhouseholdblackwater farmer, who receives technical and financial support for O&M from the utility. After treatment, the blackwater is stored in a 1,500 m3 tank until it is reused.

The liquid fertilizer produced from Hölö treatment plant meets the newly developed Swedish certification standards for wastewater fractions for reuse from on-site and smaller wastewater treatment systems (see Box 7.9). Initial quality tests showed elevated values for copper, but this was easily corrected by replacing some brass faucets at the treatment plant. The reusing farmers also have complementary environmental protection features in their farms, such as protective zones around watercourses to reduce nutrient leaching, which have proved effective in preventing the release of pharmaceuticals.

Results The liquid produced provides a complete fertilizer input for 40 ha. of cultivated land. The initiative has achieved its primary purpose – reduced eutrophication of lakes and coastal waters – more cost-effectively than expansion of the centralized sewer system could have done. Environmental restrictions have spurred technical development of the blackwater treatment, which is now patented by the utility, and the process produces a popular certified liquid fertilizer that can be spread using conventional farming equipment. Effective public-private entrepreneurial arrangements between utility and farmer are another benefit to have come out of the initiative.

Source: Personal communication with K.A. Reimer, Södertälje Municipality, and A. Kalo, Telge Nät, Sweden.

125 126 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

of urineandvermicomposting

faeces used as solid fertilizer faeces usedassolidfertilizer Photo: Kim Andersson

after treatment.after Greywater liquid fertilizer, composted CASE STUDY 9.5 pre-treated inagrease Decentralized storage Treated urineusedas WASTE STREAM: urine andgreywater used forornamental of faeces. Greywater TYPE OFREUSE: and kitchen garden and kitchen in crop production Source-separated household faeces, before reuse Combined water TREATMENT: RECOVERED: andnutrients RESOURCE irrigation

have hadsystems installed, thegrowing volume offertilizer were used indemonstration gardens. As more families excreta-derived thefirstphaseof the project, In fertilizers safe to reuse, includingfor food production. Testing found thatbothwater andexcreta were products household’s garden, with ornamentalandedibleplants. showers ischannelledto wetlands smallconstructed inthe while urineistreated by storage. Greywater from basinsand reuse. Faeces iscomposted with worms (vermicomposting), and faeces separately, for resource recovery andagricultural The systems andtreat installedby collect theproject urine gardens, andfrequent follow-up visits. on socialprocesses building, suchascapacity demonstration oflifequality inthecommunities, andputstrong emphasis villages, installedthesystems. SumajHuasiaimedto improve Aymara indigenousgroup whomigrated to ElAlto from rural Sumaj Huasi.More than1,200families, mainlyfrom the This wasinitiated project in2008by thenationalFundación adaptation measure. climateWater change isthusanimportant conservation currently provide asignificant share offreshwater supply. and anticipated disappearance ofAndeanglaciers, which and are likelyto beaggravated by thecontinued shrinking due to increasing water demandfrom agrowing population, andrationingonweekends). (shortages These problems are andwithaproblematicinfrastructure water supply growing publicsewerage lacking peri-urbancommunity 7ofElAlto city,District Bolivia,isanexampleofa Background peri-urban community: ElAlto, Bolivia and localgreywater reuse ina Decentralized excreta management produced has opened up potential for large-scale treatment and reuse. The excreta-derived fertilizers (vermicompost and treated urine) have been found to be even more nutrient-rich than organic fertilizers commonly used in the region (such as cow manure), as evidence by both nutrient testing and crop yields. Potato yields from plants fertilized with human vermicompost and urine were double those of plants fertilized with cow manure.

The system The household systems installed by the project include urine-diverting dry toilets, to minimize water use. The UDDTs have a single vault, in which faeces is collected in 100-litre plastic containers and urine in 20-litre jerry cans. The containers are collected using pick-up trucks, and transported to the common treatment plant. Faecal matter is vermicomposted for eight to nine months using red Californian earthworms (Eisenia fetida).

The households are responsible for the appropriate use and cleaning of the toilets, and for moving the containers with faeces and urine to the street outside the house on scheduled collection days. Appropriate use includes applying a layer of sawdust over the faeces after defecation, and a small quantity of water after urinating. Sawdust is easy to find in the area and costs about 5 Bolivianos (US$0.65) for a 20 kg bag (sufficient for about one month).

The project also installed showers and hand-washing/laundry basins for improved hygiene. The greywater captured from these is pre-treated in site-built grease-traps before being channelled to the constructed wetlands. Currently, about 8 tons of solids (faeces and sawdust) and 22,500 litres of urine are collected each month and processed at a common treatment plant. To overcome challenges for handling and reuse posed by these large volumes, a number of different strategies have been tried, such as storing urine directly in the field before cultivation.

Results The construction cost per sanitary unit was $795. Of this, $620 was covered by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and Sumaj Huasi, and households contributed labour and other in-kind contributions. A monthly fee scheme has been piloted, in which each household pays around 10–20 Bolivianos ($1.30–2.60) per month to cover collection and transport costs. The decentralized system has proved cost-effective compared to centralized systems and the fertilizer products offer significant boosts to agricultural production.

A general positive health impact has been confirmed in the community. The prevalence of acute diarrhoeal disease has fallen by 23 per cent, according to epidemiological studies in the intervention area. Analyses of treated faeces show that parasite content is within WHO-recommended limits. The water saving due to the installed UDDTs is estimated at 108 m3 per day in the project area.

Experience in the project indicates that key factors in the high acceptance rate have included the comprehensive social process, an integrated WASH approach, and, in particular, the collection and external management of the excreta. Sources: Suntura and Sandoval 2012, Fundación Sumaj Huasi 2015.

127 128 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

Curitiba. Photo: Flickr / Francisco Anzola CASE STUDY 9.6 (food andnon-foodcrops) with secondary treatment with secondary Sludge dewatered and consisting ofaeration, Anaerobic treatment,Anaerobic including limeadded or percolating filters. WASTE STREAM: TYPE OFREUSE: stabilization ponds Municipal sewage, and reforestation during treatment treated withlime RECOVERED: TREATMENT: organic matter Nutrients and RESOURCE Agriculture

sign they are a specialagreement aware certifying ofthe isadded.fertilizer Farmers receive technical advice, and soil andnutritionalneeds. necessary, If supplementary of reuse. The sludgeapplication rate isbasedonthecrop’s produce suitablecrops andinareas appropriate for thissort to farmersregistered intheprogramme. The farmersmust standards,sludge meetstheregulatory itismadeavailable testing to ensureAfter laboratory abatch ofprocessed and treated separately. for thefarmers. wastewater Industrial isseparated atsource corrector, asasoilacidity act savings representing further quantities oflime. This meansthatthetreated sludgecan process, thesludge’s pHisraised to 12by addinglarge this sludge through stabilization.In prolonged alkaline ofthetreatment of attheplantisdisinfection One aspect The system reforestation. beans, corn, soybeans, grass andeucalyptuspine crops, mulberries, coffee, rye, sugarcane, barley, citrus, The treated sludgehasbeenusedfor green manure wasimplemented throughout2011 thispractice thestate. implement theprocess inotherregions began, andafter and intheregion ofFoz doIguaçu. After 2007,steps to generated intheMetropolitan Area ofCuritiba (RMC) has beenthefinaldisposalmethod for thesewagesludge in thestate ofParaná, Brazil. Since 2002,agricultural use overwastewater treatment 7millionpeople plantsserving Sanitation Company ofParaná (Sanepar)runs234 Background Paraná State, Brazil Reuse ofsewage sludgeinagriculture, requirements and guidance for proper use of the material, and commit to follow them. The treated sludge is supplied free to the farmers.

The agricultural reuse of sewage sludge follows the criteria and procedures established in national and state regulatory measures. These set a maximum limit for pathogenic agents and inorganic contaminants. The monitoring of organic substances in the sludge is also required, but these do not have to adhere to maximum concentration limits. The observed levels of pathogens found in the sludge meet all the requirements of the related regulation – Resolução Sema 021/09. The inorganic substance levels remain under the limits of the regulation 90 per cent of the time.

Results From 2011 to 2013, 104 farmers benefited in farming areas in 41 municipalities, an average of 65 km away from a treatment plant. The reuse of sludge in Paraná provides benefits to the farmers (based on replacement of NPK fertilizers and lime application) amounting to US$110/ha. In 2011–13, reused sludge supplied 90 per cent of the limestone, 69 per cent of the nitrogen, 83 per cent of the P2O5, and 35 per cent of the K20 demand in Paraná.

The sewage sludge has received a favourable reception among farmers in the state and the approach holds great promise. The project’s expansion has been a major challenge for Sanepar, as sludge recycling was not an operational goal from the start of system design. Thus, improvement of infrastructure and capacity building are necessary. Other complications include logistics of transporting the sludge, uneven demand around the year (concentrated in two growing seasons), and the high number of rainy days, which can make application difficult. The programme also encountered difficulties contracting laboratory analysis services with the required infrastructure and technical capacity. The project has also highlighted a need to update national regulations, which presently impose an overly bureaucratic and burdensome process not applicable to local conditions.

Sources: Andreoli et al. 2001, Bittencourt 2014, Souza et al. 2008.

129 130 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

greywater, livestock manure, Photo: Flickr / N. Khawaja Anaerobic fermentation Anaerobic followed by composting CASE STUDY 9.7 and agriculture (food WASTE STREAM: and heating(biogas) and non-foodcrops) TYPE OFREUSE: of organic matter, Biogas, nutrients, Cooking, lighting of theremaining Human excreta, food waste and TREATMENT: RECOVERED: soil conditioner crop residues RESOURCE sludge

estimates ranging from 30 percent to 90 percent. how many inuse, oftheinstalled unitsare with actually supply oforganic material. isunclearfrom reports It systems are alsodependsonanadequate biological. It depends oncareful operationandmaintenance, since the and are designed to lastfor 20years; however, success those for householdusehave avolume of6,8,or10m3 Several digester modelshave beendeployed. of Most improvement agent. aerated composting site, resulting inanutrient-richsoil accumulated sludgeistransferred from thedigester to an for lightingandcooking. Once digestioniscomplete, the forcollected useasahouseholdenergy source, mainly methanobacters, producing methanegasthatcanbe farm. Their carboncontent isdigested anaerobically by mixed withotherorganic waste from thehouseholdand where fermentation theyaretoilets tank, to theairtight Human excreta are transferred by pour-flushing from The system about100millionpeople. US$4.5 billion,impacting expansion in2003–2012,withacumulative investment of energy to farmingcommunities. There wasmajor by Zedong Mao duringthe1950s to provide renewable goes backto theruraldevelopment policiesinitiated have beenbuiltwithgovernment subsidies. The concept communities. 40millionbiogasfermenting Some units has spread across thecountry, primarilyinrural Since the1970s, China’s biogasdevelopment programme Background China fertilizer: On-site systems for biogasand Results In 2013, China produced more than 15 billion m3 of biogas, producing energy equivalent to 25 million tons of coal or 11.4 per cent of the national natural gas consumption. Also, biogas digesters produce 410 million tons of organic fertilizer per year, reduce CO2 emissions by 61 million tons, and generate benefits worth ¥47 billion (US$7.3 billion at 2012 exchange rates) in cost savings and income, according to the Ministry of Agriculture. Nevertheless, questions have been raised about whether the heavy government subsidies for the programme (provided for initial installation, and regardless of the wealth and income of the household) have encouraged installation of systems that have not subsequently been properly used and maintained. A lack of maintenance services has proved a bottleneck.

Biogas production from excreta and other organic waste provides several economic and environmental benefits for rural communities, including a clean and low-cost energy alternative to fuelwood, charcoal and fossil fuels, and a low- cost source of safe plant nutrients and soil conditioner. Health benefits range from improved indoor air compared to cooking with charcoal and wood, to containment of excreta and animal manure.

Source: Zuzhang 2013.

131 132 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY

where blacksoliderflylarvae Black soldier fly . Photo: Dunstan Adongo from urine-diverting toilets from urine-diverting feed onsludgeandreduce to central treatment plant and humanfaecal sludge CASE STUDY 9.8 the massoftreated WASTE STREAM: Faecal sludgetaken TYPE OFREUSE: agricultural inputs, Livestock feedand nutrients, protein Livestock manure plus industrialoils Organic matter, RECOVERED: TREATMENT: pathogen load RESOURCE material and

collected from the diverting toilets, fromcollected the diverting alongwithprocess of income for communities orlocalentrepreneurs. Urine biomass isahigh-valueproduct. This provides asource goodoptionbecausetheresulting larval a particularly oftheblacksoldier flyarehigh organic content. Larvae Faecal dueto its waste canbeusedto larvae feed insect toilets in80,000households.diverting The aimisto process faecalwaste removed from urine- under development through apublic-private partnership. faecal waste processing plantusing thetechnology is eThekwiniIn municipality, Africa, South acost-effective been usedto managehumanexcreta onalarge scale. with swine, chickenandcattlemanure, ithasnotyet technology hasbeenused While blacksoldierflylarvae municipal organic waste by upto 70 percent. matter content ofmanure by upto 58 percent andthatof can consume large amountsofwaste, reducing thedry of protein andfatfor animalfeed. Blacksoliderflylarvae managing waste, are agoodsource asthe mature larvae and potentially financiallysustainableapproach to black soldierfly( by sellingtheproducts. Processing faecalsludgeusing as thecosts ofremoval befullycovered cannotoften high costs for anddisposingoffaecalsludge emptying are notavailable, services emptying orhouseholdsface the lackofeconomic incentive. many In areas, pitlatrine One keybarrierto safe managementoffaecalsludgeis Background AfricaSouth with blacksoldierfly: eThekwini, Livestock protein feed from faeces hermetia illucens ) larvae offers anew ) larvae residues from the black soldier fly technology, can be safely used as agricultural fertilizers and soil conditioner after further treatment.

Adult black solder flies are not disease vectors and are not considered a nuisance fly species because they only feed on fat stores from their larval stage. The larvae also reduce the dry mass of faecal waste and reduce E. coli and salmonella pathogen loads, thus decreasing the risk of disease transmission. However, if treatment residues are to be used as fertilizers for food crops, an additional treatment step is recommended.

Next steps More research needs to be conducted on the ability of black soldier fly larvae to consume human waste, including wastes from different latrine types, with different physical and chemical characteristics. Potential risks resulting from bioaccumulation of heavy metals and contamination by pathogens need to be assessed for biomass that enters the human food chain thus creating possible regulatory obstacles to using larvae as animal feed.

Sources: Lalander et al. 2013, Banks et al. 2013 and Alcock 2015.

133 134 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY other processes. saving andsupply, andpotentially many agriculture, but alsoenergy water production, inputs to productive processes, particularly valuable resources. The “wastes” become “closing theloop” andrecovering and reusing circular economy paradigm, asways of management, incontrast, belongto the health. Sustainablesanitationandwastewater ecosystem,protects human,andto anextent dangerous waste inaway products that are currently seenasways ofdisposing Sanitation andwastewater management about thevalueofexcreta and wastewater. and wastewater managementare for, and change inperceptions aboutwhatsanitation The transformation requires afundamental anticipated inthecomingsecurity decades. and thechallengesto water, food andenergy growth inpopulationsandurbancentres needs to happenurgently, given therapid sanitation andwastewater management sustainability. Andthetransformation of and environmental criteria for long-term is provided meetstheeconomic, social access, butalsoaboutensuringthatwhat inequalities thatstillexistinprovision and not onlyaboutclosingthemajorgapsand transformation hasmany dimensions:itis onto asustainabledevelopment path. This theworldmanagement iscriticalto shifting Transforming sanitationandwastewater 10. CONCLUDING REMARKS type ofreuse.type Poor inonestage functioning set-ups needto promote theparticular Andregulationsservices. andinstitutional businesses providing maintenance andother the caseofagricultural reuse). There mustbe resources, andfor crops grown withthem(in There mustbedemandfor therecovered andthewill to doso.both theknowledge used andmaintained, sotheusersmusthave beingproperly also dependsontheinterfaces andtreating themseparately.transporting It this separation, butalsomeansofstoring, thatallow needs notonlyuserinterfaces safe recovery ofresource. For itto it work, urine, faeces, greywater etc. –canfacilitate different waste streams atthesource – right technologies. For example, separating system isnotonlyaboutthe sustainability in thesystem are complementary. But point ofview, thismeansthatalltechnologies system perspective. From atechnological Designing suchsystem requires awhole- resource recovery. designed andoperated for safe andefficient should beinsustainablesystems thatare “lock-in”. As faraspossible, investments today investments, andthere isareal dangerof management systems. These are long-term sustainable sanitationandwastewater models, even asa “bridge” to more simply by replicating theold, unsustainable The transformation cannotbeachieved undermines the sustainability of the whole This book has presented a diverse selection of system. technical and institutional solutions that have been tried and tested around the Sustainable sanitation and wastewater world, and there are many more worth management systems must also be designed showcasing. Sanitation and wastewater for the specific local geographic, social, management designed for resources recovery cultural, economic and environmental is an area of rapid technological innovation, conditions; there are no one-size-fits- and there is a need for ever greater all sustainable sanitation systems. Hard technological cooperation, learning and experience has shown clearly that knowledge sharing. sustainability is not in the technology itself, but in how it matches the needs and As a final note, it is important to realize constraints of the specific context. that the challenges are not confined to the “developing world” where provision is Design also needs to take in the time currently poor. While most wealthy cities and dimension; the changes that may come countries have well-developed sanitation during the lifetime of a typical system. It and wastewater management systems, they makes practical and economic sense to are rarely suited to resource recovery, and plan and invest with an eye to the long- often use huge amounts of energy and water term future – for example urban expansion, (especially treated drinking water). Many will the consolidation of unplanned peri-urban need to adapt or even replace their existing communities, future pressures on resources, systems. Throughout history, advances in and climate change impacts. sanitation and wastewater management have gone hand in hand with some of the greatest Sustainability in a sanitation and wastewater steps in human development. Sanitation and system also depends on its ability to coper wastewater management could once again with natural and man-made hazards and play a crucial, even catalytic, role in realizing disasters. Systems that break down or the sustainable development vision of the malfunction during disasters are often 2030 Agenda. responsible for a large share of mortality and sickness in their aftermath. In this respect, sustainable sanitation and wastewater systems are an integral part of disaster resilience.

The economic case for investment in improved sanitation is already well established. Just the savings and dividends from increasing productivity and reducing mortality and sickness from communicable disease ensure that such investments pay for themselves several times over. But systems built for resource recovery and reuse can provide even greater economic benefits, creating jobs and even whole new business sectors and domestic markets. Depending on the context, making scarce resources, particularly water, fertilizer and clean energy in the form of biogas, available for society can lead to gains in productivity in sectors such as community development, transportation, agriculture, aquaculture and forestry.

The know-how and the capabilities to make good, sustainable investments are available.

135 REFERENCES

2030 Water Resources Group (2009). Charting sustainable sanitation”, Fact sheet, Stockholm our Water Future: Economic Frameworks to Inform Environment Institute. Available from http://www. Decision Making: The Economics of Water Resources. sei-international.org./publications?pid=2500. Munich, Germany: McKinsey. Andersson, K. (2014c). “Showcasing ecological 7th World Water Forum (2015). “Science & sanitation at an environmental education centre”, technology process”. Available from http:// Fact sheet. Stockholm Environment Institute. worldwaterforum7.org/introduce/program/ Available from http://www.sei-international.org./ science.asp. publications?pid=2499. Adrados, B., Sánchez, O., Arias, C. A., Becares, E., Andreoli, C.V., Von Sperling, M. and Fernandes, F., Garrido, L., Mas, J., Brix, H. and Morató, J. (2014). eds (2001). Lodode esgotos: tratamento e disposição Microbial communities from different types of final (Sewage sludge: treatment and final natural wastewater treatment systems: vertical disposal). Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Departamento de and horizontal flow constructed wetlands and Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental, Curitiba. biofilters. Water Research, vol. 55, pp. 304–312. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.02.011. Asano, T. (2002). Multiple uses of water: reclamation and reuse. GAIA, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. AF&PA (2012). 2012 AF&PA Sustainability Report. 277–280. Available from http://www.bvsde.paho. Washington, DC: American Forest & Paper org/bvsacd/leeds/asano2.pdf. Association. Balasubramaniyam, U., Meriggi, N., Zisengwe, L. Alcock, N. (2015). “Urine diversion toilet waste and Buysman, E. (2008). “Biogas production in removal in eThekwini municipality: business climates with long cold winters”, Feasibility study, partnership modeling”, Presentation at the Wageningen University, Netherlands. Available 3rd International Faecal Sludge Management from www.susana.org/lang-en/library?view=ccbkt Conference, Hanoi, Jan. Available from http:// ypeitem&type=2&id=855. www.susana.org/en/resources/library/ details/2173. Banerjee, S. G. and Morella E. (2011). Africa’s Water and Sanitation Infrastructure: Access, Affordability, Alderson, M. P., Santos, A. B. D. and Filho, C. R. and Alternatives. Washington, DC: World Bank. M. (2015). Reliability analysis of low-cost, full- scale domestic wastewater treatment plants for Banks, I. J., Gibson, W. T. and Cameron, M. M. reuse in aquaculture and agriculture. Ecological (2014). Growth rates of black soldier fly larvae Engineering, vol. 82, pp. 6–14. DOI: 10.1016/j. fed on fresh human faeces and their implication ecoleng.2015.04.081. for improving sanitation. Tropical Medicine & International Health, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 14–22. DOI: Amponsah, O., Schou, T. W., Braimah, I. and 10.1111/tmi.12228. Abaidoo, R. C. (2015). The impact of farmers’ participation in field trials in creating awareness Barber, E. B., Hacker, S. D., Kennedy, C., Koch, E. and stimulating compliance with the World W., Stier, A. C. and Silliman, B. R. (2011). The value Health Organization’s farm-based multiple- of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. barrier approach. Environment, Development Ecological Monographs, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 169–193. and Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1–21. DOI: doi/abs/10.1890/10-1510.1. 10.1007/s10668-015-9686-2. Barker, F. S., O’Toole, J., Sinclair, M. I., Leder, K., Andersson, K. (2014a). “Flood-resistant ecological Malawaraarachchi, M. and Hamilton, A. J. (2013). sanitation takes off in a rural community”, A probabilistic model of norovirus disease Fact sheet, Stockholm Environment Institute. burden associated with greywater irrigation of Available from http://www.sei-international.org./ home-produced lettuce in Melbourne, Australia. publications?pid=2497. Water Research, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 1421–1432. DOI:10.1016/j.watres.2012.12.012. Andersson, K. (2014b). “Agricultural trials demonstrate benefits of urine harvesting and SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: MANAGEMENT WASTEWATER SANITATION, RESOURCE RECOVERY TO DISPOSAL WASTE FROM

136 Barreto, M. L. et al. (2007). Effect of citywide B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave, L. A. sanitation programme on reduction in rate Meyer, eds. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge of childhood diarrhoea in northeast Brazil: University Press. assessment by two cohort studies. The Lancet, vol. 370, no. 9599, pp. 1622–28. DOI:10.1016/S0140- Bot, A. and Benites, J. (2005). The Importance of Soil 6736(07)61638-9. Organic Matter: Key to Drought-Resistant Soil and Sustained Food Production, FAO Soils Bulletin no. Bassan, M., Tchonda, T., Mbéguéré, M. and 80. Rome: UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Zabsonré, F. (2012). “Processus d’élaboration d’un cadre institutionnel régulant l’activité de vidange Bräustetter, A. (2007). “Operation and maintenance mécanique de la ville de Ouagadougou, Burkina of resource-oriented sanitation systems in Faso” [Process of developing an institutional peri-urban areas”, Diploma thesis, Triesdorf, framework to regulate mechanical emptying Fachhochschule Weihenstephan Abteilung activities in the city of Ouagadougou, Burkina Triesdorf, Fakultaet Umweltsicherung. Faso], 16th African Water Association (AfWA) Brooks, J. P., Tanner, B. D., Josephson, K. L., Gerba, International Congress and Exhibition Application, C. P., Haas, C. N. and Pepper, I. L. (2005). A national Marrakech. Available from http://www.eawag. study on the residential impact of biological ch/fileadmin/Domain1/Abteilungen/sandec/ aerosols from the land application of biosolids. publikationen/EWM/Journals/regulation_ Journal of Applied Microbiology, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. vidange_ouaga.pdf. 310–322. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02604. Bationo, A., Kihara, J., Vanlauwe, B., Waswa, B. and Buxton, N., Escobar, M., Purkey, D. and Lima, N. Kimetu, J. (2007). Soil organic carbon dynamics, (2013). “Water scarcity, climate change and Bolivia: functions and management in West African agro- planning for climate uncertainties”, Discussion ecosystems. Agricultural Systems, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. brief, Stockholm Environment Institute, 2013. 13–25. DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2005.08.011. Available from http://www.sei-international.org/ Baum, R., Luh, J. and Bartram, J. (2013). Sanitation: publications?pid=2429. a global estimate of sewerage connections Cadilhac P. and Roudot-Thoraval, F. (1996). without treatment and the resulting impact Seroprevalence of hepatitis A virus infection on MDG progress. Environmental Science & among sewage workers in the Parisian area, Technology, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1994–2000. DOI: France. European Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 12, 10.1021/es304284f. no. 3, pp. 237–240. DOI: 10.1007/BF00145411. Bazzarella, B.B. (2005). Caracterização e Cairncross, S. (2004). The Case for Marketing aproveitamento de água cinza para uso não-potável Sanitation. Nairobi: World Bank Water and em edificações (Characterization and greywater Sanitation Program. reuse for potable use in buildings), Master’s thesis. Espírito Santo, Brazil: Universidade Federal do Chamberlain, B. C., Carenini, G., Öberg, G., Poole, Espírito Santo. D. and Taheri, H. (2014). A decision support system for the design and evaluation of sustainable Bittencourt, S. (2014). Gestão do processo de uso wastewater solutions. IEEE Transactions on agrícola de lodo de esgoto no estado do Paraná: Computers, Special issue on Computational Aplicabilidade da Resolução Conama 375/06 Sustainability, vol. 63, no. 1. Available from http:// (Management of process of agricultural use of www.cs.ubc.ca/~poole/papers/Chamberlain_ sewage sludge in the state of Paraná: Applicability IEEE_Computer_2013.pdf. of CONAMA Resolution 375/06), Doctoral thesis. Curitiba, Brazil: Federal University of Paraná. Charlesworth, S., Harker and E. and Rickard, S. (2003). A review of sustainable drainage systems Blumenthal U. J., Cifuentes, E., Bennet, S., Quigley, (SuDS): a soft option for hard drainage questions? M. and Ruiz-Palacios G. (2001). The risk of enteric Geography, vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 99–107. Available infections associated with wastewater reuse: from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40573828. the effect of season and degree of storage of wastewater. Transactions of the Royal Society of Chowdhry, S. and Koné, D. (2012). Business Analysis Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. of Faecal Sludge Management: Emptying and 131–137. DOI: 10.1016/S0035-9203(01)90136-1. Transportation Services in Africa and Asia (draft final report). Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Bogner, J. M. Abdelrafie Ahmed, C., Diaz, A. Faaij, Foundation. Available from https://www.viawater. Q., Gao, S. Hashimoto, K., Mareckova, R., Pipatti, nl/files/chowdhury-2012-business.pdf. T. and Zhang, T. (2007). “Waste management”, in Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Corcoran, E., Nellemann, C., Baker, E., Bos, R., Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report Osborn, D. and Savelli, H., eds (2010). Sick Water? of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, The Central Role of Wastewater Management

137 138 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY to environmental andeconomic consequences of Diaz, R.J. andR.Rosenberg (2011).Introduction beyond-food-production. thrive/2013/09/02/wastewater-reuse-benefits- 2013. Available from https://wle.cgiar.org/ Research (CGIAR) THRIVE blog, 2Sept. Consultative Group for Agricultural International reuse: benefitsbeyond food production“, di Mario, L.andDrechsel, P. (2013). “Wastewater files/publications/GSP_sanifoam.pdf. Available from http://www.wsp.org/sites/wsp.org/ DC: World Bank Water andSanitation Programme. Design Effective Sanitation Programs. Washington, Framework to Analyze Sanitation Behaviors to Devine, J. (2009).Introducing SaniFOAM: A CO;2. 10.1890/1540-9295(2004).002[0249:LCBHNA]2.0. the Environment ecosystem function Land-use choices: balancinghumanneedsand DeFries, R.S.,Foley, J. A.andAsner, G.P. (2004). Cross and Y. Coombes, eds. IWA Kigali: Publishing. from theAfricaSanStand? Analysis Conference andHygieneSanitation inAfrica We Where Do the contribution ofproductive sanitation?” in Africa: whatcould be insub-Saharan security N.,Henry,Ekane, L.andHarawa, (2014). K. “Food Dagerskog, L.,Morgan, P., Still, D., Ochiro, B., AguieNiger Prod SanitationCREPA 1049(4).pdf. http://www.ecosanres.org/aguie/documents/TAN EnvironmentStockholm Institute. Available from agricultural productivity”, Technical note, advisory with aviewto measure itspotential for improving testing anutrientrecyclingAguie system Niger: Dagerskog, L.(2010). “Productive sanitationin GTZ. Water andSanitationProgram EastAsia, South Aid Sourcebook andDecision Cruz, R.etal. (2005). Control Board. of Environment andForests, Central Pollution Ministry CUPS/70/2009-10. NewDelhi:Indian Towns ofIndia Generation andTreatment inClass-I Cities&Class-II CPCB (2009). eds. London: andJ. Lienert, IWAUdert Publishing. for Wastewater Management security” in the role ofsanitationsystems inachievingfood Cordell, D. (2013). “Global phosphorusscarcity and www.grida.no. UN-HABITAT, GRID-Arendal. Available from http:// Assessment. Nairobi: UNEnvironment Programme, Response in SustainableDevelopment. ARapid Source Separation andDecentralization Status ofWater Supply, Wastewater , Control ofUrbanPollution Series, , vol. 2,no. 5,pp. 249–257.DOI: . Frontiers inEcology and Sanitation Philippines Sanitation . Manila: . Manila: World Bank , T. M. A.Larsen,K. , P. Improving Africa Livelihoods insub-Saharan Africa”, in poverty, water andagriculture insub-Saharan Faurès, J. M.andSantini,G.(2008).eds, “Mapping org/3/a-av252e.pdf. Organization. Available from http://www.fao. to2015. Outlook FAO (2011). unesco.org/images/0009/000904/090426eo.pdf. 49. Paris: UNESCO. Available from http://unesdoc. inHydrologyUNESCO no. StudiesandReports Water Resources ofSmallIslands:APractical Guide Falkland, A.andCustodio, E.(1991). European Union. Countries inSub-Saharan Supply andBasicSanitation Water AssistanceUnion Development forDrinking European ofAuditors Court (2012). S1462-0758(01)00064-4. Water ofgrey(2002). Characteristics wastewater K., Henze, M.and Eriksson, E.,Auffarth, Ledin, A. dsg/dsgoffthecuff.asp?nid=288. Nations. Available from http://www.un.org/sg/ Press conference, New York, 28May 2014,United remarks atmedialaunchofsanitationcampaign”, Eliasson, J. (2014). Secretary-General’s“Deputy s11269-011-9805-2. vol. 25,no. 9,pp. 2251–2265.DOI:10.1007/ Korba casestudy agriculture andaquifer recharge inacoastal area: oftreated wastewaterM. (2011).Impact reuse on El Ayni, F., Cherif, S.,Jrad, A.and Trabelsi-Ayadi, ecosanres.org/pdf_files/ESR-factsheet-06.pdf. Factsheet no. 6.Available from http://www. urine andfaeces incrop production”, EcoSanRes EcoSanRes (2008). “Guidelines ontheuseof Income Countries. inLow- Risk andMitigating and HealthAssessing M. andBahri,A.,eds(2010). Drechsel, P., Scott, C.A.,Raschid-Sally, L.,Redwood, 80/02508060.2011.594549. International food crops are irrigated withwastewater of optionsfor reducing healthrisksinareas where Drechsel, P. andSeidu, R.(2011).Cost-effectiveness 10.1289/ehp.1509995. agriculture pathways for exposure to wastewater usein (2016).AreviewPizzacalla, ofhealthrisksand K. Schuster-Wallace, S.K., Dickin, C.J., QadirM.and 1, pp. 71–82.DOI:10.1080/07900627.2010.531379. hypoxia , vol. 4,no. 1,pp. 85–104.DOI:10.1016/ . Water Resources vol. Development 27 , Special Report no., SpecialReport 13.Luxembourg: Water andtheRural for Poor: Interventions . Environmental HealthPerspectives Current World Fertilizer Trends and , vol. 36,no. 4,pp. 535–548.DOI:10.10 Rome:UNFood andAgriculture . Water Resources Management London: Earthscan. Wastewater Irrigation European Hydrology and . Water . Urban . Rome: , no. . DOI: , , UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Available Gardner, M., Comber, S., Scrimshaw, M. D., from http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/i0132e/ Cartmell, E., Lester, J. and Ellor, B. (2012). The i0132e00.htm. significance of hazardous chemicals in wastewater treatment works effluents. Science of the Total Felice, F. and Vatiero, M. (2012). “Elinor Ostrom Environment, vol. 437, pp. 363–372. DOI:10.1016/j. and the solution to the tragedy of the commons”, scitotenv.2012.07.086. American Enterprise Institute, 27 June 2012. Available from http://www.aei.org/publication/ Gennaccaro, A. L., McLaughlin, M. R., Quintero- elinor-ostrom-and-the-solution-to-the-tragedy-of- Betancourt, W., Huffman, D. E. and Rose, J. B. the-commons/. (2003). Infectious cryptosporidium parvum oocysts in final reclaimed effluent. Applied Fewtrell, L., Kaufmann, R. B., Kay, D., Enanoria, W., Environmental Microbiology, vol. 69, no. 3, Haller, L. and Colford, J. M. (2005). Water, sanitation pp. 4983–4984. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.69.8.4983- and hygiene interventions to reduce diarrhoea in 4984.2003. less developed countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol. 5, no. Ghazy, M.R., Dockhorn, T. and Dichtl, N. (2011). 1, pp. 42–52. DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(04)01253-8. “Economic and environmental assessment of sewage sludge treatment processes application in Fong, T. T., Mansfield, L. S. Wilson, D. L., Schwab, Egypt”, Paper presented at Fifteenth International D. J., Molloy, S. L. and Rose, J. B. (2007). Massive Water Technology Conference (IWTC-15). microbiological groundwater contamination associated with a waterborne outbreak in Lake Ginneken, M. van, Netterstrom, U. and Bennett, A. Erie, South Bass Island, Ohio. Environmental Health (2011). More, Better, or Different Spending? Trends Perspectives, vol. 115, no. 6, pp. 856–64. Available in Public Expenditure on Water and Sanitation in from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4139303. Sub-Saharan Africa, Public Expenditure Review, Water papers. Washington, DC: World Bank. Fracchia, L., Pietronave, S., Rinaldi, M. and http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ Martinotti, M. G. (2006). Site-related airborne en/2011/12/15978054/more-better-or-different- biological hazard and seasonal variations in two spending-trends-public-expenditure-water- wastewater treatment plants. Water Research, sanitation-sub-saharan-africa . vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 1985–1994. DOI:10.1016/j. watres.2006.03.016. Gonçalves, R.F., da Silva Simões, G.M. and Wanke, R. (2010). Greywater reuse in urban buildings: case Friedler, E., Butler, D. and Alfiya, Y. (2013). study of Vitória (ES) and Macaé (RJ) Revista Aidis, “Wastewater composition”, in Source Separation vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 120–131. and Decentralization for Wastewater Management, T. A. Larsen, K. M. Udert and J. Lienert, eds. Graham, J. P. and Polizzotto, M. L. (2013). Pit London: IWA Publishing, pp. 241–257. latrines and their impacts on groundwater quality: a systematic review. Environmental Health Fundación Sumaj Huasi (2015). “Proyecto: ‘agua y Perspectives, no. 121. Available from http://hsrc. saneamiento para areas peri -urbanas de la ciudad himmelfarb.gwu.edu/sphhs_enviro_facpubs/36/. de el alto, aplicando tecnologías alternativas”. sostenibilidad y escalabilidad [Project: “Water and Grant S. B. et al. (2012). Taking the ‘waste’ out sanitation for peri-urban areas of the city of El Alto, of ‘wastewater’ for human water security and applying alternative technologies”, Sustainability ecosystem sustainability. Science, vol. 337, no. and Scaleability’], Presentation delivered at 6095, pp. 681–686. DOI: 10.1126/science.1216852. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), Stockholm, May 2015. Guest, J. S. et al. (2009). A new planning and design paradigm to achieve sustainable resource Gallego, A., Hospido, A., Moreira, M. T. and recovery from wastewater. Environmental Science Feijoo, G. (2008). Environmental performance & Technology, vol. 43, no. 16, pp. 6126–6130. DOI: of wastewater treatment plants for small 10.1021/es9010515. populations. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 931–940. DOI: 10.1016/j. Hansena, V., Müller-Stövera, D., Ahrenfeldta, J., resconrec.2008.02.001. Holmb, J. K., Henriksen, U. B. and Hauggaard- Nielsen, H. (2015). Gasification biochar as a Galli, G., Nothomb, C. and Baetings, E. (2014). valuable by-product for carbon sequestration and Towards Systemic Change in Urban Sanitation, soil amendment. Biomass and Bioenergy, vol. 72, IRC working paper. The Hague: IRC. Available pp. 300–308. DOI:10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.10.013. from http://www.ircwash.org/sites/default/ files/201411_wp_towardssyschangeinurbansan_ HCWW (2014). The Re-use of Treated Sewage Waste web.pdf. Water in Agriculture: Final Report. Cairo: Holding Company for Water and Wastewater.

139 140 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY I., Heinz, wh.2007.009. Health sanitation interventions Global cost-benefit analysis ofwater supplyand Hutton, G.,Haller, J. (2007). L.and Bartram, Paper 103171. Washington, DC: World Bank. Hygiene. Water andSanitationProgram Technical Goal Targets onDrinking Water, Sanitation,and the2030Sustainable Developmentof Meeting Hutton, G.and Varughese, M.(2016). The Costs WSH_12.01_eng.pdf. int/iris/bitstream/10665/75140/1/WHO_HSE_ Organization. Available fromhttp://apps.who. WHO/HSE/WSH/12.01. Geneva: World Health to ReachtheMDGTarget andUniversal Coverage Drinking-Water Interventions SupplyandSanitation Hutton, G.(2012). 6641f6616a4f. view publication?id=02309d73-8e41-4d04-b2ef- we do/ourapproach/research andpublications/ Available from http://www.wateraid.org/what Menstrual Hygiene theWorld Around Hygiene Matters:AResource forImproving House, S.,Mahon, T. andCavill, S.(2012). 10.1139/f2011-096. Sciences waters Wastewater onCanadian release anditsimpacts Holeton, C.,Chambers, P. A.andGrace, L.(2011). 10.1177/0734242X0202000207. Management &Research separated urineusedinagriculture riskassessmentofsource- (2012). Microbial Höglund, C.,Stenström, T. A.andAshbolt, N. Report%20Mail.pdf. Documents/GWI/Wastewater%20Evaluation%20 Programme. Available from http://unep.org/gpa/ the Cost Nairobi: ofNoAction. UNEnvironment Valuation of Wastewater: theCost and ofAction J.Mateo-Sagasta, andQadir, M.(2015).Economic Hernandez-Sancho, F., Lamizana-Diallo, B., watpolcontrol.pdf. int/water_sanitation_health/resourcesquality/ Programme. Available from http://www.who. Health Organization andUNEnvironment & FNSpon/Thomson Professional for World Principles. Management Quality London: E Pollution Control: AGuideto theUse of Water Helmer, R.andHespanhol, I.,eds(1997). Water 455–466. DOI:10.1080/02508060.2011.594984. farmers and exchange involving projects citiesand Evaluating thecosts andbenefitsofwater reuse Dávila, J.Salgot, M.andMateo-Sagasta (2011). , vol. 5,no. 4,pp. 481–502.DOI:10.2166/ . Canadian JournalofFisheries andAquatic . Water International , vol. 68,no. 10,pp. 1836–1859.DOI: Global Costs andBenefitsof . JournalofWater and , vol. 30,no. 7.DOI: , vol. 36,no. 4,pp. . Waste . WaterAid. Menstrual , Urine andFaeces inCrop Production and Salomon,E.(2004). Stintzing, A., Jönsson, H.,Richert Vinnerås, B. Training_manual.pdf. W6-1_GEN_MAN_D6.1.4_Conflict_resolution_-_ http://www.switchurbanwater.eu/outputs/pdfs/ J. T. Visscher andJ. Verhagen (eds).Available from BarrierstoEffective Decision-making and Minimize Communication Tools toAssistConflict Resolution Future –D.6.1.4. AHandbookofAppraisal and Sustainable Water ofthe ManagementintheCity in Kullön, Stakeholder conflicts Sweden, in Johansson, M.andKvarnström, E.(2011). Update-report-2015_English.pdf. org/fileadmin/user_upload/resources/JMP- Programme. Available from http://www.wssinfo. Geneva: UNICEFand WHO, JointMonitoring Water –2015UpdateandMDGAssessment JMP (2015). 9, pp. 147–155.DOI: 10.2166/wst.2007.713. a review Jiménez, B. (2007). Helminth ova control insludge: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.03.010. & Medicine from socialmarketinginGhana demand for sanitation andpotential gains and indicators ofhouseholddecision-making M. Jenkins, W. B. andScott, (2007).Behavioral socscimed.2005.04.036. 61, no. 11,pp. 2446–2459.DOI:10.1016/j. in ruralBenin the “good life”: why somepeoplewantlatrines M. Jenkins, W. andCurtis, V. (2005).Achieving SNV Financing Sanitation Learning Paper.pdf. washsymposium/sites/default/files/attached-files/ UTS. Available from http://www.colorado.edu/ of Technology, Sydney (UTS). Sydney, Australia: forInstitute SustainableFutures (ISF),University Netherlands Development Organisation by and Towns: Learning Paper, Prepared for SNV ISF-UTS (2014).Financing Sanitationfor Cities fulltext/213227/213227.pdf. http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/ University of Technology. Available from of Technology. Gothenburg, Sweden: Chalmers Energy andEnvironment, ChalmersUniversity Performance EmissionImplicationsGas andEconomic Biorefineries in Pulp and Mills: GreenhousePaper Isaksson, J. (2015). http://www.ifad.org/rpr2011/. for Agricultural Development. Available from Tomorrow’s Generation. Rome:International Fund forRealities, NewChallenges:Opportunities IFAD 2011:New (2011).Rural Poverty Report . Water andTechnology Science , vol. 64,no. 12,pp. 2427–2442.DOI: Progress andDrinking onSanitation , Doctoral thesis, Department of thesis,, Doctoral Department . Social Science &Medicine Science . Social Biomass Gasification-Based Guidelines ontheUseof . Social Science Science . Social . Stockholm: . Stockholm: , vol. 56,no. , vol. vol. , . , EcoSanRes Publication Series, Stockholm Land Stewardship Project (2013). “Valuing Environment Institute. Available from http://www. sustainable practice: value of soil organic ecosanres.org/pdf_files/ESR_Publications_2004/ matter”, Farm Transitions Toolkit. Available ESR2web.pdf. from http://landstewardshipproject.org/ farmtransitionsvaluingsustainablepracticesvalue Kar, K. and Chambers, R. (2008). Handbook on ofsoilorganicmatter/. Community-Led Total Sanitation. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies. Larsen T. A. and Gujer, W. (2013). “Implementation of source separation and decentralization in Khiewwijit, R., Temmink, H., Rijnaarts, H. H. cities”, in Source Separation and Decentralization M. and Keesman, K. J. (2015). Energy and for Wastewater Management, T. A. Larsen, K. M. nutrient recovery for municipal wastewater Udert and J. Lienert, eds. London: IWA Publishing, treatment: how to design a feasible plant layout? pp. 135–151. Environmental Modelling and Software, vol. 68, pp. 156–165. DOI:10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.02.011. Larsen, T.A. Udert, K. M. and Lienert, J. eds. (2013). Source Separation and Decentralization Kim, N. and Ferguson, J. (1993). Concentrations for Wastewater Management. London: IWA and sources of cadmium, copper, lead and zinc in Publishing. house dust in Christchurch, New Zealand. Science of the Total Environment, vol. 138, no. 1–3, pp. Lazarova, V., Choo, K. H. and Cornel, P., eds (2012). 1–21. Water-Energy Interactions in Water Reuse. London: IWA Publishing. Kjellén, M., Pensulo, C., Nordqvist, P. and Fogde, M. (2012). Global Review of Sanitation System Trends Lazarova, V., Hills, S. and Birks, R. (2003). Using and Interactions with Menstrual Management recycled water for non-potable, urban uses: a Practices. Stockholm: Stockholm Environment review with particular reference to toilet flushing. Institute. Available from http://www.sei- Water Science and Technology: Water Supply, international.org/publications?pid=2044. vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 69–77. Available from http:// ws.iwaponline.com/content/3/4/69. Kvarnström, E., Verhagen, J., Nilsson, M., Srikantaiah, V., Ramachandran, S. and Singh, Lewis, D. L., Gattie, D. K., Novak, M. E., Sanchez, K. (2012). The Business of the Honey-suckers in S. and Pumphrey, C. (2012). Interactions of Bengaluru (India): The Potentials and Limitations of pathogens and irritant chemicals in land-applied Commercial Faecal Sludge Recycling: An Explorative sewage sludges (biosolids). BMC Public Health, vol. Case Study, Occasional Paper no. 48. The Hague: 2, no. 11. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-2-11. IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. Available from http://www.ircwash.org/OP48. Li, Y., Zhao, X., Li, Y. and Li, X. (2015). Waste incineration industry and development policies in Kvarnström, E., McConville, J., Bracken, P., China. Waste Management, vol. 46, pp. 234–241. Johansson, M. and Fogde, M. (2011). The DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2015.08.008. sanitation ladder – a need for a revamp? Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Lienert, J. (2013). “High acceptance of source- Development, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–12. DOI: 10.2166/ separating technologies – but . . .”, in Source washdev.2011.014. Separation and Decentralization for Wastewater Management, T. A. Larsen, K. M. Udert and J. Lahnsteiner, J., du Pisani, P., Menge, J. and Lienert, eds. London: IWA Publishing, pp. 193–208. Esterhuizen, J. (2013). “More than 40 years of direct potable reuse experience in Windhoek Long, S. and Cudney, E. (2012). Integration of (Namibia)”, in Milestones in Water Reuse: The Best energy and environmental systems in wastewater Success Stories, V. Lazarova, T. Asano, A. Bahri and J. treatment plants. International Journal of Energy Anderson, J., eds. London: IWA Publishing. and Environment, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 521–530. Available from http://www.IJEE.IEEFoundation. Lal, R. (2008). Soils and sustainable agriculture, a org. review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 57–64. DOI: 10.1051/ Luo, Y., Guo, W., Ngo, H. H., Nghiem, L. D., Hai, agro:2007025. F. I., Zhang, J. and Wang, X. C. (2014). A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the Lalander, C., Diener, S., Magri, M. E., Zurbrügg, aquatic environment and their fate and removal C., Lindström, A. and Vinnerås, B. (2013). Faecal during wastewater treatment. Science of the Total sludge management with the larvae of the Environment, vol. 473–474, pp. 619–641. DOI: black soldier fly Hermetia( illucens): from a 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.12.065. hygiene aspect. Science of the Total Environment, vol. 458–460, pp. 312–318. DOI:10.1016/j. Lüthi, C., Morel, A., Tilley, E. and Ulrich, L. (2011). scitotenv.2013.04.033. Community-Led Urban Environmental Sanitation

141 142 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY management model”, Lima, World Bank Water to changewater andsanitation partnership Project (STPP) inPeru: social Aprivate-public McGregor, J. L.(2005). Small “The Town Pilot from http://doc.utwente.nl/81633/. Nairobi: UNEnvironment Programme. Available Water totheInternationalResource Efficiency Panel. oftheWorkingGreen Economy: Group AReport on McGlade, J. etal. (2012). eds. London:Lienert, IWA Publishing, pp. 85–99. Management Separation andDecentralization forWastewater of scaleandtheprice ofuncertainty”, in Maurer M.(2013). “Full costs, (dis-)economies M. QadirandD. Wichelns, eds. London: Springer. Economic AssetinanUrbanizingWorld treatmentproduction, anduse”, in A. (2015). “Global wastewater andsludge J.,Mateo-Sagasta, Raschid-Sally, L.and Thebo, Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2015.pdf. images/pdfs/GSW_2015_Report/Financing- http://www.governmentspendingwatch.org/ Finance andOxfam.Available International from Spending Watch research Development report. Government SpendingontheMDGs Goals:LessonsSustainable Development from Martin, M.and Martin, Walker, J. (2015). DOI: 10.1111/j.1759-5436.2012.00311.x. problem? D.Mara, D. (2012).Sanitation: What’s thereal Introduction The2006WHOGuidelinesandBeyond Analysis: –An D.Mara, D. (2010). library/519. GIZ. Available from http://www.sswm.info/ fürInternationale Zusammenarbeit Gesellschaft Biogas Sanitation Mang, H.-P. andLi,Z.(2010). Baltimore, MD, 24–25February. Presentation at2009AgSTAR Conference, Biogas andBioenergy Utilisation(GERBIO)”, experiences”, for Sustainable GermanSociety Mang, H.-P. (2009). someEuropean“Co-digestion: iwaponline.com/content/51/8/41. vol. 51,no. 8,pp. 41–49.Available from http://wst. assessment. systems: focussing onhazardous flows tools for urbanwater andwastewatersupport P.Malmqvist, A.andPalmquist, H.(2005).Decision approaches/sani-8. and-planning-frameworks/frameworks-and- category/planning-process-tools/programming- Eawag. Available from http://www.sswm.info/ Planning (CLUES) IDS Bulletin . Washington,Bank. DC: World Water &Technology Science , T. andJ. M.Udert A.Larsen,K. . Dübendorf, Switzerland: . Eschborn, Germany: Deutsche . Eschborn,Germany: Quantitative Microbial Risk Quantitative Microbial Risk , vol. 43,no. 2,pp. 86–92. Measuring Water Useina Technology Reviewof Financing the , Government Wastewater: , P. Drechsel, , Source

Addis Ababa: UNEconomic Commission for Africa. Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). toEnhance and GrowthOptions Survival NEPAD (2006). watres.2009.11.028. vol. 44,no. 5,pp. 1667–1679.DOI:10.1016/j. its applicationinsemi-aridChina. orientedagriculture: planningmodeland Are-use Murray, A.andRay, I.(2010). Wastewater for default/2-1582-city-sanitation-plan-for-kochi.pdf. www.susana.org/_resources/documents/ sanitation planfor Kochi”. Available from http:// Municipal Corporation ofCochin (2011). “City details/1324. http://www.susana.org/en/resources/library/ GIZ, Eawag, 16November 2011.Available from be usedby thepopulation?”, Presentation to that water- andsanitationfacilitieswillactually H.-J.Mosler (2011). “How canitbeachieved management-2006.pdf. documents/default/2-947-en-greywater- from http://www.susana.org/_resources/ 14/06. Dübendorf, Switzerland: Eawag. Available Households orNeighbourhoods Review ofDifferent Treatment Systems for Management inLow Countries, andMiddle-Income Morel, A.andDiener, S.(2006). Publications/openaccess/Eawag_05545.pdf. Available from http://library.eawag.ch/EAWAG- Civil Engineering, Leopold-Franzens-University. Faculty Germany: Innsbruck, of dissertation. Flows Availability withLimited Data toAssessMaterial Approach Countries: An Environment Planning inDeveloping Sanitation Montangero, A.(2006). (unpublished manuscript). from on-site sanitationinheterogeneous aquifers” risk assessmentofshallow well water supplies Harikumar, P. S.(2010). “Quantitative microbial S.A.,Cvetkovic,Molin, V., Stenström, T. A.and chemosphere.2011.02.046. vol. 84,no. 6,pp. 832–839.DOI:10.1016/j. from humanurineandfaeces. Global potential ofphosphorusrecovery J.Mihelcic, R.,Fry, L.M.andShaw, R.(2011). 10.2166/wst.2009.189. Technology Ethiopia. study ofArbaMinch, sanitation planningindeveloping countries: case Material flow analysis asa tool for sustainable Meinzinger, F., Kröger, R.(2009). andOtterpohl, K. publications/213200781413_lac_models.pdf. http://www.wsp.org/sites/wsp.org/files/ and SanitationProgramme. Available from , vol. 59,no. 10,pp. 1911–1920.DOI: Water inAfrica: Management Material Flow for Analysis Chemosphere , Sandec Report no., SandecReport Water & Science Greywater Water Research , Doctoral , Doctoral , New , , Available from http://www.uneca.org/awich/ Science of the Total Environment, vol. 348, nos. 1–3, nepadwater.pdf. pp. 151–163. DOI: 0.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.12.052. Niwagaba, C. B. (2009). Treatment Technologies Parkinson, J., Lüthi, C. and Walther, D. (2014). for Human Faeces and Urine, Doctoral thesis, Sanitation 21 – A Planning Framework for Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish Improving City-Wide Sanitation Services. University of Agricultural Sciences and Faculty International Water Association, Eawag-Sandec of Technology, Makerere University, Kampala. and GIZ. Available from http://www.iwa-network. Uppsala, Sweden: Swedish University of org/filemanager-uploads/IWA-Sanitation- Agricultural Sciences. Available from http://pub. 21_22_09_14-LR.pdf. epsilon.slu.se/2177/. Paul, J. N., Jr. (2011). “Making water reform Nordqvist, P. (2013). System Order and Function in happen: the experience of the Philippine Water Urban Sanitation: Exploring the Concept of Poly- Revolving Fund”, Background paper for the centric Systems in the City of Kampala, Uganda, OECD Global Forum on Environment: Making Master’s thesis, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Water Reform Happen, Paris, 25–26 October. Stockholm University. Available from http://www. Available from http://www.oecd.org/env/ diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A6 resources/48925373.pdf. 57357&dswid=-184. Persson, T., Svensson, M. and Finnson, A. (2015). NRC (1998). Issues in Potable Reuse: The Viability “REVAQ certified wastewater treatment plants in of Augmenting Drinking Water Supplies with Sweden for improved quality of recycled digestate Reclaimed Water, National Research Council. nutrients”, IEA Bioenergy Task 37. Available Washington, DC: National Academic Press. from http://www.iea-biogas.net/case-studies. html?file=files/daten-redaktion/download/case- OECD-DAC (2013). “Financing water and studies/REVAQ_CAse_study_A4_1.pdf. sanitation in developing countries: the contribution of external aid”, Organization for Poleto, C. and Tassi, R. (2012). “Sustainable Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) urban drainage systems”, in Drainage Systems, Development Assistance Committee (DAC), Paris. M. S. Javaid. InTech. Available from http://www. Available from http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/ intechopen.com/books/drainage-systems. water. Post, V. and Athreye, V. (2015). “An overview of the Örebro Municipality (2010). “Koldioxidjakten” [The financial instruments for sanitation used in FINISH

CO2 hunt], Student guide, August. Available from programmes in India and Kenya”, Financing https://www.orebro.se/download/18.2e96e73312 Sanitation series no. 1, The Hague, WASTE, Nov. b3224f4fd80004412/Koldioxidjakten.pdf. 2015. Available from http://www.waste.nl/en/ project/financial-inclusion-improves-sanitation- Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The and-health-finish. Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Prüss-Üstün, A. et al. (2014). Burden of disease from inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene in Ostrom, E. (2009). “Beyond markets and states: low- and middle-income settings: a retrospective polycentric governance of complex economic analysis of data from 145 countries. Tropical systems”, Prize lecture at Aula Magna, Stockholm Medicine and International Health, vol. 19, no. 8, University, 8 Dec. 2009. Available from http:// pp. 894–905. DOI: 10.1111/tmi.12329. www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic- sciences/laureates/2009/ostrom-lecture.html. Quayle, T. (2012). Wastewater Treatment and Water Recycling for Biomass Production in Niamey, Niger. Otterpohl, R. (2009). “Terra preta sanitation – full Cape Town, South Africa: International Council reuse in sanitation and bio-waste-management”, for Local Environmental Initiatives ICLEI. Available Presentation, Institute of Wastewater from http://www.sswm.info/library/7623. Management and Protection, Technical University Hamburg-Harburg (TUHH). Available from http:// Richardson, S. D. and Kimura, S. Y. (2016). Water www.sswm.info/content/terra-preta-sanitation-0. analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues. Analytical Chemistry, vol. 88, no. 1, pp Ottoson, J. and Stenström, T. A. (2003). Faecal 546–582. DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b04493. contamination of greywater and associated microbial risks. Water Research, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. Richert, A., Gensch, R., Jönsson, H., Stenström, T.-A. 645–655. DOI: 10.1016/S0043-1354(02)00352-4. and Dagerskog, L. (2010). Practical Guidance on the Use of Urine in Crop Production, EcoSanRes series. Palmquist, H. and Hanæus, J. (2005). Hazardous Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute. substances in separately collected grey- and blackwater from ordinary Swedish households.

143 144 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY 1–3, pp. 83–91.DOI:10.1016/j.agwat.2006.08.012. Nepal. world: valleyin two casestudiesfrom Kathmandu (2007). Wastewater irrigationinthedeveloping Rutkowski, T., Raschid-Sally, L.andBuechler, S. Centre, Asian of Institute Technology (ENSIC-AIT). Thailand: Environmental Systems Information ed., Urban Waste no. Series 6.Pathumthani, Urban Low-income Neighbourhoods Household Excreta: in TheOperation ofServices and bucketlatrinesin Yichang China”, City in pitlatrines latrines, householddry from publicdry Rulin, J. (1997). “Collection anddisposalofexcreta 10.1579/0044-7447-31.2.177. Environment yet more food. Ambio: Decreasing reliance onmineral nitrogen – Roy, R. R.N.,Misra, V. A.(2002). andMontanez, wasman.2011.06.008. vol. 31,no. 11,pp. 2228–2235.DOI:10.1016/j. fuel.a biosolid-derived of management optionsandco-incineration P. L.(2011).Reviewofbiosolids andDickie, Roy, Havard, M.M.,Dutta,A.,Corscadden, K., ?pid=diva2%3A575781&dswid=-8358. from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf Rugby, Practical Publishing. Action UK: Available LessonsSanitation: from theErdos Eco-Town Project Q. (2012). T Rosemarin, A.,McConville, J., Flores, A.andZhu, Environment Institute. WaterInternational Association/Stockholm Development Goals.the Millennium London: Pathways forSustainableSanitation E., McConville, J., Ruben,C.andFogde, M.(2008). N.,Caldwell,Rosemarin, A.,Ekane, I.,Kvarnström, 2797. DOI:10.1016/S0043-1354(96)00188-1. facility. microorganisms by afull-scalewater reclamation D. P. (1996).Removal ofpathogenicandindicator Rose, J. B., Dickson,L.J., Farrah, S.R.andCarnahan, userfiles/files/SGC269.pdf. SGC. Available from http://www.sgc.se/ckfinder/ 2012:269.Malmö, Sweden: Report Center (SGC) hygienisation ofsludge]Svenskt Gastekniskt andenergybiogas production efficient hygienisering av slam[Process for increased biogasproduktionför ochenergieffektiv ökad Johansson, N.andEdström, M.(2012).Process Rogstrand, G.,Olsson,H.,Andersson,C.A., iss2/art32/. from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/ Ecology andSociety exploring thesafe operatingspace for humanity. Rockström, J. boundaries: etal. (2009).Planetary Agricultural Water Management, Water Research he ChallengesofUrbanEcological , vol. 31,no. 2,pp. 177–183.DOI: , vol. 14,no. 2,p. 32.Available , vol. 30,no. 11,pp. 2785– Journal oftheHuman Waste Management, : Achieving , M.A.Muller, vol. 88,nos

. Jenssen, P. D. andStenström, T. -A.(2008). Seidu, R.,Heistad, A.,Amoah,P., Drechsel, P., eds.and B. London: Akissa, Earthscan. Drechsel, C.A.Scott, L. Raschid-Sally, M.Redwood inLow-Income Risk and Mitigating Countries, in associatedreduction withwastewater irrigation, treatment for interventions diarrhoeadisease effectiveness analysis of treatment andnon- Seidu, R.andDrechsel, P. (2010).Cost- University ofLife Norwegian Sciences. Norway: Wastewater ReuseinGhana Associated withFaecaland HealthRisks Sludgeand Seidu, R.(2010). pdf. from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00KMCR. Ethiopia, WASH IndexTool Sustainability Assessment: Schweitzer, R., Ward, R.andLockwood, H.(2015). sustainable_use_phosphorus.pdf. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/natres/pdf/ General for theEnvironment. Available from European Union.Brussels:EUDirectorate- to EnvironmentStockholm Report Institute Phosphorus, Rosemarin, A.(2010). Schröder, J. J., Cordell, D., Smit,A.L.and sswm.info/library/1246. (BORDA), October. Available from http://www. ResearchOverseas andDevelopment Association and latrines–septage, Presentation, Bremen domestic on-site sanitationsystems septictanks A.(2005). Schmidt, Treatment ofsludgefrom Press.University ofAlberta Freshwater andEstuaries. oftheWorld’sThe AlgalBowl: Overfertilization Schindler, D. W. and Vallentyne, J. R.(2008). agwat.2013.08.007. Management treatment, anduse. A level needfor dataonwastewater generation, Ahmad, Z.(2013).Global, regional, andcountry Sato T., Qadir, M., Yamamoto, S.,Endo, T. and 411–420. DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2013.11.003. in . management for asustainablesludge-to-energy sludge incineration,gasificationand pyrolysis Comparative assessmentofmunicipalsewage Samolada, M.andZabaniotou, A.(2014). www.susana.org/en/resources/library/details/550. Deliverable D15.AQUAREC. Available from http:// Wastewater, Integrated Concepts forReuseofUpgraded Standards forWaterfor Quality ReuseinEurope, E.,eds(2006). Salgot, M.andHuertas, Wastewater IrrigationandHealth:Assessing Final USAID/Tetra Report. Tech. Available Waste Management EVK1-CT-200200130, Work Package 2, Wageningen University and , vol. 130,pp. 1–13.DOI:10.1016/j. Disentangling the Risk Factors theRisk Disentangling gricultural Water Sustainable Useof Edmonton, AB: , Doctoral thesis., Doctoral Ås, , vol. 34,no. 2,pp. Guideline P P. Quantification of the health risk associated with and Sanitation Programme. Available from http:// wastewater reuse in Accra, Ghana: a contribution www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/hygiene/ toward local guidelines. Journal of Water and envsan/EOS96-11a.pdf. Health, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 461–471. DOI: 10.2166/ wh.2008.118. Sinnatamby, G. S. (1983). Low-Cost Sanitation Systems for Urban Peripheral Areas in North-East Seidu, R., Sjølander, I., Abubakari, A., Amoah, D., Brazil, Doctoral thesis, University of Leeds. Leeds, Larbi, J. A. and Stenström, T. -A. (2013). Modeling UK: University of Leeds. the die-off of E. coli and Ascaris in wastewater- irrigated vegetables: Implications for microbial Slim, J. A. and Wakefield, R. W. (1990). The health risk reduction associated with irrigation utilization of sewage sludge in the manufacture cessation. Water Science & Technology, vol. 86, no. of clay bricks. Water SA, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 197–202. 5, pp. 1013–1021. DOI:10.2166/wst.2013.335. Available from http://reference.sabinet.co.za/ webx/access/journal_archive/03784738/2154.pdf. Seltenrich, N. (2013). Incineration versus recycling: in Europe, a debate over trash”, Yale Environment Smith, C. (1993). The Effect of the Introduction 360. Available from http://e360.yale.edu/feature/ of Piped Sewerage on Ascaris Infection and incineration_versus_recycling__in_europe_a_ Environmental Contamination in a Gaza Strip debate_over_trash/2686/. Refugee Camp, Thesis. London: Department of Epidemiology and Population Sciences, London Senecal, J., Fidjeland, J. and Vinnerås, B. (2015). School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. NoWaste Toilet: function and nutrient recovery, Presentation at FSM3, Third International Smith, J., Abegaz, A., Matthews, R., Subedi, M., Faecal Sludge Management Conference, Orskov, R. E. and Tumwesige, V. (2014). What is Hanoi, Vietnam, January. Available from http:// the potential for biogas digesters to improve www.susana.org/images/documents/07-cap- soil fertility and crop production in sub-Saharan dev/b-conferences/15-FSM3/Day-3/Rm-3/3-3-1- Africa? Biomass Bioenergy, vol. 70, pp. 58–72. 1Senecal.pdf. DOI:10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.02.030. Sherpa, A. M., Sherpa, M. G. and Lüthi, C. (2013). Souza, M. L. P., Ribeiro, A. N., Andreoli, C. V., Souza, CLUES: Local solutions for sanitation planning: L. C. P. and Bittencourt, S. (2008). Aptidão das the case study of Nala, Nepal, March. Available terras do Estado do Paraná para disposição final from http://www.eawag.ch/fileadmin/Domain1/ de lodo de esgoto (Suitability of land in Paraná Abteilungen/sandec/schwerpunkte/sesp/CLUES/ state for final disposal of sewage sludge).Revista nala_flyer.pdf. DAE, vol. 56, no. 177, pp. 20–29. DOI: 10.4322/ dae.2014.012. Shuval, H., Adin, A., Fattal, B., Rawitz, E. and Yekutiel, P. (1986). Wastewater Irrigation in SP Technical Research Institute (2012). Developing Countries: Health Effects and Technical Certifieringsregler för system för kvalitetssäkring Solutions, Technical Paper no. 51. Washington, DC: av fraktioner från små avlopp [Certification rules World Bank. for plant nutrient-rich fractions from on-site sewage systems], SPCR 178, SP Technical Research Shuval, H., Guttman-Bass, N., Applebaum, J. and Institute of Sweden, December 2012. Available Fattal, B. (1989). Aerosolized enteric bacteria from: https://www.sp.se/sv/units/certification/ and viruses generated by spray irrigation of product/Documents/SPCR/SPCR 178.pdf. wastewater. Water Science and Technology, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 131–135. Available from http://wst. Sriram, S. and Seenivasan, R. (2012). Microalgae iwaponline.com/content/21/3/131. cultivation in wastewater for nutrient removal. Journal of Algal Biomass Utilization, vol. 3, no. 2, Silva, J., Castillo, G., Callejas, L., López, H. and pp. 9–13. Available from http://jalgalbiomass. Olmos J (2006). Frequency of transferable com/paper2vol3no2.pdf. multiple antibiotic resistance amongst coliform bacteria isolated from a treated sewage effluent Stenström, T. A. (2013). Hygiene, a major challenge in Antofagasta, Chile. Electronic Journal of for source separation and decentralization, Biotechnology, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 533–540. DOI: in Source Separation and Decentralization for 10.2225/vol9-issue5-fulltext-7. Wastewater Management, T. A. Larsen, K. M. Udert and J. Lienert, eds. London: IWA Publishing, Simpson-Herbert, M., Sawyer, R. and Clarke, L. pp. 151–161. (1997). The PHAST Initiative: Participatory Hygiene and Sanitation Transformation: A New Approach Stenström, T. A., Seidu, R., Ekane, N. and to Working with Communities, WHO/EOS/96.11. Zurbrügg, C. (2011). Microbial Exposure and Geneva: World Health Organization, UN Health Assessments in Sanitation Technologies and Development Programme and World Bank Water Systems, EcoSanRes series, 2011-1. Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute. Available from

145 146 SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: FROM WASTE DISPOSAL TO RESOURCE RECOVERY using life assessmentandenvironmental cycle sanitationsystem source-separation blackwater Comparison ofdevelopment scenarios ofa Thibodeau, C.,Monette, F. andGlaus, M.(2014). DOI:10.3390/w5031006. based study. separation-based sanitationconcepts: amodel- G. andBuisman,C.(2013).Prospects ofsource- Tervahauta, T., Hoang, T., Hernández,L.,Zeeman, DOI: 10.1016/S0043-1354(98)00099-2. Water Research German sewagetreatment plantsandrivers. Ternes, T. A.(1998).Occurrence ofdrugsin McGraw-Hill. Reuse D. (2003). Tchobanoglous, F. G.,Burton, L.andStensel, H. Bradford, ITDGPublishing. UK: –AGuidetoStrategicUrban Sanitation Planning. Tayler, Parkinson, J. K., andColin, J. (1999). Wastewater Association. in Sweden. (2000). Swedish Waterand WastewaterAssociation Agency. Sweden. Swedish EPA (2014). resources/library/details/267. Available from http://www.susana.org/en/ Sustainable SanitationAlliance (SuSanA). sanitation solutions–SuSanAvisiondocument, SuSanA. (2008). Towards more sustainable en/resources/library/details/1583. projects. Available from http://www.susana.org/ (SuSanA) casestudyofsustainablesanitation Alto city, Bolivia,SustainableSanitationAlliance scale ecological sanitationinperi-urbanarea, El Suntura, J. C.andSandoval, B. I.(2012).Large- of%20sludge_2008.pdf. Processutvecklingsrapporter/Disintegration%20 www.kappala.se/Documents/Rapporter/ and Workshop. Available from: https:// Biosolids andOrganic Resources Conference Paper presented atthe13thEuropean a way ofoptimizinganaerobic digestion, Sundin, A-M.(2008).Disintegration ofsludge: Operation. Book –Systems forImplementationand Approach eds (2014). Strande, L.,Ronteltap, M.andBrdjanovic, D., ntsinsanitationtechnologiessystems.pdf. default/2-1236-microbialexposurehealthassessme http://www.susana.org/_resources/documents/ (4thed.), andEddy. Metcalf Boston, MA: Facts onWater SupplyandSanitation Stockholm: Environmental Stockholm: Protection Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Stockholm: Swedish Stockholm: Water and London: IWA Publishing. Faecal Sludge Management(FSM) Water, , vol. 32,no. 11,pp. 3245–3260. vol. 5,no. 3,pp. 1006–1035. Wastewater Treatment in

report/MDG 2014English web.pdf.report/MDG http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2014 MDG 2014. UN (2014). Medicine andEnvironmentalJournal ofOccupational of hepatitisAvirusamongwastewater workers. (2000). Evaluation ofoccupational transmission Trout, D., Mueller, C., Venczel, L.andKrake, A. Reviews, to makesense? Garg, How M.O. (2015).Algaebasedbiorefinery: Trivedi, J., Aila,M.,Bangwal, D. P., S.and Kaul, Financing.pdf. publications/WSP-Tremolet-Results-Based- from http://www.wsp.org/sites/wsp.org/files/ Bank Water andSanitationProgram. Available Paper.WSP Working Washington,DC: World for Results-based Financing forSanitation, Trémolet, S.(2011). of Copenhagen. Vietnam Wastewater UseinAgriculture andAquaculture in Trang, D. T. (2007). Lowres_1p.pdf. Compendium_2nd_pdfs/Compendium_2nd_Ed_ Abteilungen/sandec/schwerpunkte/sesp/CLUES/ from http://www.eawag.ch/fileadmin/Domain1/ ed. Dübendorf, Switzerland: Eawag. Available SystemsSanitation andTechnologies, R.(2014). and Schertenleib, Tilley, E.,Lüthi, C.,Morel, A.,Zurbrügg, C. IWA Publishing, pp. 225–239. T. eds. London: J. Lienert, M.Udert, A.Larsen,K. and Decentralization forWastewater Management processing andmanagementin systems to account for newcomplexities in Tilley, E.(2013).Conceptualising sanitation pp. 52–62.DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.04.019. study. ascenario human urineandmineralfertilisers: Environmental using ofwheatproduction impact Tidåker, P., B. Mattsson, andJönsson,H.(2007). 740–747. DOI:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.10.023. Journal ofHazardous Materials domestic wastewater? Greece asacase-study. of emerging organic contaminants intreated the aquaticenvironment dueto theexistence and Thomaidis, N.S.(2015).Isthere ariskfor Thomaidi, V. A.S.,Borova, S.,Stasinakis, V. L. resconrec.2014.08.004. Recycling life costing. cycle New York: United Nations. Available from Journal ofCleanerProduction , Doctoral thesis., Doctoral Copenhagen: University vol. 47,issue C,pp. 295–307. , vol. 42,no. 1,pp. 83–87. , vol. 92,pp. 38–54.DOI:10.1016/j. Millennium Development Goals Report GoalsReport Development Millennium Renewable andSustainableEnergy Resources, Conservation and Health Risks Associated With Associated Health Risks Identifying thePotential Compendium of , vol. 283,pp. Source Separation , vol. 15,no. 1, 2ndrev. , UN-Water (2015). Wastewater Management, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/EPAactivities/ Analytical brief. Geneva: UN-Water. Available from economics/nonco2projections.html. http://www.unwater.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ unwater_new/docs/UN-Water_Analytical_Brief_ Valfrey-Visser, B. and Schaub-Jones, D. (2008). Wastewater_Management.pdf. Engaging Sanitation Entrepreneurs: Supporting Private Entrepreneurs to Deliver Public Goods. UNDP (2006). Human Development Report London: Building Partnerships for Development. 2006: Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Available from http://www.susana.org/en/ Global Water Crisis. New York: UN Development resources/library/details/1873. Programme. Available from http://hdr.undp.org/ en/content/human-development-report-2006. Verlicchi, P., Al Aukidy, M., Galletti, A., Zambello, E., Zanni, G. and Masotti, L. (2012). A project of reuse UNEP (2011). Phosphorus and food production, of reclaimed wastewater in the Po Valley, Italy: in UNEP Yearbook 2011: Emerging Issues in our polishing sequence and cost benefit analysis. Global Environment. Nairobi: UN Environment Journal of Hydrology, vols 432–433, pp. 127–136. Programme, pp. 34–45Available from www.unep. DOI:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.02.024. org/yearbook/2011/pdfs/UNEP_YEARBOOK_ Fullreport.pdf. Vögeli, Y., Lohri, C. R., Gallardo, A., Diener, S. and Zurbrügg, C. (2014). Anaerobic Digestion UNEP/GEMS (2006). Water Quality for Ecosystem of Biowaste in Developing Countries: Practical and Human Health. Burlington, ON: UNEP/ UN Information and Case Studies. Dübendorf, Global Environmental Monitoring Systems GEMS. Switzerland: Eawag, Department of Water and Available from http://www.unep.org/gemswater/ Sanitation in Developing Countries. Portals/24154/publications/pdfs/water_quality_ human_health.pdf. Waddington, H., Snilstveit, B., White, H. and Fewtrell, L. (2009). Water, sanitation and hygiene UNICEF (2012a). Pneumonia and Diarrhoea: intervention to combat childhood diarrhoea in Tackling the Deadliest Diseases for the World’s developing countries, International Initiative for Poorest Children. New York: UNICEF. Impact Evaluation (3IE). Available from http:// monitoringandevaluation.zunia.org/sites/ UNICEF (2012b). Water Sanitation and Hygiene default/files/media/node-files/3i/179502_3ie%20 (WASH) for School Children: State-of-the-Art in SR0011249554991.pdf. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, Provisional draft. Wallin, A. (2014). Actors at the Interface Between New York: UNICEF, 2012b. Available from http:// Socio-technical and Ecological Systems: Analytical www.unicef.org/wash/schools/files/UNICEF_ Starting Point for Identifying Mitigation Possibilities WASH_for_School_Children_South_Asia_Report. in the Case of On-site Sewage Systems, Doctoral pdf. thesis. Gothenburg, Sweden: Division of Environmental Systems Analysis, Department US EPA (2003). Control of Pathogens and Vector of Energy and Environment. Available from Attraction in Sewage Sludge, Environmental http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/ Regulations and Technology, EPA/625/R-92/013, fulltext/204929/204929.pdf. revised July 2003. Washington, DC: Office of Water, US Environmental Protection Agency. WaterAid (2013). Sanitation and hygiene Available from http://www.epa.gov/sites/ approaches, WaterAid technology brief, Jan. 2013. production/files/2015-04/documents/control_of_ Available from http://www.wateraid.org/~/media/ pathogens_and_vector_attraction_in_sewage_ Publications/Sanitation-and-hygiene-approaches. sludge_july_2003.pdf. pdf. US EPA (2010). Methane and Nitrous Oxide Waterkeyn, J. A. and Waterkeyn, A. J. (2013). Emissions from Natural Sources. Washington, Creating a culture of health: hygiene behaviour DC: Office of Atmospheric Programs, US change in community health clubs through Environmental Protection Agency. knowledge and positive peer pressure. Journal of Water Sanitation & Hygiene for Development, US EPA (2012a). Guidelines for Water Reuse. vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 144–155. DOI: 10.2166/ Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection washdev.2013.109. Agency, 2012a. Available from http://nepis.epa. gov/Adobe/PDF/P100FS7K.pdf. Weiland, P. (2010). Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Applied Microbiology and US EPA (2012b). Global Anthropogenic Emissions Biotechnology, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 849–860. DOI: of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases: 1990–2030, 430–R- 10.1007/s00253-009-2246-7. 12-006. Washington, DC: Office of Atmospheric Programs, Climate Change Division, US Wendland, C. and Albold, A. (2010). Sustainable Environmental Protection Agency. Available from and cost-effective wastewater systems for rural

147 and peri-urban communities up to 10,000 PE, Wichelns, D., Drechsel, P. and Qadir, M. (2015). Guidance paper, Women in Europe for a Common Wastewater: economic asset in an urbanizing Future (WECF). Available from http://www.wecf. world, in Wastewater: Economic Asset in an eu/download/2010/03/guidancepaperengl.pdf. Urbanizing World, P. Drechsel, M. Qadir and D. Wichelns, eds. London: Springer, pp. 3–14. Werner, C. (2004). Ecosan – principles, urban applications and challenges, Presentation at the Winpenny, J., Heinz, I. and Koo-Oshima, S. (2010). UN Commission on Sustainable Development The Wealth of Waste: The Economics of Wastewater 12th Session, New York, 14–30 April. Available Use in Agriculture, FAO Water Report no. 35. Rome: from http://waterfund.go.ke/watersource/ UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Available Downloads/018. Ecosan Challenges.pdf. from http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1629e/ i1629e.pdf. Westerhoff, P., Lee, S., Yu, Y., Gordon, G. W., Hristovski, K., Halden, R. U. and Herckes, P. (2015). Wong, T. H. and Brown, R. R. (2009). The water Characterization, recovery opportunities, and sensitive city: principles for practice. Water valuation of metals in municipal sludges from Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 3, p. 673. U.S. wastewater treatment plants nationwide. Environmental Science & Technology, vol. 49, no. WSP (2011). Economic Impacts of Inadequate 16. DOI: 10.1021/es505329q. Sanitation in India. New Delhi: World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme. Available Westrell, T. (2004). Microbial Risk Assessment and its from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ Implications for Risk Management in Urban Water en/2011/01/16232493/economic-impacts- Systems, Doctoral thesis. Linköping, Sweden: inadequate-sanitation-india. Department of Water and Environmental Studies, Linköping University. Available from http://www. WSP (2012). Economic Assessment of Sanitation diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A2 Interventions in Cambodia: A Six-Country Study 0794&dswid=3224. Conducted in Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao PDR, the Philippines and Vietnam under the Economics Westrell, T., Schonning, C., Stenstrom, T. -A. of Sanitation Initiative (ESI). Jakarta: World Bank and Ashbolt, N. J. (2004). QMRA (quantitative Water and Sanitation Programme. microbial risk assessment) and HACCP (hazard analysis critical control points) for management WSP (2014). The WSP in Sanitation Service Delivery: of pathogens in wastewater and sewage A Review of Faecal Sludge Management in 12 Cities, sludge treatment and reuse. Water Science and Research brief. Washington, DC: World Bank Water Technology, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 23–30. and Sanitation Programme. Available from http:// www.wsp.org/sites/wsp.org/files/publications/ WHO (2006). Guidelines for the Safe Use of WSP-Fecal-Sludge-12-City- Review-Research- Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater, vols 1–4. Brief.pdf. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available from http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_ WWAP (2015). The UN World Water Development health/wastewater/gsuww/en/. Report 2015: Water for a Sustainable World. Paris: UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme. WHO (2012a). Global Costs and Benefits of Available from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ Drinking-Water Supply and Sanitation Interventions images/0023/002318/231823E.pdf. to Reach the MDG Target and Universal Coverage. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available Zhou, J. L., Zhang, Z. L., Banks, E., Grover, D. from http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_ and Jiang, J. Q. (2009). Pharmaceutical residues health/publications/2012/globalcosts.pdf. in wastewater treatment works effluent and their impact on receiving river water. Journal of WHO (2012b). GLAAS 2012 Report: UN-Water Hazardous Materials, vol. 166, nos 2-3, pp. 655– Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation 661. DOI:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.11.070. and Drinking-Water: The Challenges of Extending and Sustaining Services. Geneva: World Health Zuzhang, X. (2013). Domestic Biogas in a Changing Organization. Available from http://www.un.org/ China: Can Biogas Still Meet the Energy Needs of waterforlifedecade/pdf/glaas_report_2012_eng. China’s Rural Households? International Institute pdf. for Environment and Development (IIED) Access to Energy series. London: IIED. WHO (2015). Sanitation Safety Planning: Manual for Safe Use and Disposal of Wastewater, Greywater and Excreta. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available from http://apps.who.int/iris/ bitstream/10665/171753/1/9789241549240_eng. pdf?ua=1. SANITATION, WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY: MANAGEMENT WASTEWATER SANITATION, RESOURCE RECOVERY TO DISPOSAL WASTE FROM

148 THE AUTHORS

Kim Andersson is a Research Fellow at SEI and currently leads the SEI Initiative on Sustainable Sanitation.

Dr Sarah Dickin is a Research Fellow at SEI and works in the SEI Initiative on Sustainable Sanitation.

Dr Elisabeth Kvarnström is a researcher at SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden and part of the group Urban Water Management.

Dr Birguy Lamizana is a Programme Officer at UNEP and currently leading the UNEP Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land Based Activities (GPA) Wastewater portfolio.

Dr Jennifer McConville is a researcher at SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden and part of the group Urban Water Management.

Dr Arno Rosemarin is a Senior Research Fellow at SEI and works in the SEI Initiative on Sustainable Sanitation.

Dr Razak Seidu is a Professor and the leader of the Water and Environmental Engineering Group at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).

Caspar Trimmer is a Science Writer and Editor at SEI and communications lead for the SEI Initiative on Sustainable Sanitation.