Mid-Term-Proceedings on Capacity Development ... - UN-Water · 4.1.5 UN-Water Decade Programme on...

Editors: Reza Ardakanian, Hani Sewilam, Jens Liebe UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC)

Mid-Term-Proceedings on

Capacity Development for the Safe Use of Wastewater in AgricultureA Collaboration of UN-Water Members & Partners FAO · WHO · UNEP · UNU-INWEH · UNW-DPC · ICID · IWMI

Hosted by the United Nations University (UNU)

UNW-DPC

Editors: Dr. Reza Ardakanian, Dr. Hani Sewilam, Dr. Jens Liebe (UNW-DPC)Graphic Design: Katja Cloud (UNW-DPC)Cover Photo: kesipun/fotolia.com

UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC)United Nations UniversityUN CampusHermann-Ehlers-Str. 1053113 BonnGermany

Tel +49-228-815-0652Fax [email protected]

All rights reserved.Publication does not imply endorsement.

This publication was printed and bound in Germany on FSC certified paper.

Proceedings Series No. 8Published by UNW-DPC, Bonn, GermanyAugust 2012© UNW-DPC, 2012

DisclaimerThe views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the agencies cooperating in this project. The designations employed

and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the UN,

UNW-DPC andUNU concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of

its frontiers or boundaries.

Unless otherwise indicated, the ideas and opinions expressed by the speakers do not necessarily represent the views of their employ-

ers. Please note that the views reported from the group discussions derive from discussions between different participants attending the

meeting. As such their appearance in this publication does not imply that all participants agree with the views expressed, although group

consensus was sought where possible. The contributions contained herein have been lightly edited and re-formatted for the purpose of this

publication. The publishers would welcome being notified of any remaining errors identified that the editing process might have missed.

Editors: Reza Ardakanian Hani Sewilam Jens Liebe

UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC)

Coordinated by:

Mid-Term-Proceedings on

Capacity Development for the Safe Use of Wastewater in AgricultureA Collaboration of UN-Water Members & Partners FAO · WHO · UNEP· UNU-INWEH · UNW-DPC · ICID · IWMI

Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture | 32 | UNW-DPC Proceedings No. 8

FOREWORD 6

ACkNOWLEDgEMENTS 9

AbSTRACT 11

Section 1

the Project

1 introduction & BaSic definitionS 13

1.1 TyPES OF WASTEWATER 14

1.2 CATEgORIES OF WASTEWATER USE 15

2 Potential imPactS 17

3 caPacity develoPment 20

3.1 LEvELS AND DIMENSIONS OF CAPACITy 20

4 the Project 22

4.1 PROJECT PARTNERS 23

4.1.1 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 23

4.1.2 World Health Organization (WHO) 23

4.1.3 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 24

4.1.4 United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment

and Health (UNU-INWEH) 25

4.1.5 UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) 26

4.1.6 International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) 26

4.1.7 International Water Management Institute (IWMI) 27

4.2 TARgETED COUNTRIES 28

4.3 PROJECT STAgES 28

4.3.1 Stage I (2011-2013): Capacity-Building at the Individual/Organization Level 29

4.3.1.1 Target Group 29

4.3.1.2 Capacities to be developed 29

4.3.2 Stage II (2014-2015): Capacity-Building at the Organization/ System Level 30

TAble of CoNTeNTS

Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture | 3

4.3.2.1 Target Group 30

4.3.2.2 Capacities to be developed 30

4.4 IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISM 30

4.5 PROJECT PHASES IN STAgE I 31

4.5.1 Phase I: Individuals’ Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) 33

4.5.2 Phase II: International Workshop 34

4.5.3 Phase III: Regional Workshops & Communication Platform 35

4.5.4 Phase IV: Implementation of Recommended Actions and Assessment of

Organizational/System Capacity Needs 35

Section 2

caPacity needS analySiS

5 caPacity needS analySiS 37

5.1 REqUIRED kNOWLEDgE 38

5.1.1 Knowledge of Health Risk 39

5.1.2 Knowledge of Health Protection Measures 39

5.1.3 Knowledge of Monitoring and System Assessment 41

5.1.4 Crop Production Aspects 42

5.1.5 Environmental Aspects 43

5.1.6 Socio-cultural Aspects 43

5.1.7 Economic and Financial Considerations 44

5.1.8 Policy and Institutional Aspects 45

Section 3

international KicK-off, regional WorKShoPS and other

aWarneSS-raiSing activitieS

6 international KicK-off and regional WorKShoPS 47

6.1 THE INTERNATIONAL kICk-OFF WORkSHOP IN bONN 47

6.1.1 Workshop Statement 52

6.2 REgIONAL WORkSHOPS 54

6.2.1 1st Regional Workshop for Francophone and North African Countries 54

6.2.2 2nd Regional Workshop for West Asian and Middle Eastern Countries 58

6.2.3 Remaining Regional Workshops 61


7 additional Promotion of the toPic of Safe uSe

of WaSteWater in agriculture 62

7.1 16TH AFRICAN WATER ASSOCIATION (AFWA) INTERNATIONAL

WATER AND SANITATION CONgRESS 62

7.2 UN-WATER SEMINAR ON SAFE USE OF WASTEWATER IN

AgRICULTURE AT IFAT ENTSORgA 2012 63

8 roadmaP and the Way forWard 65

Section 4

the un-Water activity information SyStem (unW-aiS):

WeB-BaSed caPacity develoPment tool

9 un-Water activity information SyStem 69

9.1 bACkgROUND INFORMATION 69

9.2 UNW-AIS AS PROJECT SUPPORT AND COMMUNICATION TOOL 71

Section 5

national rePortS

10 national rePortS 75

10.1 bACkgROUND 75

10.2 NATIONAL REPORT OF gHANA 77

10.2.1 The Situation in Ghana 77

10.2.2 Wastewater Status and Trends 77

10.2.3 Wastewater Use 79

10.2.4 Use of Integrated Natural Wastewater Treatment Systems 82

10.2.5 Policies and National Strategy 83

10.2.6 Organizational Roles and Responsibilities 84

10.2.7 Competences on the Safe Use of Wastewater in Irrigation 88

10.3 NATIONAL REPORT OF JORDAN 96

10.3.1 The Situation in Jordan 96

10.3.2 Water Availability and Use 97

10.3.3 Wastewater Treatment in Jordan: What is Wastewater and Why Treat It? 98

10.3.4 Wastewater Treatment Plants in Jordan 101

10.3.5 Wastewater Use and Disposal 103

10.3.6 Research and Practice on Different Aspects of Wastewater 104


10.3.7 Wastewater Standards in Jordan 105

10.3.8 WHO Guideline of Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater (2006) and

JS 893/2006 112

10.3.9 Monitoring and Reporting for Reclaimed Water 113

10.3.10 Wastewater Analysis carried out at WAJ Central Laboratories 114

10.3.11 Wastewater Evaluation 115

10.3.12 Treat Plants Efficiency 116

10.3.13 Treated Wastewater Quantity 117

10.3.14 Conclusions 118

10.4 NATIONAL REPORT OF IRAN 119

10.4.1 The Situation in Iran 119

10.4.2 Organizational Roles and Responsibilities 121

10.4.3 Service Provision for Urban Water 122

10.4.4 Wastewater Status and Trends 124

10.4.5 Policy Aspects and National Strategy 132

10.4.6 Questionnaire Results of Competences on the Safe Use of Wastewater in Irrigation 134

Section 6

referenceS and other Selected PuBlicationS 138

ADDITIONAL SOURCES 143

additional materialS 146

aPPendix 147


foreWorD

In many regions of the world, particularly in water scarce urban and peri-urban areas and

where competition for water is high, wastewater is being used for agricultural purposes.

While some countries have established agricultural wastewater use practices that fol-

low national regulations and safety standards, others, especially those in the developing

world, lack the implementation of safe use guidelines and practices. Such a lack can lead

to the aggravation of health risks that could otherwise be avoided.

Even though the international community recognizes that “Safe Use of Wastewater in Ag-

riculture” is an important water resources issue that needs to be addressed, much work

still needs to be done to advance the topic in national policies and to implement guide-

lines and safe practice. The keyword therein is “safe”, and one of the essentials is to under-

stand that wastewater is a valuable resource. Addressing the safe use of wastewater in

agriculture is an important step. In particular, it needs to be understood that, where water

is scarce, a lack of safe practices and guidelines will not prevent the use of wastewater,

but will rather result in unsafe practices of use.

Tackling the wastewater topic requires a concerted effort, taking into account various

disciplines. In this project, UNW-DPC brought together, under UN-Water, six of its Mem-

bers and Partners with extensive knowledge and experience in the field of wastewater

use, all from a different disciplinary backgrounds: The Food and Agriculture Organiza-

tion of the United Nations (FAO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Na-

tions Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations University Institute for Water,

Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), the International Commission on Irrigation and

Drainage (ICID), and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI). Concerting

the efforts of UN-Water Members and Partners in capacity development efforts is one of

the core tasks of UNW-DPC. Fostering such collaboration adds value, increases the coher-

ence of UN-Water Members and Partners, and contributes to the UN delivering as one.


Launched in November 2011 with an International kick-Off Workshop in bonn, the two-

year “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” project features five regional workshops that

address region-specific capacity needs. As of now, regional workshops have been held for

Francophone and North African Countries in Marrakech, Morocco — hosted by the Office

National de l’Eau Potable (ONEP) — and for South, West and Central Asian Countries in

New Delhi, India.

This report gives an overview of the scope and progress of the project after roughly half

of its activities. So far, we have reached 90 participants from 35 countries and from vari-

ous disciplinary backgrounds, predominantly representing Ministries of Agriculture and

Irrigation, Health, Environment and Development. One important aspect of bringing to-

gether national stakeholders of different disciplinary pedigrees is to stimulate cross-sec-

toral communication and the exchange of experience among the participating countries.

Three further regional workshops will be held for Anglophone Africa, Latin America and

the Caribbean, and East and South-East Asia through March 2013, during which we ex-

pect to reach and work with an equally large audience. The outcomes of this capacity

development project, and possible steps for follow-up, will be at the heart of the project’s

International Wrap-up Conference in May 2013.

The “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” Project is one of those activities where UN-

Water can make an important and meaningful impact in its role as the United Nations’

inter-agency coordination mechanism for all freshwater-related issues.

I wish you an enjoyable read.

Dr. Reza Ardakanian

Director, UNW-DPC

Bonn, Germany


foreWorD

© fl

ickr/

it’s-

d-lo


ACkNoWleDgeMeNTS

The Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture Project is a collaboration under UN-Water of

the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Health

Organization (WHO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United

Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), the Inter-

national Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), the International Water Manage-

ment Institute (IWMI) and is coordinated by the UN-Water Decade Programme on Capac-

ity Development (UNW-DPC).

As a joint activity, the Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture Project gratefully acknowl-

edges the contributions of all above mentioned UN-Water members and partners in the

framework of the workshops, their contributions to the concept note, questionnaires and

the provision of materials.

We also would also like to thank the authors of the National Reports which were included

as examples of contributions of all workshop participants. For the National Report of

ghana: Mr. Delali Nutsukpo, Deputy Director, Ministry of Food and Agriculture, ghana,

and Philip Amoah, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), ghana; for the Na-

tional Report of Jordan: Eng. Ahmed Ali Uleimat, Advisor, Environment & Water Reuse,

Water Authority of Jordan (WAJ); and for the National Report of Iran: Prof. Massoud Tajr-

ishy, Environment and Water Research Center (EWRC), Department of Civil Engineering,

Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. Further National Reports can be accessed

on the individual workshop pages through the UN-Water Activity Information System

(UNW-AIS) at www.ais.unwater.org/wastewater.


foreWorD

© fl

ickr /

Agr

ilife

Toda

y


Wastewater use in agriculture was one of the topics addressed at the United Nations Con-

ference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) as a significant issue for the global green

Economy. It is estimated that 200 million farmers worldwide irrigate at least 20 Mha with

treated, partially treated and untreated wastewater.

The use of wastewater in agriculture is an effective and economic way of recycling urban

wastewater, especially as it contains nutrients important for agricultural production. How-

ever, using it without adequate treatment or practices leads to increased health risks and

environmental and economic impacts.

The global understanding of such impacts and mitigation measures has critical gaps. To

promote the safe use of wastewater in agriculture, the UN-Water Decade Programme on

Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) brought together, in a multi-year project under UN-

Water, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World

Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the

United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), the

International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) and the International Water

Management Institute (IWMI) for a global project aimed at developing national capacities

for the promotion of safe use of wastewater in agriculture, in developing countries and

countries in transition.

This project, which started in November 2011 and will run through May 2013, includes

capacity needs assessment of individuals and organizations at a national level in many

countries, and development of their capacities by sharing knowledge at an international

level. This capacity development approach targets organizations in a vertical direction

(individuals, institutions, system) as well as in a horizontal direction (health, water and

agriculture sectors). Different capacity development techniques were followed using this

initiative, such as international knowledge-sharing events, development of web-based

learning systems and making use of the relevant materials developed by UN-Water mem-

bers and partners.

AbSTrACT


© U

N-Ph

oto


SeCTioN 1

The ProjeCT

1. Introduction & Basic Definitions

The water and agriculture sectors are increasingly subject to external and human-made

changes, yet at the same time, societies expect more reliable services, safe food and less

risk. Our understanding of such changes, social phenomena, impacts and mitigation

measures has gaps; therefore, knowledge and capacity development should be a top

priority on local, regional and international agendas.

Population growth and rapid urbanization are dramatically increasing the gap between

water supply and demand in some parts of the world. Wastewater is considered to be a

valuable source of irrigation water for farmers in such regions. Wastewater can be urban

wastewater from domestic use, institutions, including hospitals, as well as industrial efflu-

ents. Using urban wastewater for irrigation can be considered to be both a resource and

a problem. On the one hand, wastewater use in irrigation is an effective way for recycling

urban wastewater, especially given that it contains nutrients important for agriculture

production. On the other hand, using wastewater without adequate treatment is associ-

ated with the greatest health risk.


1.1 Types of Wastewater

Wastewater used for agricultural irrigation covers wastewater of different qualities, rang-

ing from raw and diluted, to those generated by various urban activities (Raschid-Sally

and Jayakody, 2008):

y Urban wastewater is usually a combination of one or more of the following:

y Domestic effluent consisting of black water (excreta, urine and associated

sludge) and grey water (kitchen and bathroom wastewater)

y Effluent from commercial establishments and institutions, including hos-

pitals

y Industrial effluent where present

y Storm water and other urban run-off

y Treated wastewater is wastewater that has been processed through a

wastewater treatment plant, and that has been subjected to one or more

physical, chemical, and biological processes to reduce its contamination of

hazardous substances

y Reclaimed (waste) water or recycled water is treated wastewater that can of-

ficially be used under controlled conditions for beneficial purposes, such as

irrigation

grey water is particularly suitable for reuse. It is generated from households not connect-

ed to a sewerage system and can be treated and used for irrigation of home gardens and

trees, such as olive trees. grey water is an important component of water conservation.

It comprises 50-80% of residential wastewater and offers great potential as an economic

and resource conservation component of integrated water resource management in dry

areas.


1.2 Categories of Wastewater Use

y Direct use of untreated wastewater from a sewage outlet occurs when it is di-

rectly disposed of on land where it is used for cultivation

y Indirect use of (un)treated urban wastewater occurs when water from a river

receiving (un)treated urban wastewater is abstracted by farmers downstream

of the urban centre for agriculture. This happens when cities do not have any

comprehensive sewage collection network and drainage systems are discharg-

ing collected wastewater into rivers

y Direct use of treated wastewater occurs when wastewater has undergone

treatment before it is used for agriculture or other irrigation or recycling pur-

poses

y Planned use of wastewater refers to the conscious and controlled use of waste-

water either raw (direct) or diluted (indirect). However, most indirect use hap-

pens without planning

y The resulting schemes for wastewater use can be very heterogeneous but

common patterns can still be detected among different countries

y Lack of quality water, freshwater scarcity and poverty drives untreated waste-

water use in urban and peri-urban agriculture and is a common pattern in poor

regions where there is no or little economic capacity to afford conventional

sanitation and wastewater treatment facilities. This poses high health and en-

vironmental risks if no additional measures are applied

y Water scarcity together with health and environment protection is the main

driver for reclaimed wastewater use in high income countries. This is a com-

mon pattern in countries such as Israel, Australia or USA (California and Flori-

da), where highly effective sanitation and treatment technology can be found

in planned reclamation facilities. This is a costly approach but reduces risk to

the minimum


y Water scarcity driving partially treated wastewater use in middle-income re-

gions is a common pattern in areas where low-cost technologies are applied

providing partially treated wastewater for irrigation purposes. This approach

poses moderate risks on health and environment if no additional measures are

applied

y The total land irrigated with untreated, treated or partially treated wastewater,

both directly and indirectly, is uncertain but estimations indicate that it can be

as high as 10% of total irrigated land (Lazarova and bahri, 2008)

An important factor that makes wastewater valuable is that it is a reliable source of water

and available all year round. Consequently, it permits higher crop yields, year-round pro-

duction, and increases the range of crops that can be irrigated. Additionally, wastewater

contains a large diversity of nutrients. The land application of wastewater for agricultural

use constitutes a low-cost disposal method and a land treatment system. If carried out

under controlled conditions it can also recharge aquifers through infiltration. Reduced

costs to society are also notable, in view of reducing the amount of fossil fuel used in

fertilizer production (qadir and others, 2007; Raschid-Sally and Jayakody, 2008).

besides all benefits of wastewater use in agriculture, it can also have adverse impacts on

health and environment, depending on the treatment level, type of irrigation and local

conditions. Untreated wastewater contains a variety of pathogens, many of which are ca-

pable of survival in the environment, on crops or in the soil, and pose health risks to farm-

ers and their families, consumers and nearby communities. Other contaminants present

in untreated water that can pose serious health and environmental risks are chemical

agents, salts and heavy metals. Managing these risks is a crucial issue that must be ad-

dressed from both local and global perspectives.

In cities and other urban agglomerations and densely populated regions of the devel-

oped world where wastewater collection and treatment have been established over the

years, wastewater is treated and used with proper attention to sanitation, public health

and environmental protection. In many places in developing countries and in countries

in transition, this is not the case. It is important to underlie again that in several develop-

ing countries raw sewage is still used for agricultural irrigation, despite the health risks.

© C

iAT N

eil P

alm

er


Therefore, to maximize opportunities and minimize risks related to the use of wastewater

in agriculture, a robust policy and institutional framework has to be designed.

In many countries where wastewater use in agriculture takes place, these frameworks are

lacking. Responsibilities and jurisdictions among public institutions (health, agriculture

and water) have to be clear and coordination and collaboration mechanisms should be

created to come up with comprehensive and effective policies.

Cost-effective and appropriate wastewater treatment suited for the end use of wastewa-

ter is a fundamental action. However, for most developing countries wastewater treat-

ment is not economically feasible in the short-term, and interim solutions may be needed

to protect farmers and public health. In these countries the focus should be on prioritiz-

ing affordable and easily adoptable risk management strategies. Adopting the multiple-

barrier approach (WHO/UNEP/FAO, 2006a and b) can reduce human and crop exposure

to toxic compounds and pathogens.

In addition, farmers have to be provided with specific guidance to support their produc-

tion and to be able to access markets; and proper dissemination and education cam-

paigns have to be designed to facilitate the adoption of such guidelines by farmers.

An integrated risk assessment with maximum protection for human health and the en-

vironment, as well as maximum use of the resource (water and nutrients) to support the

livelihoods of poor farmers, needs to be considered when using wastewater. Applications

need to be monitored to ensure that wastewater is being used in a manner consistent

with the intended applications and practice. Tested technologies and strategies for the

safe use of wastewater in agriculture are available worldwide, but capacities to imple-

ment them are still lacking in many countries.

2. Potential Impacts

Hussain and others (2002) developed an overview of the potential impacts of using

wastewater in agriculture. Selected potential impacts are summarized as follows:

© C

iAT N

eil P

alm

er


y Public health: Wastewater has the potential to cause diseases as it contains bac-

teria, viruses and parasites. Also, the inclusion of heavy metals in wastewater

can be very dangerous for human health. Wastewater use in agriculture causes

risk to the population living within and outside the wastewater irrigation zone

y Crops: Wastewater is attractive and economically valuable for farmers because

it contains nutrients important for crop growth. However, a high concentration

of chemical pollutants in wastewater may be toxic to plants

y Soil resources: Accumulation of nitrogen, phosphorus, dissolved solids and

other constituents such as heavy metals in the soil affect its productivity and

the sustainability of land use for agriculture. Salt accumulation in the root zone

has possibly harmful impacts on crop yields

y groundwater resources: Leaching of nutrients and salts included in wastewa-

ter has the potential to affect the quality of groundwater. The degree of impact

depends on several factors, among them quality of groundwater, depth of wa-

ter table, soil drainage and the amount of wastewater applied for irrigation

y Property values: Using wastewater for irrigation may influence the land prop-

erty values positively or negatively. Low soil productivity due to the use of

wastewater in irrigation may negatively affect the land prices and lease reve-

nues. However, the value of wastewater as a source for irrigation may positively

affect the value of land

y Ecological impacts: Drainage of wastewater from irrigation schemes into water

bodies may indirectly affect aquatic life and negatively influence overall biodi-

versity, e.g., the presence of water birds

y Social impacts: The use of wastewater in agriculture has different social im-

pacts such as food safety, health and welfare, impaired quality of life, loss of

property values and sustainability of land use

A brief overview of the wastewater constituents, parameters and possible impacts is

given in the following table.


TAble 1: PollUTANTS AND CoNTAMiNANTS iN WASTeWATer AND Their PoTeNTiAl iMPACTS ThroUgh AgriCUlTUrAl USe


3. Capacity Development

Capacity development has been defined by the Organization for Economic Cooperation

and Development (OECD) as “the process by which individuals, groups, organizations,

institutions and societies increase their abilities to: i) perform core functions, solve prob-

lems, define and achieve objectives; and ii) understand and deal with their development

needs in a broad context and in a sustainable manner” (UNDP, 1998). This definition has

three important aspects, namely it:

y Indicates that capacity is part of a continuing process

y Ensures that human resources and the way in which they are utilized are cen-

tral to capacity development

y Recognizes the importance of the overall framework (system) within which in-

dividuals and organizations undertake their functions

Following from this definition, capacity-building for safe wastewater use in agriculture

can be defined as the process through which relevant stakeholders, especially those from

sanitation, agriculture, environment and consumer sectors, improve their abilities to per-

form their core roles and responsibilities, solve problems, define and achieve objectives,

understand and address needs and effectively work together in order to ensure the safe

and productive use of wastewater in agriculture.

3.1 Levels and Dimensions of Capacity

As illustrated in Figure 1, capacity for safe wastewater use in agriculture exists at three

different, but closely related levels:

y System level or context in which organizations, groups and individuals operate

y organization and group level within the system

y individual level within organizations and groups


figure 1: levels and Dimensions of Capacity with respect to Safe Wastewater Use in Agriculture; Source: UNDP, 1998

At each of these different levels, there are various dimensions of capacity for the safe

wastewater use in agriculture:

y At the system level, dimensions of capacity include the policies, laws, regula-

tions and standards that provide a framework for safe wastewater use in ag-

riculture, as well as the mechanisms for management, communication and

coordination among the different organizations involved

y At the organizational level, the mission, structure, operational procedures and

culture of organizations involved in wastewater use in agriculture are impor-

tant dimensions of capacity, in addition to their human resources, financial re-

sources, information resources and infrastructure, etc.

y At the individual level, knowledge, skills, competencies, experience and ethics

are all part of capacity

These dimensions are the core characteristics or features of capacity. Some of these di-

mensions are cross-cutting and exist at each of the levels. For instance, the overall human

Individual level: Public health, agricultural and environmental scientists, agriculture professionals, educators, research engineers,

policymakers and those responsible for developing standards and regulations. This includes knowledge, skills,

competences, work ethics, etc.

Organization level: Government agencies and institutions such as ministries of agriculture, wa-ter, environment, health or irrigation; Water control laboratories, Research

Centers, Consumer groups

System level: Context in which organizations, individuals and groups involved in wastewater use

for agriculture operate. This includes policies, strategies, laws and regulations, relationships, interdependencies and interactions among concerned stakeholders.

Trade and market

Governance

Socio-economic and political environment

Education


resource capacity of an organization will obviously depend on the number of individuals

within the organization, as well as their qualifications and skills, and the external environ-

ment in which they operate.

Considering capacity in terms of these different levels and dimensions is useful because

it takes account of the relationships between them, and allows for the possibility that the

root cause of weak capacity at one level may be found at a different level.

4. The Project

The UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) brought to-

gether, in a multi-year project under UN-Water, the Food and Agriculture Organization of

the United Nations (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the

United Nations University Institute on Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH) to

start a global initiative aimed at developing national capacities for the promotion of safe

use of wastewater in agriculture in developing countries and countries in transition. At

a later stage, the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), the Inter-

national Water Management Institute (IWMI), and the World Health Organization (WHO)

joined the initiative, contributing significant additional expertise available within the

group of UN-Water members and partners.

The initiative is playing a significant role in increasing the understanding of the links

between wastewater and health, ecosystem functioning and the potential benefits of

wastewater reuse in contributing to development and improved well-being. It also en-

courages the engagement of stakeholders in all sectors and the improvement of inter-

sectoral collaboration through the development of professional skills and institutional

capacities.


4.1 Project Partners

4.1.1 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) leads international

efforts to defeat hunger. Serving both developed and developing countries, FAO acts

as a neutral forum where all nations meet as equals to negotiate agreements and de-

bate policy. FAO is also a source of knowledge and information, and helps developing

countries, and countries in transition, modernize and improve agriculture, forestry and

fisheries practices and ensure good nutrition for all. Since its foundation in 1945, FAO has

focused special attention on developing rural areas, home to 70% of the world’s poor and

hungry people.

4.1.2 World Health Organization (WHO)

WHO is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the UN system. It is re-

sponsible for providing leadership on global health matters, shaping the health research

agenda, setting norms and standards, articulating evidence-based policy options, pro-

viding technical support to countries and monitoring and assessing health trends.

In the 21st century, health is a shared responsibility, involving equitable access to essen-

tial care and collective defence against transnational threats.

WHO fulfils its objectives through its core functions:

y Providing leadership on matters critical to health and engaging in partnerships

where joint action is needed

y Shaping the research agenda and stimulating the generation, translation and

dissemination of valuable knowledge

y Setting norms and standards and promoting and monitoring their implemen-

tation

y Articulating ethical and evidence-based policy options


y Providing technical support, catalysing change, and building sustainable insti-

tutional capacity

y Monitoring the health situation and assessing health trends

These core functions are set out in the 11th general Programme of Work, which provides

the framework for organization-wide programmes of work, including, budget, resources

and results. Entitled “Engaging for health”, it covers the 10-year period from 2006 to 2015.

4.1.3 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

Since 1972, UNEP has worked in partnership with diverse groups, including other UN

entities, governments, NgOs, businesses, industry, the media and civil society. From help-

ing governments form national biodiversity strategies to driving innovation through the

green Economy Initiative, UNEP’s mission is to inspire and support nations and commu-

nities to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations.

UNEP is also an implementing Agency of the gEF (global Environment Facility) with the

World bank and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). UNEP is the only

gEF Agency whose sole focus is the environment. UNEP plays a key role in supporting

countries to develop and execute gEF projects, including scientific assessments, technol-

ogy transfer and advocacy.

To focus its efforts over the period 2010–2013, UNEP has developed a medium-term strat-

egy, which will enable it to work more efficiently and effectively to achieve its goals. The

new approach strengthens the capacity of UNEP to deliver on its mission by focusing on

the following six thematic priorities:

1. Climate change: Strengthen the ability of countries, in particular developing

countries, to integrate climate change responses into national development

processes

2. Resource efficiency: Ensure that natural resources are produced, processed

and consumed in an environmentally sustainable way, paving the way to the

green Economy, in which environmental impact is decoupled from economic

growth and social co-benefits are optimized


3. Disasters and conflicts: Minimize threats to human well-being from the en-

vironmental causes and consequences of existing and potential natural and

man-made disasters

4. Environmental governance: Ensure that environmental governance and inter-

actions at the country, regional and global levels are strengthened to address

environmental priorities

5. Harmful substances and hazardous waste: Minimize the impact of harmful

substances and hazardous waste on the environment and people

6. Ecosystem management: Ensure that countries use the ecosystem approach:

the holistic management of land, water and living resources to promote con-

servation, and sustainable use to enhance human well-being (UNEP, available

from: http://www.unep.org/pdf/Overview_folder.pdf.)

4.1.4 United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH)

based in Hamilton, Canada, UNU-INWEH acts as the ‘UN Think-Tank on Water’ and its pro-

gram is designed to provide applied science and capacity-building initiatives that enable

water managers to better address both the root causes and current manifestations of

the global water crisis. UNU-INWEH’s three core functions are: (1) capacity development

of researchers and institutions in developing countries and countries in transition; (2)

knowledge enhancement by facilitating global knowledge networks to address the glob-

al water crisis; and (3) research-policy bridging by fostering better approaches to water

management and governance through applied research designed to fill critical policy

gaps. The core functions are addressed within the scope of four thematic areas: (1) coastal

zone ecosystems; (2) dryland ecosystems; (3) freshwater ecosystems; and (4) water-health

nexus. In collaboration with the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry

Areas (ICARDA) and the IWMI, UNU-INWEH has recently also initiated a program address-

ing safe and productive use of marginal-quality water resources for agriculture in dry ar-

eas. Human activity and climate change effects on water and land quality, water quality-

health nexus, economic dimensions of water and land degradation and improvement,

and relevant institutional and policy level interventions are considered to be the corner-

stones of this joint initiative. Capacity development is an integral part of this initiative.


4.1.5 UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC)

The UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) started work

on 1 August 2007. The aim of the programme office is to strengthen the activities of the

more than two dozen UN organizations and programmes already cooperating within UN-

Water, and to support them in their efforts to achieve the Millennium Development goals

(MDg) related to water. This is not just a matter of capacity development related to water,

but also of education, training and institutional development. It also links the activities

in the water sector to the broader efforts of the UN International Decade of Education for

Sustainable Development and other relevant UN Decades.

UNW-DPC is hosted by the United Nations University (UNU) in bonn and financially sup-

ported by the german government. The vice-Rectorate of the UNU in Europe (UNU-viE)

provides central services for all UNU entities in bonn including UNW-DPC.

4.1.6 International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID)

The International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) was established on 24 June

1950 as a Scientific, Technical and voluntary Not-for-profit Non-governmental Internation-

al Organization (NgO), with headquarters in New Delhi, India. The Commission is dedicated

to enhancing the worldwide supply of food and fibre for all people, by improving water and

land management and the productivity of irrigated and drained lands through appropriate

management of water, environment and application of irrigation, drainage and flood man-

agement techniques. The Mission of ICID is to stimulate and promote the development

and application of the arts, sciences and techniques of engineering, agriculture, economics,

ecological and social sciences in managing water and land resources for irrigation, drain-

age, flood management and river training applications, including research and develop-

ment and capacity-building for achieving sustainable irrigated agriculture.

ICID has more than half-a-century of experience in the transfer of water management tech-

nology and in the handling of related issues. building on its past experience, accomplish-

ments, and the comprehensive water management framework, ICID strives to promote

programmes that enhance sustainable development of irrigated agriculture. ICID has been

involved in the global discussions leading to Agenda 21, World Water vision, World Water

Forums, etc., which have become the focal point of several of its technical activities.


In recognition of its significant contribution to the programmes and objectives of the

International year of Peace, proclaimed by the UN general Assembly on 15 September

1987, ICID was designated as a Peace Messenger by the UN Secretary general.

4.1.7 International Water Management Institute (IWMI)

IWMI is one of 15 international research centres supported by a network of 60 govern-

ments, private foundations and international and regional organizations collectively

known as the Consultative group on International Agricultural Research (CgIAR). It is a

non-profit organization with a staff of 350, offices in over ten countries across Asia and

Africa and Headquarters in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

y IWMI’s Mission is to improve the management of land and water resources for

food, livelihoods and the environment

y IWMI’s vision, reflected in the Strategic Plan, is water for a food-secure world

y IWMI targets water and land management challenges faced by poor communi-

ties in the developing world/or in developing countries and through this con-

tributes towards the achievement of the UN Millennium Development goals

(MDg) of reducing poverty, hunger and maintaining a sustainable environ-

ment. These are also the goals of the CgIAR

Research is the core activity of IWMI. The research agenda is organized around four prior-

ity themes, including Water Availability and Access, Productive Water Use, Water quality,

Health and Environment, and Water and Society. Cross-cutting activities in all themes

include assessment of land and water productivity and their relationship to poverty,

identification of interventions that improve productivity as well as access to and sustain-

ability of natural resources, assessment of the impacts of interventions on productivity,

livelihoods, health and environmental sustainability. IWMI works through collaborative

research with many partners in the North and South and targets policymakers, develop-

ment agencies, individual farmers and private sector organizations.


4.2 Targeted Countries

The project targets developing countries and countries in transition. The countries in-

volved in the International kick-off Workshop were:

y Iran, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria from the Middle East

y Pakistan from Southern Asia

y Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia from North Africa

y ghana and Senegal from West Africa

y kenya and South Africa from East and Southern Africa

y bolivia, Chile, Colombia, guatemala, Mexico and Peru from Latin America

The subsequent regional workshops invite nominations of representatives of the proj-

ect’s target group (4.3.1.1) from developing countries and countries in transitions, who

agree to prepare extensive preparatory work, such as national capacity needs assessment

involving multiple agencies and the compilation of a national report on wastewater use

in their countries.

4.3 Project Stages

Capacity-building is a continuous process of improvement that can occur at different levels

(individuals, organizations or the system in which they operate) and that can focus on dif-

ferent dimensions of capacity. Similarly, it can be targeted at different types of stakeholders.

given the complexity of a capacity-building process, the project is structured in two stages.


4.3.1 Stage I (2011-2013): Capacity-Building at the Individual/Organization Level

This initial stage will enable staff members in selected organizations to increase their

knowledge and skills on the safe use of wastewater in agriculture. The target audience

will be trained in the use of selected materials and methodologies to promote the safe

use of wastewater in agriculture. Different tools and techniques will be discussed and

chosen to maximize knowledge dissemination by the selected organizations and related

stakeholders. This new individual capacity will contribute to the improvement of the

overall capacity and performance of the organizations as a whole.

4.3.1.1 Target Group

In Stage I, the project will focus on individuals in key organizations and institutions with

competences in safe wastewater use in agriculture.

Potential institutions and organizations will include: Ministries of Irrigation; Agriculture,

Food, Health, Water, Environment and Rural Affairs; Research Centers; Consumers groups;

Water Control Laboratories; National Farmers Unions; and others that are linked with

wastewater treatment and reuse for agricultural irrigation. key departments and services

will need to be selected within these organizations.

The target audience may include public health, agricultural and environmental scientists,

agriculture professionals, educators, researchers, engineers, policymakers and those re-

sponsible for developing standards and regulations for safe wastewater use in agricul-

ture.

4.3.1.2 Capacities to be developed

A Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) will be carried out at country level to identify the key

institutions and organizations and the necessary staff capacities to be developed.


4.3.2 Stage II (2014-2015): Capacity-Building at the Organization/ System Level

Stage II will aim to improve the organizational and system performance to enable trained

individuals to make best use of their new capacities (acquired in Stage I). This will pro-

vide the conditions for a comprehensive and effective implementation of projects and

programmes related to safe wastewater use in agriculture. Special attention will be given

to policies, strategies, laws and regulations and the relationships, interdependencies and

interactions among concerned stakeholders.

4.3.2.1 Target Group

This second stage will focus on the whole system of wastewater production, manage-

ment and use, and all the organizations and stakeholders involved. The project will ad-

dress appropriate environment, opportunities and incentives, taking into account the

organizational/institutional/political level as well as the societal level.

4.3.2.2 Capacities to be developed

In Stage II, a broad assessment will be carried out to identify what other capabilities are

needed/lacking in their public institutions and policy framework for effective planning

and implementation of the safe use of wastewater in agriculture.

4.4 Implementation Mechanism

The main idea is based on sharing knowledge between the involved countries and re-

gions. In addition to the different national experiences, expert groups, research institutes

and international organizations will be involved to provide state-of-the-art expertise,

standards, innovations and technologies to enhance local capacities and support them

in applying and implementing innovative wastewater use technologies in their respec-

tive countries.

Cooperative links and a community of practice have been especially established with

expert groups of the respective collaboration partners, in addition to other UN-Water

members and partners involved in the public sector. This has enabled the participants


and beneficiaries to become more active in implementing innovative wastewater use

strategies and concepts in developing countries and countries in transition. At the same

time, it has enabled the beneficiaries and participants to learn from experiences of best

practice implementation, as well as continuing exchange on recent implementation

strategies and suitable indicators from partners and water bodies who are active in im-

proving wastewater management and reuse in their respective environment.

This project is running mainly on two levels; national level and international lev-

el. Figure 2 shows the Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) that has been carried out

at the national level in the targeted countries. based on the CNA, the capacity de-

velopment activities will be carried out at an international level, to enable sharing

knowledge from different regions using different capacity development channels.

figure 2: The Capacity Development Mechanism; Source: UNDP, 1998

4.5 Project Phases in Stage I

A number of successful approaches, tools and techniques, as well as previous experience

of FAO, UNEP, UNU-INWEH, UNW-DPC, ICID, IWMI and WHO staff are available to ensure

the success of this project stage. The contents, proposed methodologies and tools for

safe wastewater and grey water use will be introduced and disseminated in a form of

training workshops and seminars in four phases (see Figure 3).

Web-Based

Questionnaires

Local Workshops

International Workshops

National Reports

Publications

National Level

Global Level

Capacity Needs Assessment

Capacity Development Channels

Enha

nced

Nat

iona

l Cap

acit

y Current N

ational Capacity


Clustering Partners’ materials

Dissemination techniques

Gaps Assessment

International Workshops

Regional Workshops

National Reports

Questionnaires

National meetings

Individual Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA)

Results

Country Needs

Selected materials, methods and expertise

Ph

ase

1P

has

e 2

Ph

ase

3

Capacity building action plan at the individual/organization level

Wrap up Workshop

Ph

ase

4

Implementation of Recommended Actions

New CNA at the institution/system level

figure 3: Phases in Stage i: Capacity-building at the individual/organization level


4.5.1 Phase I: Individuals’ Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA)

In the involved countries (see Section 4), each organization plays a different role within

the national system, therefore, a capacity-building needs assessment of individuals in

these organizations was an essential initial step in the overall process of developing and

strengthening national capacity in promoting safe wastewater use in agriculture.

The first phase of this project was successfully completed in 2011. In the first phase of this

project, key organizations in the selected countries were identified and a national focal

point/coordinator was nominated. Formal links are now being established with the focal

points and other key participants through a formal communication from UNW-DPC. The

project concept note was developed and sent to the national focal points and key partici-

pants to raise interest and to explain the different dimensions of the project.

Country focal points, in collaboration with key national players, have identified the most

relevant organizations in their country with competencies on safe wastewater use in ag-

riculture. Subsequently, a questionnaire prepared by FAO was sent to the country focal

points as a supporting tool for the capacity needs assessment. These questionnaires were

specifically designed to help in the identification of the knowledge and skills that each

organization needs to develop. The WHO/UNEP/FAO (2006a and b) guidelines for the safe

use of wastewater in agriculture provided a comprehensive framework to understand

these components covered in the questionnaires. The country focal points were respon-

sible for the circulation of the questionnaires to the selected organizations and the col-

lection of these questionnaires once they were filled in.

The national focal points were encouraged to discuss the questionnaires’ results in a na-

tional meeting. In addition to the identified local organizations, other relevant stakeholders

were involved (relevant ministerial departments, NgOs, local institutions, universities, etc.).

based on the questionnaires’ results, the focal points, in collaboration with the other key

national participants, produced a National Report for each country.


4.5.2 Phase II: International Workshop

The main outcomes from the National Reports resulting from the CNA (at the organiza-

tion/individual level) were presented by the countries’ focal points in an international

workshop coordinated by UNW-DPC in bonn, germany, in November 2011 for discussion

and validation.

The main country capacity needs were highlighted and common patterns between

countries have been identified. Subsequently, the project partners and collaborating ex-

perts presented the existing capacity development methodologies and selected training

materials related to safe wastewater water use, for discussion.

This will allow:

y The clustering and prioritization of the capacity needs of the involved coun-

tries

y The identification of the main capacity gaps, and therefore

y The identification of the necessary materials, expertise and know-how to fill

these gaps

y The identification of the exact training and capacity development methodolo-

gies and the names of experts to be involved

At the same time, this international workshop served to raise awareness on the topic

among the international community; to present current trends, challenges and activities;

to exchange experiences and knowledge; and to build a community of practice among

participants.


4.5.3 Phase III: Regional Workshops & Communication Platform

In order to fill the gaps identified in the international workshop, five regional workshops

will be organized based on the clustering of the involved countries.

In the regional workshops, the audience will be trained in the use of selected materials

and methods for the safe use of wastewater in agriculture. Different techniques to dis-

seminate these material and methods at country level will be discussed (e.g., promoting

social learning methodologies).

Mentors will be assigned for the groups of participants; to whom they can address ques-

tions even after the workshop, and to whom they should report about the progress of

further capacity development local actions on wastewater, in their respective countries.

Also, a web-based communication platform will be available to facilitate networking and

exchange of knowledge between different stakeholders involved in the capacity devel-

opment process. An important output from these regional workshops will be a capacity

development action plan that should describe how the training material and learning-

methods should be disseminated in the relevant organization at country level.

4.5.4 Phase IV: Implementation of Recommended Actions and Assessment of Organizational/System Capacity Needs

National counterparts, in collaboration with other relevant stakeholders, will implement

this capacity development action plan in relevant organizations at country level. At the

same time a new assessment will be carried out to identify the organizational and sys-

tem barriers for the trained individuals, so that they can make the best use of their new

capacities.

The different action plans and preliminary results from their implementation will be pre-

sented in an international wrap-up workshop. In this workshop, national experiences, key

results and lessons learnt will be shared with a large audience of technicians, practitio-

ners and policymakers. This workshop will also serve to present the results of the capac-

ity needs assessment at organizational and system level (e.g., laws, regulations, policies,

culture, organizational structures, etc.) and can serve as the inception workshop for the

Stage II of this project.


© it

’s d-

lo- f

lickr


SeCTioN 2

CAPACiTy NeeDS ASSeSSMeNT

5. Capacity Needs Analysis

In the capacity needs assessment (CNA), the targeted organizations have identified their

role in the current national strategy to promote safe use of wastewater in agriculture.

Figure 4 shows the first steps of a capacity needs assessment for individuals within a

given organization.

Review the current national strategy to promote the safe use of wastewater in agriculture and the role of the organization in this

strategy (policy making, research, education, extension, etc.

Review and analyse the existing organizations’ individual competences (knowlege, skills) to play this role

Identify training and education needs

figure 4: Capacity Needs Assessment for individuals within an organization

Define the desired future situation in terms of individual competences to effectively play this role


The FAO has developed a questionnaire to assess the individual’s capacity and to classify

and prioritize the knowledge and skills needed for safe use of wastewater in agriculture.

The questionnaire was devoted to compiling data on the existing knowledge and skills

necessary for the safe use of wastewater (including grey water) in agriculture. The ques-

tionnaire is addressed to key institutions and organizations in developing countries or in

countries in transition that play an important direct role in the safe use of wastewater in

agriculture. The consortium has identified one coordinator for each country to be respon-

sible for distributing and collecting the questionnaires and producing a National Report.

5.1 Required Knowledge

The next sections describe the areas that have been assessed through the capacity needs

assessment questionnaires*. The questionnaire was structured in eight sections along

the lines of the 2006 WHO/UNEP/FAO (2006a and b) guidelines on safe use of wastewater

in agriculture (an example of the questionnaire is included in the Annex):

y Assessment of health risk

y Health protection measures

y Monitoring and system assessment

y Crop production aspects

y Environmental aspects

y Socio-cultural aspects

y Economic and financial considerations

y Policy and institutional aspects

* The questionnaire was developed by Javier Mateo-Sagasta of FAO.


5.1.1 Knowledge of Health Risk

The use of wastewater has effects on health from both infectious agents and chemicals.

The capacity to carry out a systematic assessment of the positive and negative health

impacts of the use of wastewater in agriculture should be available. Therefore, the

questionnaires analyze the following areas:

y Microbial and chemical laboratory analysis which refers to materials and meth-

ods to implement effective laboratory analysis concerning the type and num-

ber of harmful chemical agents (e.g., heavy metals) or pathogens (e.g., viruses,

bacteria, protozoa, helminths) in wastewater, soil and on crops

y Epidemiological studies which refers to evaluation of risk of infections for farm-

ing families and local communities. This includes risk to consumers eating un-

cooked crops, risk to agricultural workers and their families, risk to local com-

munities from sprinkler irrigation

y quantitative microbial risk assessment (qMRA) that refers to the method for as-

sessing risk from specific hazards through different exposure pathways. qMRA

has four components: hazard identification, exposure assessment, dose-re-

sponse assessment and risk characterisation

y Health-based targets which refer to a defined level of health protection for a

given exposure. This can be based on a measure of disease, e.g., 10-6 DALy per

person per year, or the absence of a specific disease related to that exposure

5.1.2 Knowledge of Health Protection Measures

The health protection measures are effective against pathogens and chemicals present in

the wastewater that are primary health hazards associated with agriculture use of waste-

water. The control and protection measures include:

y Crop restriction

y Wastewater application technique


y Pathogen die-off between last irrigation and consumption

y Food preparation measures (washing, disinfecting, peeling, cooking)

y Human exposure control

y Wastewater treatment

The selection of health protection measures by planners and designers of wastewater

use schemes based on different factors. Therefore, the questionnaires also assess their

knowledge of health protection measures.

Wastewater treatment which refers to design, construction, operation and maintenance

of wastewater collection and treatment systems, including:

y Primary treatment processes such as sedimentation tank, skimming and chem-

ical enhanced primary treatment

y Secondary treatment processes such as Aerated Lagoon, Activated Sludge, Up-

flow Anaerobic Sludge blanket, Trickling Filters, Rotating biological Contactors,

Oxidation Ditch and Settling basin Digester

y Natural biological treatment processes such as Waste Stabilization Pond, Con-

structed Wetlands, Overland Treatment, Nutrient Film Techniques, Soil Aquifer

Treatment, High-Rate Algal Pond and Floating Aquatic Macrophyte Systems

y Tertiary treatment processes such as Membrane filtration (Micro-; Nano-; Ultra-

and Reverse Osmosis), Infiltration/Percolation, Activated Carbon and Disinfec-

tion

Non-treatment options which refers to the design and implementation of health protec-

tion measures (different than wastewater treatment), such as:

y Crop restriction: the growing of non-food crops (e.g., cotton and jojoba); food

crops that are processed before consumption (e.g., wheat) and food crops that

have to be cooked (e.g., potatoes and rice)


y Selection of wastewater application techniques: the selection or irrigation

methods used to minimize exposure of farm workers, nearby communities and

edible plants to wastewater

y Cessation of irrigation: the withholding period required to allow pathogen die-

off after the last wastewater application and before the consumption

y Food preparation measures: the use of hygienic practices at food markets and

during food preparation and health and hygiene promotion

y Human exposure control: the use of personal protective equipment (e.g.,

gloves and boots), health and hygiene promotion, chemotherapy and immu-

nization for consumers, fieldworkers and their families

5.1.3 Knowledge of Monitoring and System Assessment

The most effective means of consistency ensuring the safety of wastewater use in ag-

riculture is through the use of a comprehensive risk assessment and risk management

approach that encompasses all steps in the process from generation of wastewater to the

consumption of the product. The combination of health protection measures adopted

in a particular wastewater use scheme requires regular monitoring to ensure that the

system continues to function effectively. Monitoring includes, among other institutional

arrangements, observing, inspecting and collecting samples for analysis. These arrange-

ments require certain qualifications and skills that should be held by all involved staff.

Therefore, the questionnaires investigate and analyse this availability.

Monitoring of health protection measures which refers to the thorough observation and

inspection of the wastewater use system, collecting samples for analysis, and establish-

ing the necessary institutional arrangements to ensure the collected information pro-

vides comprehensive feedback to those that have implemented the health protection

measures. Monitoring has three different purposes:

y To prove that the system is capable of meeting its desired requirements (e.g.,

microbial reduction targets)

© C

iAT N

eil P

alm

er


y To provide information regarding the functioning of individual components of

the health protection measures (e.g., wastewater treatment)

y To ensure that the system is achieving the specified targets (e.g., testing for

E.coli crop contamination) which usually takes place at the end of the process

Wastewater use system assessment which refers to the comprehensive description and

evaluation of wastewater use systems, including identification of sources of hazards, the

assessment of the risk and development and implementation of preventive strategies to

manage the risks. It also requires an assessment of capabilities to meet targets.

Wastewater generation monitoring (quantity and quality) refers to monitoring of the

quality and quantity of the wastewater, how and where it is generated, and where the

potential for use of wastewater in agriculture is situated.

5.1.4 Crop Production Aspects

Individuals who are involved in the process should be also fully aware of the crop produc-

tion-related aspects this includes:

y Components of wastewater harmful to crop production which refers to evalu-

ation of the quality of wastewater in terms of the concentration of elements

that may have an adverse impact on the crop production (e.g., salts, toxic ions,

suspended solids, etc.)

y Agricultural effects of wastewater irrigation which refers to the evaluation of

positive effects (e.g., nutrient supply) and negative effects (e.g., salinity or so-

dicity) of using wastewater for crop production

y Management strategies for maximizing crop production which refers to imple-

menting control measures to maximize crop production, when using waste-

water to irrigate:

y Crop selection e.g., less sensitive to salinity or to toxic compounds of waste-

water


y Irrigation aspects: scheduling of irrigation, application of correct amount of

(treated) wastewater, selection of irrigation methods (e.g., drip irrigation al-

lows to maintain high soil water potential throughout the growing season and

minimize the effect of salinity)

5.1.5 Environmental Aspects

The use of wastewater in agriculture has the potential for both negative and positive

impacts on the environment. With careful planning and management such use can be

positive and can avoid negative impacts on the environment. knowledge of the follow-

ing issues is necessary in order to achieve this environmental objective:

y Components of wastewater harmful to the environment which refers to evalu-

ation of the quality of wastewater, in terms of concentration of elements that

may have an adverse impact on the environment

y Environmental effects through the agricultural chain which refers to an evalua-

tion of the effects of using wastewater for agriculture; on soils (e.g., salinization

and loss of soil structure), groundwater (e.g., contamination) and surface water

(e.g., eutrophication)

y Management strategies for reducing environmental impacts which refers to

implementing control measures to minimize environmental impacts. The con-

trol measures can be presented by a polluting agent (e.g., the control measure

for excessive nitrogen is to dilute wastewater with fresh water when possible),

or a kind of problem (e.g., control measure for clogging of irrigation systems is

to use water with low total suspended solids content)

5.1.6 Socio-cultural Aspects

Human behavioural patterns are a key determining factor in the transmission of excre-

ta-related diseases. The social feasibility of changing certain behavioural patterns in or-

der to introduce wastewater use schemes or to reduce disease transmission in existing

schemes, needs to be assessed on an individual project basis. Managers and planners

should be aware of all these aspects to be more efficient in realizing safe waste water

use in agriculture. Therefore, knowledge of the following aspects is considered essential:


y Cultural and religious beliefs which refer to cultural and religious factors that

can limit the feasibility of a wastewater reuse system, and the ways to over-

come these limiting factors

y Public acceptance which refers to the tools and methods to assess and attain

community acceptance on wastewater use for agriculture. This includes public

participation, education and information, public meetings, workshops, inter-

views surveys, questionnaires, etc.

5.1.7 Economic and Financial Considerations

Economic factors are especially important when studying and appraising the feasibility

of a new scheme for the use of wastewater. Even an economically worthwhile project

can fail without careful financial planning. Managers of such schemes should be aware

of economic analysis and financial considerations to be able to encourage safe wastewa-

ter use in agriculture. Therefore, the developed and implemented questionnaire aims to

check the knowledge of:

y Economic feasibility which refers to assessing whether a project is affordable

and has a positive internal rate of return (projects that provide the most ben-

efits at least cost are the most desirable)

y Financial feasibility which refers to establishing the sources of revenue and

evaluating who will pay what for a project

y Market feasibility which refers to assessing the ability to sell (treated) waste-

water to producers and evaluating the marketability of products grown with

wastewater or grey water


5.1.8 Policy and Institutional Aspects

The safe management of wastewater use in agriculture is facilitated by appropriate poli-

cies, legislation, institutional frameworks and regulations at the international, national

and local levels. In many countries where wastewater use in agriculture takes place, these

frameworks are lacking, yet the individual’s knowledge of the policy related aspect is es-

sential. Therefore, the following issues were included in the survey:

y Institutional roles and responsibilities which refers to the responsibilities and

jurisdictions among public institutions, and the coordination mechanisms

among them

y Laws and regulations which refers to legal instruments to facilitate and gov-

ern (control) the safe use of wastewater for agriculture, (e.g., creating rights of

access to wastewater, establishing land tenure, developing public health and

agricultural legislation, etc.)

y Economic instruments which refers to financial tools that the public authorities

can use to promote safe practices when using wastewater in agriculture, and

to share the costs of wastewater treatment and reuse projects (e.g., subsidies,

taxes, water pricing, payment for environmental services, etc.)

y Education and social awareness which refers to the education and training

tools used to increase knowledge and skills on the safe use of wastewater in

agriculture, as well as advocacy and communication campaigns used to im-

pact public perception and awareness.


© U

N-Ph

oto


6. International Kick-off and

Regional Workshops

6.1 The International Kick-off Workshop in Bonn

To launch the two-year Capacity Development Project on “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agri-

culture”, a two-day international kick-off workshop (Figure 5) was held at the UN Campus

in bonn, germany, on 14-15 November 2011, jointly organized by the Food and Agricul-

ture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United

Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH) and the UN-

Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC).

The main objective of the international workshop was to present the national reports

and results of the capacity needs assessment and to develop a roadmap for the regional

training workshops. The roadmap includes the target groups, hosting countries and insti-

tutions, training contents, training methodologies and trainers/speakers.

This international workshop also served to raise awareness on the topic among the in-

ternational community, to present current trends, challenges and activities, to exchange

experiences and knowledge and to build a community of practice among participants.

SeCTioN 3

iNTerNATioNAl kiCk-off, regioNAl WorkShoPS AND oTher AWAreNeSS-rAiSiNg ACTiviTieS


figure 5: The international kick-off Workshop in bonn, germany

In all, nearly 40 participants representing 17 countries attended the workshop: Algeria,

bolivia, Colombia, Egypt, ghana, guatemala, India, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Paki-

stan, Peru, Senegal, South Africa, Syria and Tunisia. In addition to the representatives of

each of the four organizers, the majority of the representatives came from various minis-

tries in the water/health/agricultural sector, while some of the participants represented

research institutions or universities (Figure 5-7). The workshop was held at the UN Cam-

pus in bonn, germany, and simultaneously translated into English, French and Spanish.

figure 6: group Photo of the international kick-off Workshop on Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture


On the first day of the workshop, after the opening speeches, introductions of the par-

ticipants and their formulation of expectations and introductory presentations by the

organizing institutions (FAO, UNEP, UNU-INWEH and UNW-DPC), the participants had the

opportunity to present and discuss their national reports in regional panels for Asia, Af-

rica and Latin America.

At these panels, each facilitated by one of the organizers, each country had about 10

minutes to present the situation of wastewater use in their countries based on the re-

sults of the capacity needs assessment they had conducted prior to the workshop. Once

all the presentations were completed, commonalities across the regions were analyzed

and discussed further. The panels also served to further define the countries’ respective

capacity needs with regard to addressing the safe use of wastewater in agriculture. These

were discussed and mapped and potential contributions from the participating UN insti-

tutions were noted.

The regional presentations showed that capacity gaps exist in all fields covered by the

questionnaire, especially in the fields on “health risk assessment” and “monitoring and

system assessment”. The analysis of the submitted questionnaire (Figure 8) reflects the

top rating of this need and provides an overview of the capacity needs of the participat-

figure 7: Presentation of National reports and Discussion on Capacity Needs


ing countries, with the highest capacity needs on “health risk assessment” and “moni-

toring and system assessment”, followed by “crop production aspects”, “economic and

financial considerations”, “health protection measures”, “socio-cultural aspects”, “environ-

mental aspects” and “policy aspects.”

figure 8: overview of the Capacity Needs Assessment at the international kick-off Workshop

In all, it was evident that great disparities still exist between countries and that each re-

gion has its own set of priorities to tackle in terms of capacity development. A more de-

tailed analysis of national capacity needs as stated by the country representatives is pre-

sented in form of web graphs in Figure 9.1-9.3. based on the response of the participants,

these graphs illustrate that more capacity development activities are needed in African

and Asian countries than in Latin America, and it also indicates the relative importance of

individual fields of capacity.


figure 9.1: Detailed overview of identified Capacity Needs in African Countries

figure 9.2: Detailed overview of identified Capacity Needs in latin American Countries

Policy aspects

Health risk assessment

Environmental aspects

Health protection measures

Monitoring and system assessment

Economic and financial

considerations

Ghana Morocco Senegal South Africa Tunisia

African Countries

highmediumlownone

Capacity Needs: Socio-culturalaspects

Crop productionaspects

Policy aspects

Health risk assessment





Socio-culturalaspects


considerations

Latin American Countries

Colombia GuatemalaPeru

Capacity Needs:

highmediumlownone


figure 9.3: Detailed overview of identified Capacity Needs in Asian Countries

The International kick-off Workshop was linked to, and held back-to-back with, the Nex-

us Conference in bonn 2011, which was organized to prepare the road map for Rio+20.

The “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” Project was therein recognized as one of the

“moving actions” in the Water-Energy-Food Security Nexus theme.

6.1.1 Workshop Statement

At the end of the International kick-off Workshop, the participants formulated a work-

shop statement:

The International kick-off Workshop brought together participants/representatives from

17 countries within Africa, Asia and Latin America. They presented preliminary results of

the national capacity needs assessment, which they had compiled in preparation for this

workshop, in the form of a national report and results from questionnaires on capacity

needs assessment, which focused on the following aspects:

y Health risk assessment

y Health protection measures

y Monitoring and system assessment

Asian Countries

JordanLebanon PakistanSyria

Capacity Needs:

Policy aspects





Socio-culturalaspects


considerations

highmediumlownone


y Crop production aspects

y Environmental aspects

y Socio-cultural aspects

y Economic and financial considerations

y Policy aspects

In regional breakout groups for Africa, Asia and Latin America, the countries’ respec-

tive capacity needs were further defined. Each country came up with specific capacity

development needs that address the safe use of wastewater in agriculture. These were

discussed and mapped with the resources and potential contributions from the partici-

pating UN institutions.

In addition to the needs assessment from the regional breakout groups, the interested

participants agreed to submit a modified final national report and questionnaire, follow-

ing the agreed structure. Particular focus will be given to the identification of the stake-

holders involved in the safe use of wastewater, as well as the identification of national

coordinators who can bring together a variety of national stakeholders to discuss this

topic. The full proceedings of the workshop will be compiled by the workshop organizers.

As a follow up, it was decided to organize a series of regional workshops between Febru-

ary and September 2012. In an open plenary, the national participants defined the con-

tent and planning process of the regional workshops by defining topics and ranking their

importance. Some of these items were linked to fulfilling specific criteria.

This discussion is summarized in the categories:

y Purpose of the regional workshops

y Themes to be covered in the regional workshops, and

y Form of contribution from each participating country


The so-defined statements of interest and commitment, along with the capacity needs

identified in the regional break out groups and the national reports, will form the base-

line for the regional workshops. Furthermore, several participants expressed their inter-

est to host a regional workshop. These were:

y For Africa: Morocco and South Africa

y For Asia: Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Syria

y For Latin America: Peru

The workshop-organizing UN institutions and member states also discussed joint efforts

of fund-raising to continue to expand this capacity development initiative.

All participants affirmed their interest and commitment in the Capacity Development

Project on “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture”.

6.2 Regional Workshops

6.2.1 1st Regional Workshop for Francophone and North African

Countries

On 18-19 February 2012, UNW-DPC, with support and facilitation from the Arab Coun-

tries Water Utilities Association (ACWUA) and together with the Office National de l’Eau

Potable (ONEP), organized the 1st Regional Workshop on “Safe Use of Wastewater in Ag-

riculture” for Francophone and North African Countries. It was joined by FAO, UNEP and

UNU-INWEH as well as the UN-Water partners ICID and IWMI and was the first of five

regional workshops in the framework of the joint multi-year project on the “Safe Use

of Wastewater in Agriculture”. The goal of the five regional workshops is to formulate a

capacity development action plan and to disseminate training materials and learning

methods at the country level.

The 1st Regional Workshop was attended by 30 participants from 17 African, predomi-

nantly francophone and northern African, countries: Algeria, benin, burkina Faso, Cam-


eroun, Central African Republic, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt,

gabon, guinea, guinea-bissau, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Senegal, Togo and Tunisia

(Figure 10), and was held at the Palais de Congrès in Marrakech, Morocco.

The workshop was opened with welcoming words by Mr. bensaid of ONEP and Dr. Arda-

kanian of UNW-DPC. After short presentations by the project partners, an extensive ses-

sion was dedicated to the participants, in which they were requested to provide informa-

tion on the status and situation of wastewater use in their country, along with additional

information on their specific capacity needs, the identification of national key players and

possible leaders of wastewater use initiatives.

The capacity needs assessment of the participants of the 1st Regional Workshop showed

that “Health Risk Assessment”, “Health Protection Measures” and “Resource Efficiency”

were the three themes with the greatest perceived capacity needs (Figure 11), followed

by “Monitoring and System Assessment”, “Crop production aspects” and “Environmental

Aspects”.

figure 10: group Photo of the 1st regional Workshop on Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture


figure 11: overview of the Capacity Needs Assessment at the 1st regional Workshop for francophone and North African Countries

figure 12: Workshop Participants discussing Wastewater Use and Capacity Needs in their Countries

In the subsequent sessions, the participants were sensitized regarding the safe use of

wastewater in agriculture and familiarized with various training materials and guidelines

available from UN-Water members and partners. In accordance to the wide range of start-

ing points of the participating countries, from situations of use of untreated wastewater


in absence of treatment facilities to situations with highly technical systems and several

years of experience with water-reuse on the other extreme, the presented material ca-

tered to the whole range of the audience. guidelines and best practices were presented

for both low- and higher-technology states.

Furthermore, the project partners and participants engaged in discussions on various

topics during the various thematic blocks that were presented, e.g., on “Water reuse plan-

ning, economic aspects, crop productions aspects, and public acceptance”, “Health risk

assessment and mitigation where wastewater treatment does not work”, “Health Protec-

tion Measures and Policy Aspects”, “Environmental Effects of Wastewater in Agriculture”,

and “Awareness raising, and national strategies” (Figure 12).

As part of the programmeme, the workshop participants visited Marrakech’s newly

opened water treatment plant at the end of day 1 (Figure 13). This facility treats the

wastewater of Marrakech, which is then used for irrigation of golf courses, and, in the

near future, the palm trees of “La Palmeraie”. It also generates biogas, which is used to

generate a substantial fraction of the power used by the treatment facility. The visit was

appreciated by the participants and provided them with a hands-on example of how

wastewater treatment and its use can be planned, as well as providing some fuel for dis-

cussion on the second day of the workshop.

figure 13: Participants visiting the Wastewater Treatment Plant of Marrakech, Morocco

Further information on the 1st Regional Workshop on Safe Use of Wastewater in Agricul-

ture can be found at project page on UNW-AIS at: www.ais.unwater/wastewater/ws1


6.2.2 2nd Regional Workshop for West Asian and Middle Eastern Countries

On 16-18 May 2012, the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), with

support from UNU-INWEH and UNW-DPC, organized the 2nd Regional Workshop on the

“Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture,” held at the National Agricultural Science Complex

(NASC) in New Delhi, India. In addition to the organizers, the project partners FAO, UNEP

and IWMI participated with the World Health Organization (WHO) and with experts at

the faculty.

figure 14: The 2nd regional Workshop on Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture

The workshop was attended by 20 participants from 10 Asian countries, predominantly

from West, Central and South Asia and the Middle East: bangladesh, India, Iraq, Jordan,

Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Syria and Turkey (Figure 14).

The workshop was opened with welcoming words by Dr. Avinash Tyagi of ICID, Dr. Jens

Liebe of UNW-DPC and Dr. Manzoor qadir of UNU-INWEH. An opening speech was de-

livered by Dr. Jagir Singh Samara, CEO of the National Rainfed Area Authority of India,

who contexualized the Safe Use of Wastewater in terms of both the associated risks and

the safety nets it provides, and spoke of the importance of agriculture for food security,

employment security, livelihood security and environment security. He pointed out that

peri-urban areas, with their high cropping intensity and fodder production for dairy farm-

ing, are hot-spots for the safe use of wastewater. From a health perspective he specified

the health risk challenges associated with the production of vegetables in peri-urban


areas, which are consumed raw, rather than cooked. Further, despite the focus of this

project on urban and peri-urban agriculture, he also pointed out that safe use of waste-

water is an important aspect for rural areas and their population.

After introductory presentations by UNW-DPC and FAO, the participants presented de-

tailed country reports and commented on their respective national status regarding

wastewater production and treatment; wastewater use and/or disposal; regulations and

implementation of international/regional/national guidelines; technical, institutional and

policy challenges; current steps and approaches of the government related to wastewa-

ter management; and possible solutions to make use of wastewater safer and productive.

The country reports revealed a variety of situations, ranging from those countries with

experience in wastewater irrigation and the formulation of respective national policies,

to countries that have identified unsafe practices in their countries as a problem, but are

still looking for solutions and guidelines. The capacity needs assessment provided by the

participants (Figure 15) revealed the overall high perceived need for capacity develop-

ment in all themes of the capacity needs assessment, with particularly high needs in the

fields of “Health risk assessment”, “Crop production aspects” and “Economic and financial

considerations”, closely followed by the “Health protection measures”, “Monitoring and

system assessment” and “Environmental Aspects”.

The remainder of the programmeme was organized along the following themes:

y Policy and strategic issues, with sub-sessions on “National strategies for the

use of poor-quality water resources in agriculture”, “Economic challenges of

wastewater treatment and use in agriculture” and “Institutional arrangements

and collaboration at the national and regional levels”

y health risks, environmental effects and socio-cultural acceptance, with

sub-sessions on “Health risk assessment and mitigation”, “Environmental ef-

fects of wastewater use in agriculture” and “Wetlands as the wastewater treat-

ment structures”

y capacity needs and national strategies, which discussed capacity-building

requirements and national dissemination strategies for safe use of wastewater.


After background presentations in each of the topics, during which the participants were

also sensitized regarding the safe use of wastewater in agriculture and familiarized with

various training materials and guidelines available from UN-Water members and part-

ners, the participants discussed specific issues in breakout groups, of which the results

were presented and discussed with the entire group of participants. The participation in

the breakout groups was very good and the interactive nature of the workshop structure

was much appreciated by the participants.

figure 15: overview of the Capacity Needs Assessment at the 2nd regional Workshop for West Asian and Middle eastern Countries

A “Wrap-up and Concluding Session” summarized the workshop and discussed the ex-

pectations of the countries from the project workshops and beyond. Among other items,

the participating countries agreed to

y Start a multi-stakeholders’ platform on ‘Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture’

in their countries

y Revise and complete the country report

y Develop awareness-building material for farmers and consumers


As part of the programmeme, the participants were able to visit the Wastewater Treat-

ment Plant of the Delhi Jal board, Delhi (Figure 16), in the afternoon of the second day,

which treats sewage of parts of Delhi. Some of the treated water, as well as some of the

treated sludge, is used in agriculture.

figure 16: Participants visiting the Wastewater Treatment Plant of the Delhi jal board, Delhi

6.2.3 Remaining Regional Workshops

In addition to the Regional Workshops for “Francophone and North African Countries”

and “West Asian and Middle Eastern Countries”, three further regional workshops are

planned until March 2013. These regional workshops will serve

y Anglophone African Countries

y Latin America

y East Asia

The remaining regional workshops will follow the pattern of the previous workshops and

require the compilation of a national report and a capacity needs assessment prior to

the workshop. The interactive nature of the workshops allows the specific needs of the

participating countries to be addressed. As with the other workshops, documentation of

the workshops will be made available on the Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture page

on the UN-Water Activity Information System (www.ais.unwater.org/wastewater).


7. Additional Promotion of the Topic of Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture

7.1 16th African Water Association (AfWA) International Water

and Sanitation Congress

On 21 February 2012, the project partners of “Safe use of Wastewater in Agriculture” held

a UN-Water Seminar on the same topic, with the twofold intention to introduce said proj-

ect to a larger audience, and to present the outcomes of the 1st Regional Workshop on

Safe use of Wastewater in Agriculture, held the weekend before, to the participants of the

16th AfWA International Congress (Figure 17).

The UN-Water Seminar was held with participation of most of the partners of the “Safe use

of Wastewater in Agriculture” Project, with presenters from FAO, UNU-INWEH, IWMI, ICID

and UNW-DPC. After a welcome introduction by Dr. Ardakanian (UNW-DPC), “Water Reuse

and Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture” was presented by J. Mateo Sagasta (FAO), “Trade-

offs of Wastewater Irrigation in Developing Countries” by M. qadir (UNU-INWEH, IWMI), “Im-

pact of Water Resources Management practices on Health Policies” by A. Tyagi (ICID) and

the “UN-Water Activity Information System, UNW-AIS” by J. Liebe (UNW-DPC). The Results

from the 1st Regional Workshop on Safe use of Wastewater in Agriculture”, held the week-

end before, as well as the “National Water Re-use Svtrategy of Morocco” were presented to

the audience by a participant of the workshop, Mr. Mhamed Makhokh of the Ministère de

l’Energie, des Mines, de l’Eau et de l’Environnement- Département de l’Eau, Royaume du

Maroc. The UN-Water seminar concluded with an extensive discussion. The UN-Water Semi-

nar was very well received and filled the room to capacity with 50 participants.

figure 17: Panel and Participants at the UN-Water Seminar at AfWA


7.2 UN-Water Seminar on Safe Use of Wastewater in Agricul-

ture at IFAT ENTSORGA 2012

IFAT is one of the world’s leading trade fairs for environmental technology, specifically

focusing on water, sewage, waste and raw materials management. In 2012, the event

drew over 125,000 visitors from more than 180 countries as well as 2,900 exhibitors from

54 countries. IFAT takes place biennially in Munich, germany, and showcases the latest

market trends and innovative technology. Industry and trade associations present spe-

cific sector solutions, state-of-the-art technology and a broad spectrum of services in the

fields of water, sewage, refuse and raw materials management.

In its efforts to increase cooperation and strengthen UN-Water members and partners’

activities, UNW-DPC, on behalf of UN-Water, coordinated the representation of UN-Water

at IFAT, for the second time in a row. A key activity at IFAT was a 200 m² UN-Water Centre

which contained a booth for each of the 13 participating UN-Water organizations, and

which enabled visitors to learn about UN-Water and the activities of its members, part-

ners and programmes.

The highlight of UN-Water’s participation in IFAT ENTSORgA 2012 was a seminar held

on Wednesday, 9 May 2012, from 9:30 – 1:00. The seminar had three parts: a scientific

contribution on the UN-Water project on “The Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture”;

the launch of a new UN-Water book on “Water and the green Economy: Capacity De-

velopment Aspects” by a panel of several of its authors; and a presentation of the World

Water Development Report 4 by Olcay Unver, Director of the World Water Assessment

Programme.

The “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” Session started with an introduced to the

Project by Reza Ardakanian, Director of the UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity

Development (UNW-DPC), highlighting the knowledge and capacity needs of the Afri-

can, Asian and Latin American Countries participating in the Project.

In his role as the vice Chair of UN-Water, bert Diphoorn (Figure 18) then introduced

UN-Water and its core functions to the audience. based on statistics showing immense

deficits in wastewater treatment all over the world, he pointed out the need for improve-

ments to be made by the UN-Water Task Force on Wastewater Management.


khaldon khashman, the Secretary general of the Arab Countries Water Utilities Associa-

tion (ACWUA), and participant of the International kick-off Workshop in bonn, provided

an overview of the current water reuse situation in Arab countries, which is mainly for use

in agriculture. He focused particularly on challenges to increasing water reuse, such as a

lack of willingness to pay for reclaimed water and trust concerning the water quality, and

the necessity for improvement.

Robert bos, the Coordinator for Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Health in the Department

of Public Health and Environment at the World Health Organization, introduced the 3rd

edition of the WHO guidelines on “Safe Use of Wastewater, greywater and Excreta in Ag-

riculture and Aquaculture”. He presented WHO’s work on the assessment of health risks

and risk management, and the multiple-barrier approach as a health protection measure.

The objective of the guidelines is to maximize the protection of human health and the

beneficial use of important resources.

Wim van vierssen, CEO of kWR Watercycle Research Institute, and in partnership with

UNW-DPC, introduced the complexity of capacity development with a focus on social

figure 18: opening speech by bert Diphoorn, vice-Chair of UN-Water


and knowledge networks. Across policy and practice, of the various water disciplines and

geographical levels, actors need to become more proximate. As UN-Water is in the posi-

tion of both enabling bonding and bridging, it is of great value in creating interfaces for

capacity development.

Finally, Jens Liebe, Programme Officer of UNW-DPC, highlighted the role of the UN-Water

Activity Information System (Chapter 9) for capacity development and knowledge dis-

semination. UNW-AIS is the Projects knowledge dissemination platform, bringing to-

gether core materials from UN-Water Members and Partners, providing a resource for

workshop participants and interested member states to advance the issue of Safe Use of

Wastewater in Agriculture at a national level.

The UN-Water Seminar on Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture at IFAT 2012 can be

viewed at www.ais.unwater.org/ifat2012.

8. Roadmap and the Way Forward

The results and suggestions of the International kick-off Workshop will be gathered and

disseminated to the group of participants in the project. The UN-Water Activity Informa-

tion System (UNW-AIS) will be the platform for sharing information and materials, as well

as for keeping in contact. In all, five regional workshops are set to take place between

February 2012 and March 2013, and will take advantage of other larger events, where

possible, occurring back-to-back with regional conferences. The first regional workshop

was held in Marrakech, Morocco, in February 2012, back-to-back with the African Water

Congress of the same month.

Each workshop will be tailored to the specific needs in that country; its purposes, themes

and form of contribution will vary depending on that region’s specific situation. In gen-

eral, the regional workshops should serve one or more of the following goals:

y Formulate or implement a capacity development action plan

y Disseminate training materials and learning methods at the country level


TAble 1: The roADMAP DefiNeD by The ProjeCT PArTNerS

event location and Date

International kick-off Workshopbonn, germany, November 14-15, 2011

1st Regional Workshop for Francophone and North African Countries

Marrakech, Morocco, February 18-19, 2012

2nd Regional Workshop for West Asian and Middle Eastern Countries

New Delhi, India, May 16-18, 2012

3rd Regional Workshop for Anglophone African Countries

Johannesburg, South Africa, September 26-28, 2012

4th Regional Workshop for Latin American Countries

Peru, December 3-5, 2012 (tbc)

5th Regional Workshop for East Asian Countries

February 2013

International Wrap-up Conference May 2013

The second stage (2014-2015) of this project will be devoted to improving the system

performance through providing the conditions necessary for comprehensive and ef-

fective implementation of projects and programmes related to safe wastewater use in

agriculture. An assessment will be carried out to identify the organizational and system

barriers for the trained individuals to make best use of their new capacities. The training

for the second stage will focus more on the policies, strategies, laws and regulations and

the relationships, interdependencies and interactions among concerned stakeholders.


ProMoTioNAl MATeriAlS for The WorkShoPS


© U

N-Ph

oto


SeCTioN 4

The UN-WATer ACTiviTy iNforMATioN SySTeM (UNW-AiS): Web-bASeD CAPACiTy DeveloPMeNT Tool

9. UN-Water Activity Information System

9.1 Background Information

Information and communications technology (ICT) is recognized as a strategic enabler in

the process of developing innovative solutions to address problems such as wastewater

use in agriculture (Sewilam and Alaerts, 2012). Therefore, UNW-DPC has developed the

UN-Water Activity Information System (UNW-AIS) as an integrated online tool for storing,

updating and sharing information (web-based content, documents and multimedia) on

existing water-related projects, e-learning tools and other activities carried out by UN-

Water members, partners and associated programmes.

The UN-Water Activity Information System (UNW-AIS) is an integrated online tool for stor-

ing, updating and sharing information (web-based content, documents and multimedia)

on existing water-related projects, e-learning tools and other activities carried out by UN-

Water members, partners and associated programmes.


On 14 November 2011, to recognize the International kick-off Workshop on the “Safe Use

of Wastewater in Agriculture” the project partners launched the UN-Water Activity Infor-

mation System, or UNW-AIS. The information system was inaugurated by the Chair of UN-

Water, Dr. Zafar Adeel (Figure 19), who is also Director of the United Nations University

Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH).

figure 19: launch of the UN-Water Activity information System (UNW-AiS) by the Zafar Adeel, Chair of UN-Water, at the international kick-off Workshop on “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” on 14 November 2011

Starting as a basic database for the results of UNW-DPC-led mapping activities of vari-

ous UN-Water Task Forces and Thematic Priority Areas, such as on Climate Change and

on Transboundary Waters, UNW-AIS has evolved into a comprehensive information and

communication system with various features for data analysis, e-learning and network-

ing. In addition, the IW: Science database was recently integrated into UNW-AIS accord-

ing to UNW-DPC’s mandate to coordinate UNW-AIS with other information systems, as

established in its current Work Plan and approved by UN-Water (More information can be

found at www.ais.unwater.org).


9.2 UNW-AIS as Project Support and Communication Tool

UNW-AIS is used as the official communication and knowledge-sharing platform for this

project. A special page on “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” was developed and is

accessible at http://www.ais.unwater.org/wastewater.

In the spirit of the project, it brings together the expertise of UN-Water members, part-

ners and associated programmes in one single place, easily accessible for the workshop

participants and other interested users. It features documents, for example the

y WHO guidelines for the Safe use of Wastewater, Excreta and greywater

y various FAO publications, such as “The Wealth of Waste”, research papers, and

fact-sheets

y A wide range of publications from the International Water Management Insti-

tute (IWMI), including a book on “Wastewater Irrigation and Health”, research

reports, working papers, and scientific papers

y as well as videos and animations, such as

y FAO’s “Discovering water reuse” animations (Figure 20) in English, French

and Spanish

y IWMI videos on good farming practices, improving food safety and recy-

cling realities in Africa

The pages for the individual workshops provide additional information, such as

y the submitted national reports on the situation of wastewater use in the par-

ticipating countries (examples in Chapter 10)

y video recordings of the presentations given at the workshops, prepared as e-

lectures with synchronized presentation slides (Figure 21)

y Photo documentation of the workshops


figure 20: fAo’s Animation “Discovering Water re-use”

UNW-AIS plays an important and effective role in support of the UN-Water mandate. It

brings together the resources available from UN-Water members, partners and support

programmes, which are otherwise widely spread over dozens of web pages of different

organizations, adding coherence in this joint effort, and, most importantly, making the

resources easily accessible to the workshop participants and member states.

The “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” Section on UNW-AIS is therefore not only a

documentation of UN-Water addressing an important issue, but an integral resource for

participants from a variety of organizations and countries.


© C

iAT N

eil P

alm

er

figure 21: example of the online Trainings offered by the UNW-AiS


© U

N-ha

bita

t


SeCTioN 5

NATioNAl rePorTS

10. National Reports

10.1 Background

In order to carry out a needs analysis for the issue of safe wastewater use in agriculture,

the consortium of this project decided to collect National Reports from the involved

countries (as listed under 4.4). The identified National Focal Points were the link between

the project partners (FAO, UNU-INWEH and UNW-DPC) and the pertinent national orga-

nizations. In collaboration with other ministries (e.g., water, health and/or agriculture)

and with support from the designated project partners’ representatives (at one of the

three project partners), the national focal point coordinated the project activities in the

country, and mainly:

y Identified the most relevant organizations in the country with competencies

on the safe use of wastewater in agriculture (e.g., ministry departments, NgOs,

research centres, universities, etc.)

y Circulated a questionnaire prepared by FAO to these selected organizations,

which was designed to help in the identification of the knowledge and skills

that each organization needs to develop


y Compiled these questionnaires and coordinated the production of a concise

National Report

To ensure that the National Reports of all the participating countries have the same struc-

ture and type of outcomes, the following outline was proposed:

y Current status and trends on wastewater production, treatment and use in ag-

riculture at the national level

y Policy framework and national strategy and objectives on the safe wastewater

use in agriculture

y Description of key organizations working on the safe use of wastewater in the

country

y Assessment of the knowledge, skills and competencies on the safe use of

wastewater in irrigation needed by individuals working in these key organiza-

tions ( e.g., capacities of the extension services of different ministries to pro-

mote health protection measures)

The next section shows three examples of the submitted National Reports. Additional

reports are available from the “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture” page on the UNW-

AIS at www.ais.unwater.org/wastwater.

The views expressed in the National Reports are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those

of the United Nations, their Member States, or of the UN-Water members, partners and programmes involved

in this project.


10.2 National Report of Ghana

Submitted by Mr. Delali Nutsukpo, Deputy Director, Ministry of Food and Agriculture,

ghana, and Philip Amoah, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), ghana.

10.2.1 The Situation in Ghana

The world has entered the ‘urban millennium’ as kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary

general, stated. Taking Africa as an example, its population will almost triple by 2050

and this will be primarily in the urban and peri-urban areas. It is projected that by 2015,

25 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa will have higher urban than rural populations; this

number will increase to 41 countries by 2030 (United Nations Human Settlements Pro-

gramme, 2001). About 44% of the population in the West African sub-region lives in

urban areas (United Nations, Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division,

2004), compared to only 4% in 1920. The same 44% applies to ghana, and this number is

expected to rise rapidly as some of ghana’s (peri-)urban areas have annual growth rates

of more than 6 to 9% (ghana Statistical Service, 2002).

The increasing urban population comes along with growing demand for sanitation infra-

structure. In ghana, and also in most urban centres in Sub-Saharan Africa, current urban

sanitation infrastructure is inadequate and seems not to be keeping pace with popula-

tion growth rate. In the typical example of ghana, only 4-5% of the population is linked

with – infrequently functional – sewage systems and sewerage treatment plants. Most

untreated wastewater ends up in storm-water gutters, streams and other water bodies,

which are often used as sources for irrigation water (keraita and others, 2002). In many

urban and peri-urban areas wastewater constitutes the only available surface water for

irrigation in the dry season, to sustain many livelihoods. Use of the wastewater in Urban

and Peri-urban Agriculture (UPA) not only lessens the pressure on water resources but

also increases water productivity through reuse of water and nutrients, which may be

otherwise a nuisance to the environment.

10.2.2 Wastewater Status and Trends

The total amount of grey and black wastewater produced in urban ghana is estimated

to be approximately 280 million m3. This quantity of wastewater is mainly from domestic

sources since most wastewater from industry is channelled into the ocean. With increas-


ing spread of processing facilities into inland areas future increases in the percentage of

wastewater from industrial sources could be expected. It is estimated that urban waste-

water generation in ghana will increase from 530,346 m3/day in 2000 to 1,452,383 m3/day

in 2020 (36% in 2000 to over 45% in 2020) (Agozo, 2003).

Wastewater treatment in ghana is very limited with less than 8% of wastewater being

treated currently. The majority of available wastewater treatment facilities is used for

treating domestic wastewater. The greater Accra region alone is home to 505 of these

facilities, most of which are currently under the management of government and public

institutions including hospital, schools, security services and ministries. A faecal treat-

ment plant located in kumasi could treat only 5% (180 – 500 m3/day) of the total faecal

sludge produced in the city. A biological treatment plant located at korle Lagoon, Accra,

is able to handle only 8% of Accra’s inner city wastewater from domestic and industrial

sources. It is estimated that only 10% of Accra’s wastewater is collected for some kind of

treatment. In addition to the above existing facilities, which are in most cases functioning

below average capacity or are non-serviceable, efforts are underway in the various local

government (metropolitan, municipal and district assemblies) authorities to provide fa-

cilities for waste (liquid and solid) treatment as a major step towards improving sanitation

in urban areas.

Some attempts to develop new sanitation facilities have been faced with socio-economic

challenges since they disrupt other existing infrastructure, hence most new sewerage

treatment plants in ghana are operating below the design capacity. The related cost

factor is tremendous, calculations by gijzen and Ikramullah (1999) showed that new in-

vestments in wastewater treatment would require payback periods exceeding by far the

infrastructure’s economic lifetime. As wastewater treatment does appear a realistic op-

tion, banning the use of polluted water by UPA has been tried in Accra and other cities

within the volta basin but has failed since such bans threaten many livelihoods, urban

vegetable supply and are contrary to national poverty alleviation strategies. In any case,

related institutional and policy frameworks are weak and hardly practicable or enforced

in the country.

Urban farmers in this harsh situation expressed significant concerns as their livelihoods

are at permanent risk. Any solution to reduce health risks without forcing them to change

their (market-driven) cropping patterns or water access would be appreciated. However,

this practice is known to have adverse public health and environmental effects, especially


because untreated wastewater or polluted water has high levels of pathogenic organ-

isms. Previous studies carried out in urban and peri-urban areas in ghana revealed that

most of the surface water bodies used for irrigation are heavily polluted and not appro-

priate for crop irrigation (Cornish, Mensah, and ghesquière, 1999; Mensah and others,

2001; Amoah, Drechsel, and Abaidoo, 2005; Amoah and others, 2007; keraita, Drechsel,

and kondradsen, 2008). Consequently, municipal authorities and government ministries

have raised concern regarding the potential health risks to consumers and wastewater

irrigators.

Recognizing this limitation, there is increasing advocacy for other measures which could

be more appropriate or at least complementary for risk reduction in developing coun-

tries. For example, in its revised Guideline of Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater

(2006), WHO adopted a multiple-barrier approach by combining different health protec-

tion measures to meet required health-based targets at the consumer level (WHO/UNEP/

FAO 2006a and b). This opened the way to target - in line with the Hazard Analysis and

Critical Control Points (HACCP) concept - a variety of entry points where health risks occur

or can best be mitigated before the food is consumed. In ghana, a number of research

institutions and universities supported by FAO, CPWF, IDRC and WHO have been working

with farmers and other stakeholders to explore, develop and test risk reduction measures

where vegetables are irrigated with highly polluted water. The main emphasis was put

on safety measures from farm to fork, i.e., those protecting consumers of salad greens.

10.2.3 Wastewater Use

It was estimated that if only 10% of the 280 million m3 of wastewater from urban gha-

na could be (treated and) used for irrigation, the total area that could be irrigated with

wastewater alone could be up to 4,600 ha. At an average dry-season farm size of 0.5 ha,

this could provide livelihood support for about 9,200 farmers in the peri-urban areas of

ghana (Agodzo and others, 2003). However, as described earlier, there is inadequate sew-

age conveyance capacity. In most cities and towns, such as Accra and kumasi, untreated

wastewater flows from drains into streams, which are usually used for irrigation. Thus

wastewater is mostly used in a diluted form mixed with surface runoff and/or stream

water (Cornish, Aidoo, and Ayamba, 2001). There are several cases where farmers use

wastewater directly from drains and broken sewers without further dilution, especially in

the dry season. For simplification, all these water sources are referred to as ‘wastewater’.

© C

iAT N

eil P

alm

er


A common picture in both urban and peri-urban areas of ghana is the cultivation of

cereals such as maize in the rainy seasons and irrigated vegetables in the dry seasons.

More than 15 kinds of vegetables are cultivated, all of which are sold. both exotic and

indigenous leafy vegetables are grown with wastewater. Among the exotic ones are let-

tuce (Lactuca sativa), cabbage (Brassica oleraria), spring onions (Allium cepa), cauliflower

(Brassica oleracea), green pepper (Capsicum annuum), carrots (Daucus carota) and rad-

ish (Raphanus sativus), while indigenous vegetables included “okro” (Hibiscus esculentus),

“ayoyo” (Corcorus olitorius) and “allefu” (Amaranthus cruentus). However, the frequently

cultivated ones are lettuce, spring onions, cabbage and green pepper.

The use of polluted water for vegetable farming is more widespread in the more popu-

lated cities where safe water is scarce. Safe water is mostly used for domestic purposes.

From a general survey among open-space farmers carried out in 2002, it was found that

about 84% of nearly 800 farmers farming in and close to Accra and almost all 700 farmers

in Tamale (in the north) used polluted water for irrigation, at least during the dry seasons.

generally, farmers place lower priority on the possible nutrient value of the wastewater

than on its value as a reliable water source, especially in the dry season.

Typical urban farm sizes range from 0.1–0.2 ha and they increase in size along the urban–

rural gradient. As production is market-oriented, farming is input- and output-intensive,

particularly in terms of the use of water and other farm inputs, such as poultry manure,

pesticides and fertilisers. In ghana, most farmers use watering cans to irrigate, while

motor pumps are used by a few farmers. Open-space vegetable farming is more than

90% male-dominated especially in urban areas, usually with a large distance between

the home and the actual farm plot. The reasons for the dominance of men in vegetable

production are the arduous tasks including irrigation with two heavy 15-l watering cans.

irrigation Water requirements and application rates

The amount of irrigation water required depends on the effectiveness of rainfall in any

given location. For the vegetables grown, the crop water requirements range between

300 and 700 mm depending on the climatic conditions and the season of the crop at the

location. Some farming activities that coincide with the major rainy season, irrigation

water requirements are minimal. On the other hand, in the drier months in urban areas

located in dry savannah areas, irrigation water requirements per growing season could

be as high as 600 mm. For farmers in urban centres that depend on water from the drains,


there may be insufficient water to meet their crop requirements (Agodzo and others,

2003), especially if crops are grown year round.

Benefits of Wastewater irrigation

Cost/benefit analyses have been carried out for urban and peri-urban vegetable farmers

in and around kumasi (Danso, Drechsel, and Fialor, 2002a; Cornish and Aidoo, 2000). year-

round, open-space urban farmers can achieve annual income levels of US$400/ha–$800/

ha. These levels are achieved due to the intensive nature of farming made possible partly

by the free and reliable supply of water. On average, farm income from all vegetables

amounts to about US$1,440/ha, but a more conservative estimate considering actual

crop mix could be US$500/ha (Cornish, Aidoo, and Ayamba, 2001).

The value of wastewater irrigation should not only be seen from the perspective of liveli-

hood support, employment and income generation given that the actual (sometimes

small) numbers of open-space farmers might not attract the attention of municipal au-

thorities.

The overall (aggregate) benefit to the city should also be highlighted. An example is the

dependence of the city on irrigated urban vegetable production. Due to the lack of re-

frigerated transport and storage, the supply of perishable vegetables to urban dwellers

depends significantly on this kind of agriculture (Nugent, 2000; Smith, 2002). In Accra, for

example, about 90% of the vegetables consumed in the city are produced within or close

to the city, mostly with wastewater (Cofie and Drechsel, 2007). The analysis, that excludes

backyard subsistence production, revealed that urban agriculture is a crucial supplier of

the most perishable vegetables to the cities’ markets. There is high demand for urban

produce especially from low-income households and the large number of small (street)

eating places (locally known as ‘chop-bars’) because it is fresh and they have limited pos-

sibilities for storage. Thus, most of the chop-bars benefit from wastewater irrigation.

Despite these positive signs, the problem of crop contamination raises significant con-

cerns, not only among the health directorates of the same assemblies, but also in the

media. This is supported by a municipal by-law stating that “no crops shall be watered by

the effluent from a drain from any premises or any surface water from a drain which is fed

by water from a street drainage.” (ghana, Ministry of Local government, Accra Metropoli-

tan Assembly, 1995) This by-law targets those vegetables and fruits likely to be eaten raw.


Irrigated urban agriculture therefore remains informal without any cross-sectoral sup-

port by authorities. And as farmers at most locations have no alternative to polluted wa-

ter, they continue using it.

10.2.4 Use of Integrated Natural Wastewater Treatment Systems

Although less than 8% of wastewater is currently being treated in ghana, adoption of

technologies that are environmentally friendly and self-sustaining in terms of efficiency,

cost and treatment performance will maximize the effective use of wastewater in gha-

na. To achieve this would entail the adoption of an integrated approach incorporating

economic incentives capable of paying for the cost of wastewater treatment as well as

selection of technologies that gives the country key advantages considering its peculiar

available resources. The use of natural wastewater treatment systems offers such an op-

portunity. Natural wastewater treatment systems are artificially created systems capable

of utilizing the ecological, biochemical and physical processes involving wetland flora,

soils and their associated macrofauna and microbial assemblages to assist in treating

wastewater. It has been suggested that in determining the suitability or the sustainability

of a wastewater treatment technology, the following factors need to be considered:

y Its robustness while meeting effluent standards

y Its generation of wastes such as sludge and by products such as carbon dioxide

emissions

y Its capacity for various reuse options as well as environmental benefits

y The extent of chemical usage and the degree of environmental nuisance it

poses

y Its energy source and consumption as well as land and other capital require-

ments (brix, 1998; Shutes, 2001)

Natural wastewater treatment systems perform best in tropical climates having highly

diverse flora and fauna. Their drawbacks are large land space and labour requirement,

which are usually not severely constrained in developing economies. In ghana, an im-

portant requirement of a wastewater treatment technology is its ability to remove patho-


gens as rural communities tend to use raw water from rivers, streams and drains without

any form of treatment. Table 2 summarizes the efficiency of natural wastewater treat-

ment systems in comparison to conventional wastewater treatment systems, such as the

activated sludge and trickling filter systems. They are robust, low cost, have high purifica-

tion rates requiring low-skilled manpower and potential for economic benefits, such as

fish farming, thatch harvests for roofing, mats, etc. (Denny, 1997).

TAble 2: SUMMAry of reMovAl effiCieNCieS froM SeleCTeD TreATMeNT SySTeMS

Source: Mara and Cairncross, 1989; Quinonez-Diaz and others, 2001; garcía and others, 2008

10.2.5 Policies and National Strategy

Waste (solid and liquid) treatment is a major strategy being adopted for improving sani-

tation in urban ghana. Recently, a composting plant was unveiled in Accra for processing

solid waste into compost to provide a major link between improved sanitation and urban

and peri-urban agriculture.

The National Environmental and Sanitation Policy covers all aspects of environmental

health, including excreta disposal and solid waste management. It sets out responsibili-

ties for the various stakeholders; including individuals, community organizations and

local government authorities. Others are Ministries of Environment Science and Technol-

ogy, Health Education (including educational institutions) and the private sector.

Treatment Technologylog removal

bacteria helminth eggs Protozoan cysts

Activated sludge 0-2 0-2 0-1

Trickling filter 0-2 0-2 0-1

Aerated lagoon 1-2 1-3 0-1

Waste stabilization ponds 1-6 1-3 1-4

Constructed wetland 1-4 - 1-3


based on the above, a number of by-laws have been passed and are being enforced by

local government authorities towards enhancing sanitation and food safety. Directly re-

lated to wastewater use is a local government regulation against the use of “effluent from

a drain from any premises and or surface water from any drain fed by water from a street

drainage … for the purposes of watering or irrigating crops” within the Accra Metropoli-

tan Assembly Area.

Additionally, the National Water Policy provides for the promotion of partnerships be-

tween the public and private sectors for the protection and conservation of water re-

sources through the use of cleaner and efficient technologies, effective waste manage-

ment, sound land management and agricultural practices and also the prevention of

pollution of water sources by wastewater.

10.2.6 Organizational Roles and Responsibilities

the environmental Protection agency (ePa): The EPA is the technical arm of the Minis-

try of Environment, Science and Technology and is responsible for ensuring total environ-

mental safety. Thus, it enforces compliance with all existing environmental regulations by

individuals, public and private organizations. Specifically, the EPA is responsible for the

following:

y Advise and make recommendations to the Minister of Environment on policies

on the protection of the environment

y Develop guidelines for environmental safety

y Coordinate activities of such bodies it considers appropriate for the purposes

of controlling the generation, treatment, storage, transportation and disposal

of waste


hydrological Services department (hSd): This is a department of the Ministry of Water

Resources and Works and Housing responsible for:

y Monitoring of stream/river flow rates (quantitative)

y Design and maintenance of urban drains (primary treatment)

local government authorities (metropolitan, municipal and district assemblies

(mmdas): The local authorities are responsible for:

y Passage of by-laws for maintenance of sanitation and environmental health

y Collection and disposal of solid and human waste

y Development and maintenance of waste treatment and disposal facilities, in-

cluding wastewater treatment plants and landfill sites

y Infrastructure development to support socio-economic development, includ-

ing construction of drains

ministry of food and agriculture (mofa): The Ministry of Food and Agriculture pro-

vides extension services to farmers including operators of urban and peri-urban agricul-

ture through its metropolitan, municipal and district offices across the country. Services

provided include good agriculture practices including irrigation methods towards the

achievement of higher productivity, income and food safety. The Ministry over the years

has been collaborating with public, private and civil society organizations to build capac-

ity of urban and peri-urban producers including the safe use of wastewater and food

safety.

The current Food and Agriculture Sector Policy and its accompanying investment plan

recognize the need to build capacity of operators of UPA towards enhancing food safety

and income of operators.

The MoFA will continue to coordinate activities related to ensuring safe use of wastewa-

ter for agriculture as it relates to its core duty of ensuring food security and safety.


The ghana Irrigation Development Authority (gIDA) and the Fisheries are part of the Min-

istry of Food and Agriculture.

council for Scientific and industrial research - Water research institute (Wri): The

Water Research Institute of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) is one

of the 13 institutes of the CSIR ghana. The Water Research Institute (WRI) currently em-

ploys 64 scientists (mostly trained at the PhD level) and 63 technical staff working in five

core departments namely: Fisheries, Environmental biology and Health, Environmental

Chemistry, Surface and ground Water. The staff and laboratories of the WRI are based in

three regions of ghana namely, Accra (head office), Akosombo, Eastern Region and Tama-

le, Northern Region. CSIR-WRI is mandated by the government of ghana to research into

and to advice the government of ghana on the sustainable utilization and management

of the water resources of ghana, in support of socio-economic advancement, especially

in the agriculture, health, industry, energy, education, environment and tourism sectors.

One of its core mandates is to research into the development of technologies for pollu-

tion control, pollution prevention and poverty reduction through water use.

CSIR-WRI has key competences in development of health protection technologies for

wastewater reuse, health risk assessment of wastewater reuse in tilapia and vegetable

crop cultivation and monitoring and assessment of wastewater treatment systems. It has

been involved in research on:

y Improving the pathogen removal efficiency of eco-technologies for wastewa-

ter treatment such as stabilization ponds and constructed wetlands

y Health risk assessment of wastewater reuse in tilapia and vegetable crop cul-

tivation

y Wastewater treatment technology assessment and selection based on treat-

ment objectives

Personnel of the institute has produced verifiable outputs on these technologies in the

form of publications in peer-reviewed international journals and Master of Philosophy

degrees of supervised postgraduate students from the universities. The institute is also

involved in assisting wastewater treatment plant performance of institutions such as

municipal assemblies and industries like a Cocoa Processing Company for meeting EPA-


recommended guidelines on wastewater effluents. The Institute’s laboratories analyze

samples commercially and also for scientific research purposes. Parameters include, for

example, microbial, helminths, nutrients, trace metals and hydrocarbons, and therefore

are capable of characterizing both domestic and industrial wastewater.

the international Water management institute (iWmi): The International Water Man-

agement Institute (IWMI) is one of 15 international research centres supported by the

network of 60 governments, private foundations and international and regional orga-

nizations collectively known as the Consultative group on International Agricultural Re-

search (CgIAR). It is an international non-profit organization with a staff of around 300

and offices in over 10 countries across Asia and Africa and Headquarters in Colombo, Sri

Lanka.

IWMI’s mission is to improve the management of land and water resources for food, liveli-

hoods and the environment. IWMI targets poor communities in developing countries and

through this contributes towards the achievement of the UN Millennium Development

goals (MDg) of reducing poverty, hunger and maintaining a sustainable environment.

IWMI-West Africa is engaged in numerous action-based research projects related to

widespread practice of wastewater and excreta reuse. In ghana, IWMI has worked exten-

sively in greater Accra, kumasi and Tamale addressing health risk management associ-

ated with reuse, including a project analyzing adoption drivers and cost-effectiveness of

different treatment and non-treatment risk-reducing options. Other work involves evalu-

ating technology options for co-composting organic solid waste and human excreta and

integrated use of freshwater, stormwater as well as wastewater for agriculture.

Kwame nkrumah university of Science and technology (KnuSt): kwame Nkrumah

University of Science and Technology (kNUST) is the second public university established

in ghana and in addition to the other academic programmes carries out a number of

researches including wastewater use in agriculture. For example, kNUST, in collaboration

with IWMI and the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, carried out a number of studies

aimed at safeguarding Public Health Concerns, Livelihoods and Productivity in Waste-

water Irrigated Urban and Peri-urban vegetable Farming. This was a Challenge Program

on Water and Food (CPWF) sponsored projects (PM 38 and PN 51) in collaboration with

International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Accra, University of Copenhagen and

the Royal veterinary and Agricultural kNUST.


eden tree (private sector operator): This is a private sector commercial entity involved

in the purchase, wholesaling and distribution of fruits and vegetables from UPA opera-

tors. The company has over years collaborated with MoFA to educate operators on safe

use of irrigation water and handling of produce. The company itself ensures safety of

produce through the use of post production safety procedures.

10.2.7 Competences on the Safe Use of Wastewater in Irrigation

The report on assessment of knowledge and skill needs is based on responses received

from eleven out of fifteen organizations served with questionnaires (Table 3). On average,

existing knowledge and skill are mostly basic across the organizations although few of the

organizations recorded good to excellent scores for some of the issues assessed. For exam-

ple, IWMI scored between good and excellent for most of the issues whilst fisheries scored

between low and basic for most of the issues/competencies assessed. In terms of impor-

tance of the issues assessed, the organizations scored most of the issues as being of high

and very high importance giving average scores of above 3. There are, however, marked

differences between the scores from various organizations, for example Women In Agri-

culture Development (WIAD) Directorate scored the importance of elements of Health

Risk Assessment to be of between low and very low importance whilst the same were

scored by Water Research Institute (WRI) and IWMI to be of high to very high importance.

assessment of health risk

y Microbial and chemical laboratory analysis – Available capacity is above aver-

age in majority of respondent organizations with only five organizations scor-

ing for basic level capacity and below. With exception of WIAD and Metropoli-

tan Agriculture Development Unit (MADU), all other organizations score the

issue as between high and very high importance with an average score of 2.50

(high importance)

y Epidemiological studies – Current knowledge level in most organizations is basic

with only four organizations indicating good level of knowledge and available

skill. Majority of organizations however, indicate that the issue is of high to very

high importance. Only two of the organizations think the issue is of low impor-

tance


y quantitative microbial risk assessment (qMRA) – Current knowledge and skills

only 2.09 (basic) with only four organizations indicating good level of existing

knowledge and skills. Importance of the issue is however high (3.09) across the

organizations with only two organizations scoring its importance as low

y Setting health based targets – Existing knowledge is rated as low to basic (1.91)

across the organizations. One organization (Water Resources Commission,

WRC) however rated the existing knowledge as excellent. The importance of

the subject is rated high across the organizations with four organizations rat-

ing it as of low importance

health protection measures

y Wastewater treatment – Existing knowledge and skills are ranked as mostly

basic (2.09) with five organizations scoring good (3). Importance of the subject

is ranked as high by all organizations except one (WIAD – low)

y Non-treatment options – Existing knowledge and skills levels are ranked as just

above basic (2.43) across the organizations with scoring between good and

excellent. In terms of importance, the subject is ranked between high and very

high by all organizations with an average score of 2.45

monitoring and system assessment

y Monitoring – Current knowledge and skills level is ranked averagely as just

above basic (2.36). However, three organizations scored poor (1) and one

scored excellent (4). In terms of importance, the subject was scored as gen-

erally high except for two organizations which scored the subject as of low

importance

y System assessment – Existing knowledge and skills are general (2.09). IWMI

however has an excellent knowledge and skill base as indicated by a score of

4. System Assessment is ranked as of generally high importance with only two

organizations considering it as of low importance


Socio-cultural aspects

y Cultural and religious beliefs - Current knowledge and skills are between poor

and basic (average - 2.09) across the respondent organizations. Three organiza-

tions however have good levels of knowledge. The importance of the subject is

between low and high across the organizations with an average score of 2.55

y Public acceptance – Existing knowledge is generally basic with only two orga-

nizations scoring above the basic level. Importance is generally high in most of

the organizations except for two organizations (EPA and WRI)

crop production aspects

y Components of wastewater harmful to crop production – knowledge and skills

levels are averagely just above basic (2.18) with only one organization scoring

excellent (4). In terms of importance, the subject matter is of high importance

in all organizations except three which consider it as of low importance

y Agricultural effects of wastewater irrigation – Current knowledge and skills lev-

els are between low and basic except for IWMI and WRI which scored excellent

and good respectively. The subject is considered as of between low and high

importance (average score – 2.73) by the majority of the organizations that

responded

y Management strategies to maximize crop production – Existing knowledge

and skills level are generally poor to basic (average score – 1.73) across the or-

ganizations and considered generally as of between low and high importance

environmental aspects

y Components of wastewater harmful to the environment – Existing knowledge

and skills are between basic and good except for two organizations (poor). The

importance of the subject is however considered as either high or very high by

all organizations with average score of 3.36

y Environmental effects through the agricultural chain – Existing level of knowl-


edge and skill is scored as either basic or good by all organizations except one

giving an average score of 2.36. In terms of importance the subject is score as

of high to very high importance by all organizations with an average score of

3.27

y Management strategies for reducing environmental impacts – Existing levels

of knowledge and skills are poor in five organizations, whilst good in four and

excellent in one. The importance of the subject is considered as between high

and very high in all organizations except one with an average score of 3.36

economic and financial considerations

y Economic feasibility – Existing levels of knowledge and skills are scored as

mostly basic except for four organizations which score as good (3) and excel-

lent (1). Importance of the subject was scored mostly as of high or very high

except for four organizations

y Financial feasibility – Current knowledge and skill levels within the respon-

dent organizations were scored mostly between basic, except for three which

scored either good (2) or excellent (1). In terms of importance, the subject is

considered as of low to very high importance across the organizations giving

an average score of 2.82

y Market feasibility – Existing knowledge in majority of the organizations (9) is

basic, whilst the importance of the subject matter is considered as mostly high

with an average score of 2.73. Four organizations however consider the impor-

tance of the subject to be of low importance

Policy aspects

y Institutional roles and responsibilities – knowledge on institutional roles re-

sponsibilities is either basic or good in the respondent organizations giving

an average score of 2.45. The importance of the subject is considered as either

high or very high by majority of the respondents (nine)


y Regulations – Existing knowledge of laws and regulations in the various orga-

nizations are considered as between poor and good with an average score of

2.18. On the average the knowledge of laws and regulations is considered as

high (3.00) with majority of the partipating organizations scoring it as of either

high of very high importance

y Economic instruments – Existing knowledge is generally basic with only three

organizations scoring good level of knowledge of the subject. Majority of the

organizations however consider the subject as of high importance

y Education and social awareness – Existing knowledge is considered to be gen-

erally between poor and basic by majority of the respondents, but of high to

very high importance

y Plans and programmes – Only nine respondents scored for the subject matter.

Existing knowledge of which plans and programmes were scored as between

basic and good whilst the importance of plans and programmes were scored

as high or very high

The results of the questionnaire indicate that there are existing knowledge and skills gap

in most of the respondent organizations. A few of the organizations e.g., IWMI, WRI and

EPA, have good competency levels in areas that are directly related to their general or-

ganizational responsibilities and can therefore be considered as potential candidates to

support in-country capacity-building programmes.


TAbl

e 3: A

SSeS

SMeN

T of k

NoW

leDg

e AND

CAPA

CiTy

Nee

DS

iM

PorT

ANCe

of i

SSUe

S

issue

s/re

spon

dent

org

aniza

-tio

nsfi

sher

ies

Zoom

lion

WiA

DiW

Mi

ePA

eDeN

Wri

hSD

WrC

MAD

Ugi

DAAv

erag

e

Asse

ssm

ent o

f hea

lth r

isk

Mic

robi

al a

nd c

hem

ical

la

bora

tory

ana

lysi

s4

42

44

34

33

–4

3.50

Epid

emio

logi

cal s

tudi

es4

31

33

44

23

34

3.09

qua

ntita

tive

mic

robi

al ri

sk

asse

ssm

ent (

qM

RA)

43

13

43

42

33

43.

09

heal

th P

rote

ctio

n M

easu

res

Was

tew

ater

trea

tmen

t3

32

34

33

43

34

3.18

Non

-tre

atm

ent o

ptio

ns3

34

43

43

43

34

3.45

Mon

itorin

g an

d Sy

stem

Ass

essm

ent

Mon

itorin

g of

hea

lth

prot

ectio

n m

easu

res

44

24

33

34

42

43.

36

Was

tew

ater

use

sys

tem

as

sess

men

t3

32

43

23

44

34

3.18


issue

s/re

spon

dent

org

aniza

-tio

nsfi

sher

ies

Zoom

lion

WiA

DiW

Mi

ePA

eDeN

Wri

hSD

WrC

MAD

Ugi

DAAv

erag

e

Crop

Pro

tect

ion

Aspe

cts

Com

pone

nts

of w

aste

wat

er

34

24

24

32

43

43.

18

Agric

ultu

ral t

rade

offs

of

33

24

23

22

33

32.

73

Man

agem

ent s

trat

egie

s fo

r 2

42

32

32

22

24

2.55

envi

ronm

enta

l Asp

ects

Com

pone

nts

of w

aste

wat

er

harm

ful t

o th

e en

viro

nmen

t3

33

44

33

44

33

3.36

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

thro

ugh

the

agric

ultu

re c

hain

44

33

33

33

43

33.

27

Man

agem

ent s

trat

egie

s fo

r re

duci

ng e

nviro

nmen

tal

43

33

43

34

42

43.

36

Socio

cultu

ral A

spec

ts

Cultu

ral a

nd re

ligio

us b

elie

fs3

33

32

22

23

23

2.55

Publ

ic a

ccep

tanc

e3

43

42

32

33

34

3.09

econ

omic

and

fina

ncia

ls Co

nsid

erat

ions

Econ

omic

feas

ibili

ty4

42

42

42

42

34

3.18

Fina

ncia

l fea

sibi

lity

44

24

24

22

22

32.

82

Mar

ket f

easi

bilit

y4

43

31

32

22

33

2.73


issue

s/re

spon

dent

org

aniza

-tio

nsfi

sher

ies

Zoom

lion

WiA

DiW

Mi

ePA

eDeN

Wri

hSD

WrC

MAD

Ugi

DAAv

erag

e

Polic

y Asp

ects

Inst

itutio

nal r

oles

and

re

spon

sibi

litie

s4

43

24

33

44

24

3.36

Law

s an

d re

gula

tions

44

22

14

32

43

43.

00

Plan

s an

d pr

ogra

mm

es4

43

33

34

34

3.44

Econ

omic

inst

rum

ents

44

32

12

23

43

32.

82

Educ

atio

n an

d so

cial

aw

aren

ess

44

44

23

33

33

43.

36

othe

rs

Mol

ecul

ar b

iolo

gy

tech

niqu

es

4

4.00

Nat

iona

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Plan

4

4.

00

Publ

ic in

volv

emen

t

4

4.00

know

ledg

e an

d Ca

pacit

y Nee

ds S

core

s: v

ery l

ow -

1, lo

w -

2, h

igh

- 3, v

ery h

igh

- 4

Fish

erie

s (un

der t

he M

inis

try

of F

ood

and

Agric

ultu

re, M

oFA

), Zo

omlio

n (h

ttp:

//w

ww

.zoo

mlio

ngha

na.c

om/)

, WIA

D =

Wom

en In

Agr

icul

ture

Dev

elop

men

t, IW

MI =

Inte

rnat

iona

l Wat

er M

anag

emen

t

Inst

itute

, EPA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal P

rote

ctio

n Ag

ency

, ED

EN =

ED

EN T

ree

(priv

ate

sect

or o

pera

tor)

, WRI

= W

ater

Res

earc

h In

stitu

te, H

SD =

Hyd

rolo

gica

l Ser

vice

s D

epar

tmen

t, W

RC =

Wat

er R

esou

rces

Com

mis

sion

, MA

DU

= M

etro

polit

an A

gric

ultu

re D

evel

opm

ent U

nit,

gID

A =

gha

na Ir

rigat

ion

Dev

elop

men

t Aut

horit

y (u

nder

MoF

A).


10.3 National Report of Jordan

Submitted by Eng. Ahmed Ali Uleimat, Advisor, Environment & Water Reuse, Water Au-

thority of Jordan (WAJ), P.O bOX 2412 Code 11183, Amman, Jordan.

10.3.1 The Situation in Jordan

In Jordan water is becoming an increasingly scarce resource and planners are forced to

consider any source of water which might be used economically and effectively to pro-

mote further development. This important resource, reclaimed water, has been consid-

ered by the highest level of the Jordan government. Reclaimed water is seen to have full

value to the overall water resources of the country, as stated in Jordan’s Water Strategy,

formally adopted by the Council of Ministers in May 1997, which states that “Wastewater

shall not be managed as waste; it shall be collected and treated to standards that allow

its use in unrestricted agriculture and other non domestic purposes, including ground

water recharge” (MWI, 2002 and 2009b). Since the early 1980s, the general approach has

been to treat wastewater and discharge it into the environment where it mixes with fresh

water flows, and is reused directly or indirectly. Jordan is in the process of rehabilitating

and expanding its wastewater treatment plants and reclaimed water, appropriately man-

aged, is viewed as a major component of the water resources supply to meet the needs

of a growing economy.

Appropriate standards and guidelines have been set to allow for a wide range of waste-

water reuse activities, including highly treated reclaimed water for landscapes and high

value crops and treatment plant discharge requirements. Reclaimed wastewater dis-

charged from domestic wastewater treatment plants is an important component of Jor-

dan’s water budget. About 113.83 MCM in the year 2007, 111.527 MCM in the year 2008,

114.687 MCM in the year 2009 and 117.83 MCM in the year 2010, 115.432 MCM in the

year 2011, (DWS, 2009; Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, DWS and WREU, 2011) were

treated and discharged into various watercourses or used directly or indirectly for irriga-

tion and other intended uses and it is expected to increase up to 262 MCM in the year

2020 (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2009b).

greater efforts have been made to conserve water by providing non-conventional water

supplies to deal with the demands of agriculture. However, several challenges have still


to be overcome in terms of wastewater treatment and reuse, such as scientific and pub-

lic acceptance, institutional and legal aspects. The monitoring of reclaimed wastewater

quality involves many distinct activities to give reliable and usable data. A monitoring

programmeme for domestic wastewater has been designed according to standard num-

ber 893/2006 to collect representative samples and analyze it through quality assurance

and laboratories accreditation process complying with ISO 17025. The water quality data

generated from these monitoring programmes provide information about the reclaimed

water quality and ensure its safety for irrigation, other intended uses, protection of public

health and the environment. Decisions for improvements and reuse permission are taken

depending on the quality of reclaimed water for each treatment plant and according to

the current standard.

10.3.2 Water Availability and Use

Jordan, situated in Southwest Asia, covers a territory of about 90,000 km² with 99% land

area, of which 95% receives less than 50 mm rainfall annually (Hashemite kindgom of

Jordan, MWI, 2009b). The land is characterized by an arid landscape as part of the great

North Arabian Desert supporting meager and stunted vegetation thriving for short pe-

riods after scanty winter rains. Jordan is considered as one of the four most water scarce

countries in the world. The limited water resources are exposed to pollution. Population

growth is expected to increase the pressure on available water resources. Conventional

water resources in Jordan consist of groundwater and surface water. Twelve groundwater

basins have been identified in Jordan. Some of them are exploited to their maximum ca-

pacity and others are overexploited, threatening their future use. The long-term safe yield

of renewable groundwater has been estimated at 275 MCM/year (Hashemite kindgom of

Jordan, MWI, 2009a).

The major surface water sources are the Jordan River, the yarmouk River and the Zarqa

River. Much of the flow of the Jordan and yarmouk Rivers is diverted by the upstream

riparians Israel and Syria, leaving only a small share to Jordan. The Zarqa River is polluted

by industry, municipal wastewater and non-point sources. Over the years, conflicts have

emerged over use of the water. For Jordan, lack of water is damaging people’s health as

well as the economy. Available yearly per capita share of fresh water in Jordan is among

the lowest in the world, estimated at about 145 m3 (Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, MWI,


2009b). This share is continuously decreasing and is forecasted to go down to 90 m3 by

2020 without the construction of the strategic projects (Disi, Red-Dead Sea) (Hashemite

kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2009b).

On the one hand, Jordan has very limited fresh water resources, estimated at 780 MCM

per year and split between surface 505 MCM and 275 MCM ground water resources (gIZ

and Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, 2004). Furthermore, the average yearly rainfall over

Jordan is estimated at about 8.3 billion cubic metres (bCM) of which 94% is evaporated,

leaving very little addition to available water (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2010;

gIZ and Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, 2004). On the other hand, the demand on water

is ever increasing and is estimated at about 1.2 bCM (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI,

2009a) and clearly there is a deficit between the supply and the demand. To bridge this

gap, the government of Jordan has put together a long-term plan to increase the ef-

ficiency of water use, improve the management of the water supply and improve waste-

water treatment and reuse.

Agriculture is considered to be the largest consumer of water in Jordan with 66% of wa-

ter allocated to the agricultural sector, e.g., 540 MCM in 2004 (Abdel-Jabbar and others,

2011). In spite of this, the output of agriculture only contributes 4% to the annual gDP

(Abdel-Jabbar and others, 2011). This is largely due to planting crops that are, not only

water inefficient, but also economically unstable (e.g., watermelons). However, it is dif-

ficult to change attitudes given the socio-economic context of the sector. The municipal

sector (hotels, hospitals, schools, houses, government and private bodies) comes in as

the second consumer with about 240 MCM (30% of the total consumption), while the

industrial sector consumes about 40 MCM (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2010).

However, it is expected that the total “water demand” will rise up to 1,635 MCM/year in

2020 (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2009b). The government plans to satisfy the

rising demand mainly through desalination and to some extent also through increased

wastewater reuse.

10.3.3 Wastewater Treatment in Jordan: What is Wastewater and Why treat It?

Wastewater is not just sewage. All the water used in the home that goes down the

drains or into the sewage collection systems is wastewater. This includes water from

baths, showers, sinks, dishwashers, washing machines and toilets. Municipal wastewa-


ter is mainly comprised of water (99.9%) together with relatively small concentrations of

suspended and dissolved organic and inorganic solids. Among the organic substances

present in sewage are carbohydrates, fats, soaps, synthetic detergents, proteins and their

decomposition products, as well as various natural and synthetic organic chemicals from

the process industries connected to the sewer systems. Moreover, Table 4 shows the uni-

versal levels of the major constituents of strong, medium and weak domestic wastewa-

ters. Comparing the raw wastewater produced in Jordan with the universal concentration

tabulated in Table 4. Since water use in Jordan is often fairly low, raw wastewater tends to

be very strong as stated in Table 5.

TAble 4: MAjor CoNSTiTUeNTS of TyPiCAl DoMeSTiC WASTeWATer

ConstituentConcentration (mg/l)

Strong Medium Weak

Total solids 1200 700 350

Dissolved solids (TDS) 850 500 250

Suspended solids 350 200 100

Nitrogen (as N) 85 40 20

Phosphorus (as P) 20 10 6

Chloride 100 50 30

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 200 100 50

grease 150 100 50

bOD5 300 200 100

Source: UN Department of Technical Cooperation for Development, 1985; Uleimat, 2010


TAble 5: MAjor CoNSTiTUeNTS of TyPiCAl DoMeSTiC WASTeWATer iN jorDAN

Constituent Concentration (mg/l)

Dissolved solids (TDS) 800 – 1300

Suspended solids 600 – 1500

Nitrogen (as N) 30-150

Phosphorus (as P) 20 - 80

FOg 48-206

Sulphate (as SO4) 200 - 400

bOD5 600 - 1500

COD 1000 – 2500

Municipal wastewater also contains a variety of inorganic substances from domestic,

hospitals and industrial sources, including a number of potentially toxic elements such

as arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc, etc. (kerri, 1998). However,

from the point of view of health, a very important consideration in agricultural use of

wastewater, and the contaminants of greatest concern, are the pathogenic micro- and

macro-organisms. Pathogenic viruses, bacteria, protozoa and helminthes may be present

in raw municipal wastewater and will survive in the environment for long periods. Patho-

genic bacteria will be present in wastewater at much lower levels than the coliform group

of bacteria. In addition, certain synthetic organics are highly toxic. Pesticides, benzene,

toluene and herbicides are toxic to humans, fish, and aquatic plants and often are dis-

posed of improperly in drains or carried in storm water. They also can damage processes

in treatment plants and complicate treatment efforts.

Source: Uleimat, 2010


10.3.4 Wastewater Treatment Plants in Jordan

Jordan’s first wastewater treatment plant was established in 1970. The total number of

treatment plants are 26 as of 2012, treating about 300,000 m3 per day (115MCM/year) or

about 98% of the collected wastewater (Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, DWS and

WREU, 2011).

Most of the cities of Jordan are equipped with wastewater treatment plants and it was

decided to treat wastewater up to the secondary level and meet the current standards

and WHO guidelines as minimum requirements. Discharging raw wastewater to the envi-

ronment is prohibited by public health law. The existing public sector wastewater treat-

ment plants in Jordan include 26 that use different types of treatment systems and 7 that

are planned or under construction. The systems are divided into activated sludge, trick-

ling filters, and waste stabilization ponds shown in Table 6. The aim of the Water Authority

of Jordan (WAJ) is to increase the volume of treated wastewater through improvements

in the existing treatment infrastructure and the construction of new treatment systems

ensuring compliance of the treated wastewater with current standards. WAJ has replaced

most of the treatment plants working with stabilization ponds, with activated sludge

processes to reach a high level of the quality of water and increase public acceptance for

wastewater reuse. For example, the old Samra wastewater treatment plant, established

in 1985 and the largest treatment plant in Jordan, serving the greater Amman area, Rus-

seifa and Zarka, where about 60% of the population of Jordan lives, has been changed to

an activated sludge system from stabilization ponds. The new project is a public private

partnership (PPP) for financing the construction and operation based on a build Oper-

ate Transfer (bOT) approach over a period of 25 years. The wastewater treatment plant

As-Samra is being operated by a consortium led by SUEZ under a 25-year build-Operate-

Transfer (bOT) contract with WAJ and it is the first bOT project in Jordan. The existing

wastewater treatment plants are summarized in Table 6.


TAble 6: WASTeWATer TreATMeNT PlANTS iN jorDAN

Plant Method of Treatmenthydraulic load (m3/day)

efficiencyTreatment Cost (fils/m3)*

As-Samra Activated Sludge 221510 98.6% bOT

IrbidActivated Sludge +

Trickling Filter6696 97% 118.9

Aqaba new Activated Sludge 6962 98.8% 487.2

Aqaba Stabilization Ponds 7041 90.7% 16.3

Salt Extended AERATION 4569.4 97.9% 150.1

Jerash Extended AERATION 3598.3 95% 66.2

Mafraq Stabilization Ponds 1958 80% 61.1

baqa’a Trickling Filter 10615 93.4% 91.7

karak Trickling Filter 1679.3 89% 114.7

Abu-Nusir Activated Sludge 2240.3 96% 191.1

Tafila Trickling Filter 1116 95% 173.8

Ramtha Activated Sludge 3674.7 99% 163

Ma’an Activated Sludge 2352 99% 489.7

Madaba Activated Sludge 4660.5 99.4% 191.9

kufranja Trickling Filter 2794.6 88% 225.6

Wadi Al Seer Aerated Lagoon 2762 95% 86.7

Fuhis Activated Sludge 1606.3 98% 207

Wadi Arab Activated Sludge 8316 98.8% 106.5

Wadi Hassan Activated Sludge 1140.7 99.0% 586.3

Wadi Mousa Activated Sludge 1820.4 99% 788.4

Tal-AlmantahActivated Sludge +

Trickling Filter271.5 96% 250

AL- Ekeder Stabilization Ponds 3156 88% 34.1

Alljoon Stabilization Ponds 634.8 88% 24.3

AL-marad Activated Sludge 853 96% 536.8

Al-JIZA Activated Sludge 703.9 95% 766.7

*:1 jD=1000 fils, 1 US$=710 fils. Source: WAj Technical Sector Annual report 2011 Source: hashemite kingdom of jordan, WAj, DWS, and WreU, 2011


10.3.5 Wastewater Use and Disposal

The reuse of treated wastewater can be a valuable alternative to freshwater resources,

especially in Jordan, which is a scarce water country. Today, various technically-proven

wastewater treatment and purification processes exist to produce water of almost any

desired quality. In the planning and implementation process, the intended water reuse

applications dictate the extent of wastewater treatment required, or in other words, the

quality of the available wastewater limits the reuse options. Jordan’s desperate need for

water has necessitated the reuse of treated wastewater in agriculture for many years.

The agricultural sector is the largest water consumer in Jordan, where 62% of the total

water budget is being used for irrigation (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2009a).

However, the farmers feel the pressure of the increasing demand on water by the domes-

tic sector and industry. For example, farmers in the Jordan valley are suffering from the

continuous decline in fresh water resources coming from yarmouk River through king

Abdullah Canal (kAC) as more water is pumped to Amman for drinking purposes. Ac-

cordingly, they are forced to tap unconventional water sources such as brackish water

and treated wastewater. Treated wastewater quantities have been increasing due to the

growing number of households being connected to the sewer system. This makes it an

available water source all over the year. Currently, more than 115 MCM of reclaimed water

is produced from 26 treatment plants all over the country, of which 79.6 MCM is gener-

ated from Samra treatment plant, which is the main supplier to king Talal Dam (kTR) (JvA

record, 2009; Abdel-Jabbar and others, 2011).

Treated wastewater can be either used directly in restricted agriculture or indirectly in

unrestricted agriculture after mixing it with other water sources. For indirect use, treat-

ed wastewater is usually released in natural wadis and stored in reservoirs, where it is

blended with other fresh water resources such as rainfall and spring water and then used

in irrigation. In Jordan, about 61 MCM of the total quantities of the generated reclaimed

water are being stored in reservoirs and only used indirectly in unrestricted agriculture

in the Jordan valley, while about 45 MCM are used directly for restricted irrigation and 2

MCM for industrial purposes at Aqapa Special free Zone (ASEZA).The remaining quanti-

ties are left without any use (Abdel-Jabbar and others, 2011). Therefore, and based on

the above mentioned facts, MWI has updated the national water strategy for Jordan to

control and manage the use of all water resources according to the environmental and

public health regulations, with a great emphasis on encouraging the (direct and indirect)

use of reclaimed water as one major resource in agriculture (kramer and others, 2007).


There are several projects for the direct reuse of treated wastewater in Wadi Musa, Aqaba,

Irbid, Madaba, Ramtha, Akeder, and Mafraq and others. One of the first pilot projects for

direct reuse was implemented in Wadi Musa with support from the United States Agency

for International Development (USAID).

This pilot project is located near the historic Petra, funded by USAID and was initiated in

2003. It included a 69-dunum demonstration site and 300 dunums of farm plots divided

among 14 farmers, who used reclaimed water to cultivate fruit trees, alfalfa and other

fodder crops. building on the project’s success, six women farmers were incorporated

the following year. by mid 2006, an additional 450 dunums of irrigated plots have been

added to the site, allowing 20 additional farming families to benefit from the project, ren-

dering a total cultivable area of around 800 dunums, allowing 40 men and women farm-

ers to earn JD 1000-2000/year from their plots. The demonstration site receives regular

visits from professionals, school children, journalists and residents of nearby towns who

come to enjoy the lush greenery. Olive trees, ornamental trees, fodder crops, geraniums

and spruce are just a few of the crops on display at the site.

Water was first used to irrigate a demonstration farm and then the fields of nearby farm-

ers (DWS, 2009). Another pilot project was initiated using wastewater from the small

Wadi Hassan treatment plant to irrigate green spaces on the campus of the University

of Irbid, and commercial fruit plantations (DWS, 2009). Among other projects, the Wa-

ter Authority of Jordan, the operator of most municipal wastewater treatment plants in

Jordan, has signed contracts with farmers that irrigate mainly fodder crops, and in some

cases tree crops. The total area irrigated under contracts with WAJ is 760ha (Hashemite

kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, WREU, 2011).

10.3.6 Research and Practice on Different Aspects of Wastewater

Existing water reuse in the Jordan’s 2008 water strategy has focused on the importance

of research on treated wastewater, and asked the researchers to conduct all possible ex-

periments to demonstrate and set positive examples for the safe use of reclaimed water

(Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, MWI, 2009b). Several research projects have been con-

ducted in Jordan by universities, research centres, governmental agencies and NgOs for

treated wastewater through experimental sites. It includes determining soil character-

istics prior to irrigation, and the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of the

effluent during the growing season. Suitability of the effluent for irrigation was studied


and the crop and soil were tested for pathogenic pollution. The accumulation of salts and

heavy metals in the soil, as well as concentration of the nutrients and heavy metal accu-

mulation in the plant tissues were determined. Results of the study showed that the efflu-

ent has low heavy metal content. MWI has participated in different international research

projects, for example, the recently opened demonstration plant in Fuheis is part of the

international research project “Sustainable Management of Available Water Resources

with Innovative Technologies” (SMART), bfunded by the german Ministry of Research.

SMART is a collaboration of Jordanian and german researchers, ministries and companies

who are working together within the project to draw up an integrated water resources

management strategy for the Jordan River drainage basin, which extends over several

Middle Eastern countries. because of the high water requirements and low water volumes,

the strategy has to include all available resources: groundwater, surface water, wastewa-

ter, brackish water and rainwater. Recycling wastewater is therefore as much a part of the

concept as the protection of water resources against pollution, artificial groundwater re-

charge, and demand management. The experiences in Fuheis will help MWI to optimize

operating costs and the stability of the wastewater technology pilot plants in the arid

Arab climate by putting the know-how into practice on a larger scale. At the moment, the

UFZ researchers, the MWI and the research team are planning to implement decentral-

ized wastewater treatment technologies and the associated operator concept in a pilot

village in Jordan. Later on, the idea is to introduce decentralized wastewater treatment to

larger scales, thereby making additional water resources available for reuse. The research

activities will be continued to the end of the year 2013. However several other projects

are ongoing and the outcomes will be taken in consideration by the MWI.

10.3.7 Wastewater Standards in Jordan

The Jordan Institution for Standards and Metrology (JISM) is the national entity responsi-

ble for issuing standards in Jordan. Standards are set by technical committees formulated

by JISM, from members representing main parties concerned with the subject. All con-

cerned parties have the right to express their opinion and comment on the final draft of

the subject standard during the notification period, in order to align the Jordanian stan-

dards with international standards, to alleviate any technical boundaries facing trade,

and to facilitate the flow of commodities between countries. based on this, the perma-

nent technical committee for water and wastewater No. 17 has set the Jordanian Stan-

dard 893/2002 dealing with “Water-Reclaimed Domestic Wastewater” and recommended


its approval as a Jordanian Technical base No. 893/2006 in accordance with article (11)

paragraph (b) of the Standards and Metrology Law No. 22 for the year 2000.

Jordan Reclaimed Wastewater Standard number 893/2006 of reclaimed water deter-

mines the standards, regulations and guidelines that are required for water reuse in the

present and for the future (Sheikh, 2001). In fact, the higher the standards, the higher

the level of treatment, leading to a better quality of reclaimed water intended for reuse.

Jordan controls water reuse activities through countrywide standards and signed offi-

cial agreements with the users. The legal basis governing the use of reclaimed water is

encoded in the Jordanian standard. This Jordanian standard is specifically set to specify

the conditions that the reclaimed domestic wastewater, discharged from wastewater

treatment plants, should meet in order to be discharged or used in the various fields

mentioned in this standard. The standard consists of several items discussed below. A

summary the WHO Guideline of Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater (2006), cri-

teria and standards are presented in Table 7 (Hashemite kindgom of Jordan, JISM, 2003;

Jordanian Reclaimed Wastewater Standard-JS 893/2006).

jordan reclaimed Wastewater Standard-jS 893/2006

This standard identifies several requirements and it has two primary components:

b. Reclaimed water discharged to streams, wadis or water bodies

b. Reclaimed water for reuse.

1. general requirements

The main general conditions are summarized into:

y Reclaimed water must comply with the conditions stated in this standard for

each of its planned end uses

y It is not permitted to dilute by mixing reclaimed water before being discharged

from wastewater treatment plants with pure water, intentionally to comply

with the requirement set in this standard


y Should reclaimed water be used for purposes other than those mentioned in

this standard (such as for cooling or for fire distinguishing), special standards or

guidelines are to be applied in each case after conducting the necessary stud-

ies, taking into consideration the health and environmental dimension

y Official and specialized concerned parties overseeing the operation and devel-

opment of wastewater treatment plants must always work towards improving

the effluent quality to levels, and where possible, exceeding those presented

in this standard to ideally use reclaimed water and protect the environment

and public health

2. Standard requirements

Reclaimed Water to be discharged to streams, wadis or water bodies:

y It is allowed to discharge reclaimed wastewater to streams or wadis or water

bodies or reuse it when its quality complies with the properties and criteria

mentioned in Table 7 and measures must be taken to prevent the leakage of

the reclaimed water to ground waters

y It is prohibited to discharge it into wadis draining to the gulf of Aqaba

3. reclaimed Water for reuse

b. Artificial recharge of groundwater aquifers: This part of the standard consists of

reusing reclaimed water for artificial recharge of groundwater aquifers used for

irrigation purposes if its quality complies with the criteria mentioned in Table

7, technical studies must be performed to verify that there is no effect from ar-

tificial recharge activities on groundwater aquifers used for drinking purposes

b. Reuse for irrigation purposes: This part of the standard is concerned with re-

claimed water reuse for irrigation purposes and it consists of two main groups;

standards group and guidelines


y Standards group: is the group of properties and standards that are presented

in Table 7 Part A and where operating parties must produce water complying

to it and according to the usages mentioned in this standard

y guidelines group: The guidelines group shown in Table 7 Part b is considered

for guidance only, and in case of exceeding its values, the end user must carry

out scientific studies to verify the effect of that water on public health and the

environment, and suggest ways and means to prevent damage to either

y It is prohibited to use reclaimed water for irrigating vegetables that are eaten

uncooked (raw)

y It is prohibited to use sprinkler irrigation except for irrigating golf courses, and

in that case irrigation should practiced at night and the sprinklers must be of

the movable type and not accessible for day use

y When using reclaimed water for irrigating fruit trees, irrigation must be

stopped two weeks prior to fruit harvesting and any falling fruits in contact

with the soil must be removed

y Allowable limit for properties and criteria for reuse in irrigation is tabulated in

Table 7

4. Quality monitoring

The Wastewater Treatment Plant Owner Party and the regulatory body must ensure that

the reclaimed water quality is compliant with the standards and according to its end use.

Operating and monitoring parties must carry out the required laboratory tests according

to the frequency of sampling mentioned in JS893/2006.


5. evaluation mechanism

For the purpose of evaluating the quality of reclaimed water as per the different uses

allowed in this standard, the periods mentioned in the standard are followed and when

any value violate the standards set for discharge of reclaimed water to streams, wadis or

water bodies, an extra-confirmatory sample must be taken. If the two samples exceeded

the allowable standard limits the concerned party will be notified in order to conduct the

necessary correction measures in the shortest possible time.

TAble 7: jorDANiAN reClAiMeD DoMeSTiC WASTeWATer STANDArD 893/2006

Discharge to Water bodies and Wadis

Artificial recharge irrigation

group A group ACut flowers

C b A

bOD560 bOD5 15 30 300 200 30

COD150 COD 50 100 500 500 100

DO>1 DO >2 >2 - - >2

TSS60 TSS 50 15 300 200 50

PH(6-9) pH (6-9) (6-9) (6-9) (6-9) (6-9)

NO370 NO3 30 45 - - 30

T-N70 T-N 30 70 70 45 45

E. coli1000 E. coli <1.1 <1.1 - 1000 100

Intestinal Helminthes Eggs

≤1 Intestinal Helminthes Eggs

≤1 ≤1 ≤1 ≤1 ≤1

FOg8.0 FOg 8.0 2 8.0 8.0 8.0


Discharge to Water bod-ies and Wadis


group bCut flow-ers

A b C

Phenol<0.002 Phenol <0.002 Phenol <0.002

MbAS25 MbAS 25 MbAS 100(15) Cut flowers

TDS1500 TDS 1500 TDS 1500

T-PO415 T- PO4 15 T-PO4 30

Cl350 Cl 350 Cl 400

SO4300 SO4 300 SO4 500

HCO3400 HCO3 400 HCO3 400

Na200 Na 200 Na 230

Mg100 Mg 100 Mg 100

Ca200 Ca 200 Ca 230

SAR6.0 SAR 6.0 SAR 9.0

Al2.0 Al 2.0 Al 5.0

As0.05 As 0.05 As 0.1

be0.1 be 0.1 be 0.1

Cu0.2 Cu 0.2 Cu 0.2

F1.5 F 1.5 F 1.5

Fe5.0 Fe 5.0 Fe 5.0


Discharge to Water bod-ies and Wadis


group bCut flow-ers

A b C

Li2.5 Li 2.5 Li 2.5

Mn0.2 Mn 0.2 Mn 0.2

Mo0.01 Mo 0.01 Mo 0.01

Ni0.2 Ni 0.2 Ni 0.2

Pb0.2 Pb 0.2 Pb 5.0

Se0.05 Se 0.05 Se 0.05

Cd0.01 Cd 0.01 Cd 0.01

Zn5.0 Zn 5.0 Zn 5.0

Cr0.02 Cr 0.02 Cr 0.1

Hg0.002 Hg 0.002 Hg 0.002

v0.1 v 0.1 v 0.1

Co0.05 Co 0.05 Co 0.05

b1.0 b 1.0 b 1.0

CN0.1 CN 0.1 CN 0.1


10.3.8 WHO Guideline of Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater and JS 893/2006

The current water quality laws, regulations and application standards for discharge of

wastewater into rivers, wadis, lakes and reuse in irrigation systems, in some countries

such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, follow the rules de-

veloped by the World Health Organization (WHO, 1989; WHO, FAO, and UNEP, 2006a and

b), or they follow more stringent rules developed in the USA by the State of California.

The basis for these standards is essentially the protection of public health against risk of

exposure to microorganisms and chemicals that are typically found in raw wastewater.

None of the standards are strictly based on the level of risk associated with the limits in

those standards (risk management assessment). The standards of reclaimed water were

developed to protect the health of agricultural workers, those who might enter a field

in which wastewater is used as irrigation water and the general public. The standards

specify chemical, physical and a microbiological quality guideline values or a method

of wastewater treatment that will achieve the required quality by trained operators who

carefully operate and monitor the wastewater treatment plants.

The long-term goal of Jordan is to treat wastewater used in agriculture to minimum sec-

ondary level and it has a unique system of rules and regulations to protect the quality

of water resources and to regulate wastewater use and applications. In fact, in 1989, the

WHO published the Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater and Excreta in Agriculture

and Aquaculture (WHO, 1989), focusing on microbiological parameters, to protect public

health. In these guidelines, WHO recommended the implementation of a rather stringent

procedure depending mainly a single barrier approach. This approach requires treating

wastewater at a state-of-the-art treatment plant to render treated water of an acceptable

quality for reuse purposes. In 2006, WHO, UNEP, and FAO issued the new guidelines on

the use of multiple barriers approach which is more flexible and less stringent (WHO,

FAO, and UNEP, 2006a and b). This approach combines treatment and post-treatment

barriers compared to the old approach that relied solely on the treatment plant as the

only reliable control measures.

However, it is by no means acceptable to use treated wastewater in a way that compro-

mises the health of the people. A rational adaptation and implementation of the new

guidelines risk management system shall be in place in areas where treated water is

used for irrigation and the three types of risks (microbiological, chemical, physical) are


associated with treated wastewater use. The german technical cooperation agency gIZ

(Deutsche gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit) supports the Management

of Water Resources Programme initiated in 2006. The Jordanian partner is the MWI. The

main objective of the programme is to increase sustainable use of the available water

resources and enhance the use of treated wastewater by farmers; the establishment of

water user associations is encouraged. Moreover, gIZ works on the risk assessment and

risk management for the use of treated wastewater in irrigation in cooperation with the

concerned ministries to make use of the new WHO guidelines based on the comparison

between the old and the new guidelines as stated in Table 8.

TAble 8: CoMPAriSoN beTWeeN The 1989 AND 2006 Who gUiDeliNeS

Who 1989 Who, fAo, and UNeP, 2006a and b

E. coli <1000MPN/100mlE. coli threshold varies depending on the set health-based target.

Depends on one single approach (WWTP)Depends on a multiple barriers approach (drip irrigation)

Do not provide feasible risk-management solutions or guidance.

Provide an integrated approach that combines risk assessment & risk management to control water related diseases.

Unachievable under local circumstances.Can be adopted according to the local socio-economic conditions.

10.3.9 Monitoring and Reporting for Reclaimed Water

Effluent quality and quantity may change with time as a result of available water quan-

tity and the seasonal nature of some industries connected to sewerage system or opera-

tional problems in treatment processes. The regulatory body and the operational party

have to monitor reclaimed water regularly to maintain compliance with the approved JS

893\2006. In general, monitoring programmes are implemented by the environmental

monitoring division at WAJ through collecting samples from the point of entry into the

treatment plant, the effluent point from treatment plant and from selected samples from

sails, wadis and dams receiving reclaimed water. This Jordan standard illustrates the re-

claimed water monitoring programmes which have to be implemented by the regulatory

body such as Ministry of Health and Ministry of Environment and the operational party

responsible for managing and treating wastewater in Jordan (Sheikh, 2001).


10.3.10 Wastewater Analysis carried out at WAJ Central Laboratories

various types of pollutants are present in domestic wastewater that can be measured by

many different parameters. Wastewater chemistry analyses which are carried at WAJ lab-

oratories include (Iron, Manganese, Copper, Chromium, Cadmium, Nickel, Lead, Zinc, va-

nadium, Cobalt, Aluminum, Silver, Tin, Lithium, Molybdenum, barium, beryllium Arsenic,

Selenium and Mercury), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), biological Oxygen Demand

(bOD), pH ,Turbidity, Total Suspended Solids, Total Dissolved Solids, Phosphate Ammo-

nium, Nitrate, Total Nitrogen, boron, Sodium, Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium, Chloride,

Sulfate FOg, MbAS, Cyanide and Phenol. The second class of wastewater analysis is Total

Coliforms, Escherishia coli and Helminthes Eggs Count & Identification (kramer and oth-

ers, 2007; Uleimat, 2010).

10.3.11 Wastewater Evaluation

The generated water quality data analyzed at WAJ central laboratories shown in Table 9

was evaluated according to the Jordanian Reclaimed Wastewater Standard 893/2006. It is

clear from these tables that some water quality parameters in some treatment plants, such

as phosphate or total nitrogen, are exceeding the allowable limits because these treatment

plants are not designed to deal with nitrogen compounds and phosphate removal. More-

over, the water quality differs from one treatment to another, depending on the opera-

tion conditions, water quantity and the type of treatment system. A number of elements

of heavy metals and trace elements are normally present in relatively low concentrations,

usually less than the allowable standard limits, and they tend to concentrate in the sludge

(biosolids). Heavy metals and trace elements are rarely a proper concern of any of the uses

of reclaimed water in Jordan and they are normally monitored on a quarterly basis for regu-

lar irrigation water and other uses. More attention is given to them when using sewage

effluents, particularly if contamination with industrial wastewater discharges is suspected.

The E. coli count and Intestinal Nematodes are the most satisfactory indicators for wastewa-

ter use in agriculture and public health. They comply with the current standard according

to intended uses taken in consideration that reclaimed water is chlorinated before being

discharged to receiving bodies. The total dissolved solid is one of the most important agri-

cultural water quality parameters and it ranges from 552 mg/l for Aqaba treatment plant to

1877.18 mg/l for Lajjoun treatment plant. In conclusion, most of the reclaimed water qual-

ity produced in Jordan is suitable for restricted irrigation (Hashemite kingdom of Jordan,

WAJ, WREU, 2011).


TAble 9: reClAiMeD WATer QUAliTy iN jorDAN for The yeAr 2011

Treatment plant e. Coli Po4 T-N TDS TSS CoD boDf boD5 ph

MPN/100 ml

mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l Unit

Irbid 208971 19.58 96.49 1064.73 87.64 183.77 34.18 8.13

Fuheis 11388 19.38 20.41 980.64 100 134.77 5.1 4 7.94

Wadi Arab 45121 17.8 46.27 984.77 22.73 88 19.98 8.05

Abu Nuseir 5 14.59 11.45 1084.61 8.68 58.79 6.98 7.64

Jerash 277353 44.86 138.65 1408.36 106.14 412.86 76.55 7.86

Salt 14620 18.07 24.08 827.73 55.82 88.77 7.73 7.95

Tal Mentah 4985 36.1 137.55 1877.18 97.77 179.36 35.18 6.87

Samra 18 15.84 20.17 1109.82 17 71.09 9.91 7.85

Baqa 1027803 12.95 44.55 1169.34 33 109.52 49.5 8.09

Tafilla 2244119 36.15 87.97 796.73 97.86 214.82 49.55 8

Lajoun 22658 42.48 177.5 1491.18 284.09 547.73 58.36 8.17

Wadi Esseir 38 29.54 78.57 864.73 45.09 120.09 8.91 7.87

Aqaba Mech 6 5.91 8.27 552.09 5.45 26.09 3 4.65 7.89

Wadi Hassan 11 19.58 6.59 1107.82 8.14 56.73 7.2 7.76

Kufranjah 2150640 39.95 133.57 1077.27 96.32 331.18 48.09 8.1

Maan 12 10.38 11.34 1054.64 11.64 46.45 4 8.39

Wadi Mousa 3 15.97 12.2 835.55 7.35 47 3.68 8.02

Ramtha 57 11.27 5.21 1393.45 12.5 56.41 3.64 8.09

Madaba 254722 2.96 16.86 1178 13.05 58.14 8.64 8.03

Karak 3060615 29.3 126.6 963.64 190.55 393.95 39.55 7.92

Jiza 2130 24.42 66.91 1271.45 14.91 76.82 7.82 8

Ekeider 422582 42.17 154.76 1241.45 283.18 556.09 83.91 8.1

Mafraq 2628923 41.33 138.73 1032.36 125.09 364.18 68.36 7.98

Aqaba Natural 51293 19.2 60.63 767.82 221.73 340.55 30.18 8.08

Source: hashemite kingdom of jordan, WAj, WreU, 2011


10.3.12 Treatment Plant Efficiency

The efficiency of 24 treatment plants is different from one plant to another, measured

by bOD5 as an indicator of removing dissolved organic matter from treated sewage; it

ranges from 80% for Mafraq T.P to 99% for Wadi Hassan T.P. The average annual bOD5 and

other water quality parameters for the wastewater treatment plants & the operation sys-

tems used in Jordan are shown in Figure 22 and Figure 23. They clarify that the activated

sludge system is very effective in removing dissolved organic matter and WAJ can rely on

it as a first choice and after that the trickling filter followed by wastewater stabilization

ponds (Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, DWS

and WREU, 2011).

figure 22: Annual boD5 for Wastewater Treatment Systems; Source: hashemite kingdom of jordan, WAj, WreU, 2011


figure 23: Annual Water Quality Parameters for Wastewater Treatment Systems; Source: hashemite kingdom of jordan, WAj, WreU, 2011

10.3.13 Treated Wastewater Quantity

The wastewater quantity flows to treatment plants was about 117 MCM in 2010 and 115

MCM in 2011 (Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, DWS and WREU, 2011). It decreased

by 2% from the year 2010 due to the shortage of water flowing to these treatment

plants. Moreover, about 72.5% of wastewater quantity was treated at Sammra T.P. The

discharged and used quantity of reclaimed water from all treatment plants was about

111 MCM in 2011 (Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, DWS and WREU, 2011). In fact,

reclaimed water has long been recognized as a valuable resource for use in irrigation and

other intended uses and is considered an important water resource according to Jordan

Water Strategy. WAJ has a goal of attaining total water reuse by having highly treated ef-

fluent to be used in the intended aspects.

how well are we doing? In Jordan, the government’s policy is to achieve and improve

wastewater collection, conveyance, treatment, and disposal and reuse systems. WAJ so

far has provided the service on sewer and treatment systems; 26 treatment plants exist

all over the country, working 24 hours a day and the number of connections carried out is

275,243. At the end of 2011, 68.8% of these connections flowed to Samra T.P. (Hashemite


kingdom of Jordan, WAJ, DWS and WREU, 2011). Water reuse is now a part of Jordan’s

overall water resources balance and it is also a tool used for protecting water resources,

coastal areas and receiving bodies from pollution effects. Planned reclaimed water reuse

has been practiced in Jordan and some pilot projects have been launched or are under

study for irrigation. Other intended uses are being taken in consideration given that the

percentage of the public acceptance has increased over the last ten years. Moreover, a

crop monitoring programme carried out by Jordan’s FDA confirmed that use of treated

wastewater in Jordan meets the health-based target recommended by the WHO Guide-

lines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater (Abdel-Jabbar and others, 2011).

10.3.14 Conclusions

Jordan’s experience in quality aspects of reclaimed water and standards gives an excel-

lent example of how developing countries can proceed and take full advantage of re-

claimed wastewater as a valuable resource, depending on numerical standards for in-

tensive monitoring, control and legal enforcement. The first step toward capturing this

important resource was implementing and enforcing reclaimed water standard 893 in

2006. This standard varies with the type of application and the overall risk perception

and there will be different water quality requirements and criteria for each aspect. gener-

ated reclaimed water quality from most of the treatment plants in Jordan is suitable for

restricted irrigation. Public acceptance and awareness are a major issue with all reuse

activities and can be crucial to all project outcomes. generally, acceptance of water rec-

lamations has increased over the past two decades, along with a growing familiarity with

the subject. In an effort to integrate reclaimed water resources in national water plan-

ning, the government of Jordan, with support from USAID and gIZ, has been implement-

ing several direct water reuse activities that seek to demonstrate that reclaimed water

reuse can be reliable, commercially viable, socially acceptable, environmentally sustain-

able and safe for the past 10 years, , implementing several direct water reuse activities

that seek to demonstrate that reclaimed water reuse can be reliable, commercially viable,

socially acceptable, environmentally sustainable and safe.

The report is available for download at http://www.ais.unwater.org/ais/pluginfile.

php/356/mod_page/content/93/jordan_ulimat_icid_ahma_2012-1.pdf


10.4 National Report of Iran

Submitted by Massoud Tajrishy, Associate Professor, Environment and Water Research

Center (EWRC), Departement of Civil Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran,

Iran.

10.4.1 The Situation in Iran

Iran covers a total area of about 165 million hectares. 52% of the country consists of

mountains and deserts and some 16% of the country has an elevation of more than

2,000 m above sea level. The Central or Interior Plateau is located in between two moun-

tain chains and covers over 50% of the country. It is partly covered by a remarkable salt

swamp (kavir) and partly by areas of loose sand or stones with stretches of better land

near the foothills of the surrounding mountains. The climate is one of great extremes due

to its geographic location and varied topography. The average annual rainfall is 230 mm,

while rate of evaporation annually exceeds 2,000 mm. Approximately 90% of the country

is arid or semi-arid and located in the interior and far south which is characterized by

long, warm and dry periods, lasting sometimes over seven months. About 23% of the rain

falls in spring, 4% in summer, 23% in autumn and 50% in winter as snowfall.

Of the average annual rainfall volume of 417 bCM, an estimated 70% evaporates before

reaching the rivers. The total long-term total renewable water resources are estimated at

130 bCM, of which about 13 bCM are external water resources. Internal renewable water

resources are estimated at 117 bCM. Surface runoff represents a total of 92 bCM, of which

5.4 bCM come from drainage of the aquifers, and groundwater recharge is estimated at

about 49.3 bCM, of which 12.7 bCM are obtained from infiltration in the river bed, giving

an overlap of 18.1 bCM. Dams have always played an important role in harnessing pre-

cious Iranian water reserves and the long-term objective of Iran’s water resources devel-

opment plan is based on the control and regulation of water resources through dams.

In 2006, 94 large storage dams with a total capacity of 31.6 bCM were operating and 85

large dams with a capacity of 10 bCM were under construction. In 2002, the total installed

gross desalination capacity (design capacity) was 590 521 m3/day or almost 215.5 million

m3/year. The desalinated water produced was around 200 million m3 in 2004.

In 2004, the total agricultural, municipal and industrial water withdrawal was estimated

at about 93.3 bCM, of which 40.0 bCM from surface water, 53.1 bCM from groundwater


(qanats and wells) and 0.2 bCM desalinated water. groundwater depletion is estimated at

4.8 bCM/year. Most of the overexploitation happens in the central basins where less sur-

face water is available. Land subsidence, salt intrusion and lowering of the water table are

among the most prominent effects. Estimates suggest the water levels in Iranian aquifers

have declined by an average of nearly half a metre every year over the last 15 years. Total

surface water and groundwater withdrawal represents almost 70% of the total actual

renewable water resources. Use of non-conventional sources of water is minimal. The

treated wastewater is said to be indirectly used in agriculture. In some towns, although in

a limited form, raw wastewater is used directly for irrigation resulting in some health-re-

lated problems. groundwater discharge (through wells, qanats and springs) varied from

less than 20 bCM/year in the early 1970s to over 74 bCM/year at the beginning of the

present millennium. The number of wells during that period increased fivefold, from just

over 9,000 to almost 45,000.

The cultivable area is estimated at about 37 million ha, of which 20 million ha are irrigated

and 17 million ha are dryland. Of this irrigated area, 6.5 million ha consists of annual

crops, 2 million ha are under horticultural crops and about 6.2 million ha are under annu-

al dryland crops, while the remaining are fallow. Agriculture is the main water withdrawal

sector, with 86 bCM in 2004, whose part of the total water withdrawn remains identical

compared to 1993 (around 92%). Municipal and industrial water withdrawal amount to

6.2 and 1.1 bCM respectively. About 54% of water utilization in this sector is from ground-

water resources and the remaining amount is from surface waters. Agricultural land avail-

ability is not a major constraint. The major constraint is the availability of water for the

development of these lands. Crop yields on irrigated land, although generally 2 to 3 times

higher than on rain-fed land, are still on the low side by international standards. Water

shortage and soil salinity are mentioned among the main causes of this yield gap. Out

of all water used in agriculture, about 100 million tons of food materials are produced in

2008. Economic value per cubic metre is around 1 kg/m3.

In 1995, the average price of water delivered to farmers by the government was $US0.2

to 0.8 per 1,000 m3, while the cost of groundwater withdrawal was $US5 to 9 per 1,000

m3 and the cost for regulating surface water in existing projects was $US 3 to 5 per 1,000

m3. This means that the government heavily subsidized delivered water, which is prob-

ably one of the main reasons for the low irrigation efficiency throughout the country.

Agriculture plays a significant role in the national economy; more than 33% of the labour

force was engaged in the agricultural sector. The latter accounted for 25% of the gNP and


more than 25% of export (except oil) income is from agriculture in terms of value. The

sector produces more than 80% of the food requirement of the country, and 90% of the

raw material of agro industries is maintained by this sector. Iran ranks amongst the top

seven countries in producing 22 important agricultural products.

Total population is about 72 million (2010), of which less than 40% are living in rural areas.

The annual demographic growth rate was estimated at 3.7% over the period 1980–1990

and decreased to 0.9% over the period 2000–2005. 80% of the total population lives in

urban areas and especially in big cities like Tehran, Mashhad and Isfahan.

10.4.2 Organizational Roles and Responsibilities

According to national law all water bodies (rivers, lakes, etc.) are public property and the

government is responsible for their management. The first water law after the revolution

was approved in 1982. According to this water legislation, three ministries are directly in

charge of water resources management and development. based on this law, allocating

and issuing permits to use water for domestic, agricultural and industrial purposes is the

responsibility of the Ministry of Energy (MOE). This ministry has two responsibilities: en-

ergy supplies and water resources. As far as irrigation is concerned, it is in charge of the

construction of large hydraulic works, including dams and primary and secondary irriga-

tion and drainage canals for the distribution of water.

Within the MOE, the Water Affairs Department (WAD) is responsible for overseeing and

coordinating the planning, development, management and conservation of water re-

sources. The WAD consists of the following sections: Water Resources Management

Company (WRMC), eleven Provincial Water Authorities (PWA), Irrigation and Drainage

Operation and Maintenance Companies (O&M) and Water and Wastewater Engineering

Companies (WWEC). WRMC is the mother company that manages all water sectors within

the MOE except drinking water distribution for rural and urban areas. PWAs are respon-

sible for the water sector in each province including irrigation and drainage development

and operation. Drinking water distribution and wastewater collection is the responsibil-

ity of provincial water and wastewater engineering companies. The National Water and

Wastewater Engineering Company (NWWEC) provides oversight and assistance to ser-

vice providers, in areas such as investment planning, human resources development, and

in the establishment of standardized systems and procedures.


The Ministry of Jahad-e-Agriculture (MOA) is the result of merging ministries; the former

ministries of Agriculture and of Jahad-e-Sazandagi (crusade for construction). It is ap-

pointed to distribute water for agriculture among farmers and responsible for managing

agricultural activities including fishery and forestry. The “Farmers’ House” was established

in order to protect the rights of the farmers. Its role is to streamline and coordinate the

farmers’ activities, including their commitments in the fields of farming, fruit growing,

animal husbandry, hunting, poultry production, supportive industries and so on.

The Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MHME) is responsible for setting drink-

ing water quality standards, as well as monitoring and enforcing the quality control of

drinking water from physical, chemical, biological aspects, from its source to consump-

tion points. Also, these two ministries (MOE and MHME), by using their well-trained and

experienced personnel, laboratories and facilities, could apply the existing national and

international standards for water and wastewater effluents. The Environmental Protec-

tion Organization (EPO) is in charge of water pollution control, preparation of the envi-

ronmental protection policy and the laws, directives and systems necessary for evaluat-

ing the impacts of social and economic development projects, particularly irrigation and

hydropower projects, on the environment and following up their implementation. The

National Economic Council sets the tariff policy for the whole country, with some differ-

entiation across regions.

10.4.3 Service Provision for Urban Water

Up to 1990 the water and sanitation sector was highly decentralized. Most water and

wastewater service provision was the responsibility of municipalities and provinces.

This was changed through a fundamental sector reform in 1990 with the ratification of

the Provincial Water and Wastewater Companies Law of September 1990. In 2008, sixty

companies were responsible for the provision of water and wastewater services. Evenly

spread over Iran’s thirty provinces, each province has one urban and one rural water and

wastewater company (WWC). The 60 companies had 38,000 employees. Only Tehran has

two separate companies for water and sewerage. In all other provinces, water and sanita-

tion services are provided together. The regional water boards provide bulk raw water

through transmission pipelines to the water and wastewater companies, which treat and

distribute it.


The state-owned WWCs are able to manage their day-to-day operations with a measure

of autonomy, where Managing Directors can make most decisions on operations and

staffing within the limits of the centrally authorized staffing levels and with some flexibil-

ity to provide extra compensation to well performing employees. However, the WWCs do

not control their own investment programmes and, therefore, have limited scope to im-

prove investment and operating efficiency and the level and quality of service. Moreover,

the WWCs have to follow an organizational model developed by the NWWEC and cannot

select a model that would be more appropriate for their particular situation.

Water and wastewater companies are responsible for the distribution of water for domes-

tic use in urban and rural areas, for collecting wastewater and also for collecting fees. The

current urban tariff system is based on a fixed fee that depends on the size of the con-

nection pipe, on the type of customer (household or other types), and on a volumetric

charge based on increasing block-tariffs. Sewage bills are currently levied and collected

only in neighborhoods where a network exists, as a percentage of water bills (70%). On

average, the service providers do not recover operation and maintenance costs due to

low tariffs and low bill collection. Many Provincial Water and Sewerage Companies are

incurring significant net losses. Now, the government is implementing a sector strategy

with targets for improved cost recovery and collection and increased efficiency, and at

the same time, removing subsidies and encouraging financing by the private sector.

Water pollution is caused by industrial and municipal wastewater, as well as by agricul-

ture. Concerning municipal wastewater, the bulk of collected sewage is discharged un-

treated and constitutes a major source of pollution to groundwater and a risk to pub-

lic health. In a number of cities without sanitary sewerage, households discharge their

sewage through open rainwater drains. There are also many problems in dealing with

industrial wastes. Major problems include the lack of information about the true amount

of these wastes, lack of treatment and disposal technologies, such as illegal dumping.

Annual level of industrial wastewater is about 1.5 billion cubic meters and less than 30%

of these wastewaters have efficient WWTP’s. Except for a few cases, there is no kind of

mixed wastewater treatment plant in Iran to combine industrial wastewaters with do-

mestic ones.


Less than 40% of the total population have complete and efficient wastewater treatment

plants (WWTPs). The population served by the management of these plants is about 30

million, therefore, less than 40% of the total domestic sludge is being treated completely.

This means that of more than 200,000 cubic meters of daily sludge (2000 tons/day dry

solids) of total fecal, septic and waste excrements sledges, only about 80,000 cubic me-

ters (800 tons) is being digested and/or stabilized daily by different treatment methods.

The most common method of treatment for these sludge is digestion (aerobically and an

aerobically). Lagooning, composting and landfilling are the next methods of treatment.

Mechanical dewatering is usually implemented as a final treatment to reduce the volume

of the stabilized sludge. In a few WWTPs these methods would be applied on the raw

or untreated sludge. The stabilized sludge has been used in many agricultural activities

from the past to present.

Usually, the regional wastewater companies who are responsible for the operation of

these WWTPs, deliver these treated wastes to the local farmers. The risk assessment is un-

dertaken by a research department in the Ministry of Agriculture. Since the 1980s, access

to urban water supply has increased from 75% to 99%. However, a number of challenges

remain. According to the World bank, the sector is affected by “low water use efficiency in

urban and rural uses; limited participation by stakeholders in development planning and

management; large needs for rehabilitation and development of hydraulic infrastructure

for sustainable water usage; problems of pollution caused by the discharge of untreated

wastewater into public waterways and aquifers; and weak institutions involved in the

sector and limited coordination among stakeholders.” (Worldbank, 2005) Still, according

to the World bank it is also characterized by “poor performance of water supply and on-

site wastewater disposal facilities, causing increasing risk for ground and surface water

pollution and health and environmental risks resulting from the discharge and reuse of

untreated effluent for irrigation; limited technical, institutional and financial capacity of

water and wastewater companies; a lack of clarity of institutional responsibilities of sec-

tor entities; and non transparent and inadequate tariff structures and levels.

10.4.4 Wastewater Status and Trends

before the Islamic revolution, wastewater treatment and reclamation was virtually Inon-

existent in Iran (except in the city of Isfahan and in some small systems). A strong effort

was made, only after the 1990s (Table 10). In 2001, there were 39 wastewater treatment


plants (WWTP) with a total capacity of 712,000 m3/day, treating the wastewater pro-

duced by a population of 3.8 million. The wastewater actually treated, was around 130

million m3/year. Some 79 treatment plants, with a total capacity of 1.917 million m3/day,

were under construction and 112 treatment plants with a total capacity of 1.590 million

m3/day were being studied for completion by 2010.

TAble 10: CUMUlATive WASTeWATer ColleCTioN NeTWork, NUMber of WWTPS, AND PoPUlATioN-CoNNeCTeD STATiSTiCS

year length (km) Number of WWTP Population Served

1997 9,978 30 1,959,548

2000 15,654 37 2,327,702

2005 23,473 84 6,001,322

2010 35,500 129 12,977,079

Now, Iran’s 129 municipal wastewater treatment plants cover 13 million inhabitants and

generate more than 2,425,000 cubic meters of treated wastewater per day (Table 11).

Municipal wastewater is mainly domestic and goes through secondary biological treat-

ment. No further treatment is provided due to costs. Out of 129 treatment plants, 51 are

activated sludge, 41 facultative and 33 aerated ponds, two sequential batch reactors, one

wetland and one trickling filters (Table 11).

Out of 3,547.8 MCM sewage produced in 2010, 1,162.3 MCM of wastewater was collected

and only 820.7 MCM was treated. Out of this treated effluent, only 328.2 MCM was used

for mainly irrigation (Table 12). It is estimated, that over 90% of the treated wastewater

effluent from treatment plants across the country is reused in some way; however, much

of it is mixed with freshwater before use, particularly in the suburban areas.

The percentage of population served by drinking water systems, wastewater collection

and wastewater treatment is now 99%, 45% and 35%, respectively. For rural areas, the

percentage of population served by drinking water system, wastewater collected and

treated is 74% and 2%, respectively. These figures still have to improve dramatically be-

fore the end of the fifth Five year Plans (FyP), which started in 2011.


In the literature, there is no comprehensive national inventory of the extent of direct and

indirect use of treated and untreated urban wastewater, the planned use of wastewater

or even data regarding treated and non-treated wastewater used for irrigation. Table 11

represents the most recent compiled summary of government owned operating treat-

ment plants in Iran. Table 13 shows the potential of publicly owned wastewater treat-

ment plant reclamation projects, for agricultural and landscape irrigation and industrial

reuse.

Farmers have worked to manage irrigation with wastewater for several decades. Since

the early 1990s, the general approach has been to treat the wastewater and either dis-

charge it into the environment where it mixes with freshwater flows and is indirectly re-

used downstream, or by mixing it with qanat’s water use to irrigate restricted, relatively

low-value crops. A significant number of indirect users of wastewater are unregulated

and withdraw treated wastewater from downstream points along a surface water source,

after discharge from the wastewater treatment plants. This volume is significant and will

play an important role in meeting future demands for water in Iran.

TAble 11: SUMMAry of WWeC oPerATiNg TreATMeNT PlANTS ChArACTeriSTiCS (2010)

Name of

Water and

Wastewater

Company

No.

Treat-

ment

Plants

Population

Coverage

by WWTP

(Person)

Total Treatment Plant Capacity

(m3/day) Processes

Design Capacity

Constructed Capacity

operating Capacity

1 East Azarbaijan 7 1, 288, 627 239, 647 239, 647 198, 046 AS(6), AS+SBR(1)

2 West Azarbaijan 6 884,957 405,820 181,820 129,937 AL(5), SBA

3 Istahan 20 2,428,210 757,120 757,120 449,219 AS(4), AL(8), L(8)

4 Ardebil 3 178,913 48,300 48,300 27,933 AS(2), AL(1)

5 Alborz 1 80,000 168,000 42,000 15,000 L(1)

6 Ahvaz 1 194,000 52,000 52,000 36,000 AS(1)

7 Ilam 4 145,688 72,000 36,200 21,279 AL(1), L(3)

8 Bushehr 3 154,617 125,500 41,833 34,009 L(3)

9Tehran 9 2,778,853 988,890 540,330 430,159 AS-TF(2), AS

EA(6), AS(1)

10 Chahar Mahal 5 298,129 97,700 54,700 49,314 AS(4), AL


11 North Khorasan 2 125,748 15,600 13,600 14,100 AS, L

12 Razavi Khorasan 4 292,400 52,900 52,900 39,400 AS(1), L(3)

13 South Khorasan 1 45,741 10,500 10,500 7,010 L

14 Khozestan 5 94,956 59,100 47,511 24,711 L(4), AL(1)

15 Zanjan 2 123,708 73,353 39,916 6,505 AS, L

16 Semnan 3 74,400 76,943 76,943 11,200 AL(2), L(1)

17Sistan & Baluchestan

2 156,000 175,148 68,600 18,400 AS, L

18 Shiraz 1 432,000 80,352 80,352 60,480 AS

19 Fars 2 68,800 60,440 18,100 4 AL(2)

20 Qom 2 189,100 69,000 69,000 47,000 AS, AL

21 Qazvin 3 209,842 168,468 46,996 31,353 L(3)

22 Lorestan 4 391,314 254,000 188,000 128,000 L, AS, AL, ANL

23 Kordestan 2 412,249 131,360 115,360 115,360 L, AS

24 Kerman 1 61,000 105,000 15,500 6,900 AS

25 Kermanshah 7 589,514 90,610 90,610 88,694 W(1), AS(4), L(2)

26 Kohgloyeh 1 60,983 44,000 44,000 13,000 AL

27 Golestan 3 29,380 29,200 15,900 9,920 L(2), AS

28 Gilan 2 15,830 31,600 21,600 3,353 AS(2)

29 Mazandaran 5 40,600 189,136 45,736 8,036 AS(4), L(1)

30 Markazi 9 383,441 78,734 78,734 83,160 L(5), AS(4)

31 Mashhad 3 525,000 100,200 100,200 102,000 AL(1), L(2)

32 Hormozgan 1 100,000 117,504 117,504 35,000 AS

33 Hamedan 3 36,087 39,636 39,636 12,624 AS, AL, L

34 Yazd 1 67,104 16,650 16,650 10,066 L

129 12,977,079 5,011,120 3,371,327 2,425,327

Notes: ANl – Anaerobic lagoon ASeA – Activated Sludge (extended Aeration) Tf – Trickling filter AS – Activated Sludge Al – Aerated lagoon l – lagoon (oxidation Pond) Sbr – Sequential batch reactor Wl – Wetlands


TAble 12: SUMMAry of WASTeWATer DiSChArge, ColleCTeD, TreATeD AND reUSeD iN irAN iN 2010 (MillioNS of CUbiC MeTer)

Wastewater Produced 3,547

Wastewater Collected 1,162

Wastewater Treated 820

Wastewater Reused 328

TAble 13: SUMMAry of WWeC WWTP’S hANDeD over To WAD iN 2010

Number of WWTPs 117

Wastewater treatment capacity (m3/d) 2,248,522

No. of WWTPs handed over 54

volume of treated effluent (m3/d) 785,586

Number of WWTPs in negotiation 18

Present wastewater reuse can be summarized as follows (Table 14, 15 and 16):

1. indirect (intentional) potable reuse: From 1000 cities in Iran, only 200 have

wastewater collection networks that are operational or under design and con-

struction. In many cities, wastewater from seepage pits, infiltrates through lay-

ers of the ground ultimately reaching and recharging underground aquifers.

The average distance between the water table and the bottom of these seep-

age pits should be above 20m. because of rapid industrialization and popula-

tion increase, there are small communities and industries within city limits that

draw their water from these underground strata.

2. intentional groundwater recharge for non-potable reuse: This is already

practiced around the major city limits where underground aquifers are re-

charged with the seepage pits. WWTP effluent is used to recharge brackish

groundwater aquifer through streambeds and channels and is used down-

stream through springs and qanats by farmers to irrigate their fields and for

washing purposes.


3. direct use: Direct use of untreated wastewater from sewage outlets, directly

disposed of on land where it is used for crop production, is not a common

scene in Iran. Treated or partially treated wastewater used directly for irriga-

tion without being mixed or diluted is more common. This is practiced in many

plants. There is no exact estimate about the amount used by this method to

irrigate fodders, cereals, fruit trees, or cooked and uncooked vegetables.

4. indirect use: Indirect use of untreated wastewater, where diluted wastewater

is mixed with storm water or small streams or tributaries of larger water bodies

(polluted) are used for irrigation, is very common especially downstream of

urban centres where treatment facilities are inadequate. In this way, a full-scale

self-purification process takes place while effluents are flowing in streams, mix-

ing with the stream water or diluted with qanat waters. This water is quite suit-

able for unrestricted irrigation.

5. Planned direct use: This case, when the reclaimed water has been transported

from the point of treatment to the point of use, without an intervening dis-

charge to waters, is becoming more common, especially in places where drink-

ing water supplies for cities are not adequate (i.e. City of Mashhad during the

recent drought). The planned direct use of reclaimed water is not administered

by the authority responsible for managing wastewater treatment plants, i.e.

WWCE, but is administered by special contract with the WCD and farmers ei-

ther formalizing their rights to use reclaimed water directly or by substitution

of their right.


In Iran, farmers are actively engaged in urban and peri-urban agriculture. Many of these

farmers specialize in market and fresh product gardening that is dependent on irrigation

and they rely on raw or diluted wastewater, when higher quality sources are unavail-

able. Lack of alternative water sources; limited financial resources and capacities of cities

to treat their wastewater; and the socio-economic situation and context of urbanization

which needs food and market incentives that favour food production (especially veg-

etables) in the proximity of cities, creates the conditions for unplanned and uncontrolled

wastewater use.

In many situations farmers would rather use diluted sewage for its fertilizer value, even

though they might have an access to a well or qanat water. This practice can also be

seen in rural communities located downstream of where cities discharge. Experience has

shown that once wastewater reuse is in place and its advantages (availability and fertil-

izer value of sewage) have been realized by the farmers, it is difficult to alter behaviour,

especially if changes have an associated cost.

© or

gani

c nat

ion

flick

r


TAbl

e 14:

PoT

eNTi

Al W

ASTe

WAT

er r

eClA

MAT

ioN

Proj

eCTS

for

Priv

ATe S

eCTo

r

Row

Prov

ince

No.

of

Trea

tmen

t Pl

ants

Mea

n O

pera

ting

Flow

, m3 /d

ay

m3 /d

ayTo

tal

Ope

ratin

g Fl

ow, m

3 /day

volu

me

of R

euse

% o

f To

tal

Type

of

Reus

ePo

tent

ial

of R

euse

1W

est A

zarb

aija

n6

21,6

5644

65-3

2645

130,

000

-<1

-?

2Is

faha

n14

19,6

3144

6-14

6221

275,

000

88,6

0032

LI,

L

3A

lbor

z1

14,8

0014

,800

10,6

4072

A-

4Te

hran

414

,124

4523

-324

8656

,497

-<1

-L

5Ch

ahar

Mah

al5

9,32

026

00-2

7000

46,6

0046

,600

100

A, L

-

6ko

rasa

n Ra

zavi

49,

859

600-

2483

539

,435

-<1

-A

7N

orth

kho

rasa

n2

7,75

070

00, 8

500

15,5

00-

<1-

A, L

8Za

njan

19,

360

9360

9,36

0-

<1-

A

9Si

stan

& b

aluc

hest

an2

4,78

725

74, 7

000

9,57

45,

000

152

A, L

I

10Se

mna

n3

3,81

489

0-89

2011

,442

1,14

310

AA

11Fa

rs3

25,0

6059

00-6

0480

75,1

80-

<1-

A

12q

om2

19,9

1079

95, 3

1824

39,8

1926

,000

65A

, LA

, L

13H

orm

ozga

n1

35,0

0035

000

35,0

00-

<1-

L, I

Note

s: l –

land

scap

e irri

gatio

n

A –

Agric

ultu

ral i

rriga

tion

i – in

dust

rial r

euse


TAble 15: WASTeWATer TreATMeNT PlANT CAPACiTy iN irAN iN 2010

Category

In Operation

No. WWTP 129

Designed Capacity (MCM/yr) 1261

Operating Capacity (MCM/yr) 884

In Design ProcessNo. WWTP 107

Designed Capacity (MCM/yr) 1177

TAble 16: TyPeS of WASTeWATer DiSPoSAl by WWeC’S WWTP

Disposed to River 47

Disposed to River and Potential for Planned Irrigation Use

20

Potential for Planned Agricultural Reuse Only

63

groundwater Recharge Potential 5

10.4.5 Policy Aspects and National Strategy

To cover 2000 kcal per day per person, the overall annual amount of water per person can

only be called sufficient when it exceeds 1,700 m3. The renewable water per capita in Iran

was 1830 m3/a in 1996, but in 2020 will be only 1,200 m3/a. Considering these figures it is

likely that Iran might suffer from a lack of water in future and in fact, in some regions of

the country, water scarcity is already a problem today.

The water resources management policy emphasizes an integrated approach to water re-

source development, by incorporating natural elements of the total water cycle as part of

the principles of sustainable development. based on the country’s perspective on water

resources, in order to control the overexploitation of groundwater resources, the surface


water withdrawal percentage should change from 43% at the present, to 55%. In addi-

tion, the country aims at decreasing the agricultural share from 92% to 87% by increasing

water use efficiency. Water productivity is expected to increase to 1.4 kg/m3 over the next

20 years. The country plans to develop irrigation for another 1.76 million ha in the next

20 years.

The increasing water shortage in the country has forced many decision-making bodies to

consider the reuse of effluent as an appealing option. Among the recent decisions taken

by the Expediency Council were the adoption and implementation of general plans for

recycling water nationwide. The proposed policies and strategies are as follows:

y Fully satisfy the drinking water demand potential from freshwater, prior to any

other use

y guarantee future urban water demands by replacing the agricultural water

rights to using freshwater (from rivers, springs well, etc.), with using treated

effluents

y Improve environmental, hygiene and health conditions, as well as promoting

reuse of treated effluents

y Avoid the use of high quality urban water to create green spaces and instead

allow low quality water for this purpose

y Cut off water supply to industries which have not taken practical measures for

treating and reusing their wastewater

y Expand research projects for the establishment of reasonable standards for the

safe and reliable reuse of wastewater. Replacing freshwater with treated efflu-

ents in agriculture necessitates introducing farmers to the positive and eco-

nomic advantages of using wastewater and consequently, convincing them to

exchange freshwater with effluents. This in itself requires research and study

on the sanitary, economic and environmental impacts of using wastewater for

agriculture and the artificial recharging of groundwater resources.


legislation for Water reuse

In order to ascertain that the policies established for wastewater reuse are followed

properly, satisfactory legislative measures and proper management practices need to

be introduced. The legislation should be developed so that it fits well into the overall

legislative framework of the country, with adequate provisions for all aspects of activities

related to waste water reuse. Legislation and regulations should also have provisions for

all financing, planning, construction and operation aspects of wastewater reuse systems.

Also, legislation should establish water quality standards for various uses and also pro-

vide regulations for discharges into the sewage collection systems.

Standards are set by the Supreme Council for the Protection of Environment with coor-

dination of other ministries. The Water Pollution Prevention Guideline was first drafted in

1984 and then in 1991 the wastewater effluent standard was ratified. The Amendment of

Wastewater Effluent Standard was published in 1994 and in 2007 the first guideline for use

of reclaimed water was published.


10.4.6 Questionnaire Results of Competences on the Safe Use of Wastewater in Irrigation

How are the current knowledge and skills of the pertinent staff in your

What is the importance of this subject for your organization?

Doe ePo MoA Doe ePo MoA

1. Assessment of health risk

Microbial and chemical laboratory analysis

good good Poor very High

very High

High

Epidemiological studiesbasic Poor Poor High High High

quantitative microbial risk assessment - qMRA

basic Poor Poor very High

High High

Setting health-based targets

Excellent Poor basic very High

High High

2. health Protection Measures

Wastewater treatmentgood basic basic very

Highvery High

very High

Non-treatment optionsgood basic basic High Low very

High

3. Monitoring and System Assessment

Monitoring of health protection measures

basic good Poor very High

very High

very High

Wastewater use system assessment

good Poor Poor very High

High High

4. Crop Production Aspects

Components of wastewater harmful to crop production

basic basic basic Low Low very High

Agricultural effects of wastewater irrigation

good basic basic High High very High

Management strategies for maximize crop production

Poor Poor good Low very Low

very High


How are the current knowledge and skills of the pertinent staff in your

What is the importance of this subject for your organization?

Doe ePo MoA Doe ePo MoA

5. environmental Aspects

Components of wastewater harmful to the environment

good good Poor very High

very High

very High

Environmental effects through the agricultural chain

good good Poor High very High

very High

Management strategies for reducing environmental impacts

good good basic High very High

very High

6. Sociocultural Aspects

Cultural and religious beliefs

good basic basic High High High

Public acceptancegood Poor basic very

HighHigh very

High

7. economic and financial Considerations

Economic feasibilitygood Poor basic very

Highvery Low

very High

Financial feasibilitygood Poor Poor very

Highvery Low

High

Market feasibilitybasic Poor Poor very

Highvery Low

High

8 . Policy Aspects

Institutional roles and responsibilities

basic good basic very High

very Low

very High

Laws and regulationsgood good basic High very

Highvery High

Plans and programmesbasic Poor Poor very

HighHigh High

Economic instrumentsgood Poor Poor High very

Lowvery High

Education and social awareness

basic Poor Poor High High very High


11. References

• Abdel-Jabbar, S., andothers, eds. (2011).Towards the Safe Use of Treated Wastewa-

ter: The National Plan for Risk Monitoring and Management System for the Use of Treated

Wastewater in Irrigation: For the Irrigated Areas Upstream and Downstream of the King Talal

Reservoir. Amman: german-Jordanian Programme – Management of Water Resources,

Deutsche gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit gmbH on behalf of the ger-

man Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. Available from http://

star-www.inwent.org/dokumente/bib-2011/giz2011-0481en-ar-treated-wastewater.pdf.

• Agodzo,S.K.,andothers(2003).Useofwastewaterinirrigatedagriculture:country

studies from bolivia, ghana and Tunisia, vol. 2: ghana. Wageningen, The Netherlands:

WUR. Available from http://www.iwe.wur.nl/NR/rdonlyres/E4C8340D-b6b8-4497-94E3-

3bD8CE15DE1E/9226/fh030624gHANAfinal.pdf.

• Amoah,P.,P.Drechsel,andR.C.Abaidoo(2005). Irrigatedurbanvegetableproduc-

tion in ghana: sources of pathogen contamination and health risk elimination. Irrigation

and Drainage, vol. 54, pp. 49-S61. Available from http://192.156.137.192/bitstream/han-

dle/10568/17041/17041.pdf?sequence=1.

• Amoah,P.,andothers(2007).IrrigatedurbanvegetableproductioninGhana:micro-

biological contamination in farms and markets and associated consumer risk groups.

Journal of Water and Health, vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 455-466. Available from http://www.iwapon-

line.com/jwh/005/0455/0050455.pdf.

• Brix,H.(1998).Denmark.InConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment in Europe,

J. vymazal, and others, eds. Leiden, The Netherlands: backhuys Publishers.

• Cofie,O.O.,andP.Drechsel(2007).Waterforfoodinthecities:thegrowingparadigm

of irrigated (peri)-urban agriculture and its struggle in Sub-Saharan Africa. African Water

Journal, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 26-35. Available from http://www.amcow-online.org/docs/jour-

nal/African%20Water%20Journal%20-%202007.pdf.

• Cornish,G.A.,andJ.B.Aidoo(2000)Informalirrigationintheperi-urbanzoneofKu-

masi, ghana: findings from an initial questionnaire survey. Report OD/TN 97. Wallingford,


Uk: HR Wallingford. Available from http://books.hrwallingford.co.uk/acatalog/od_down-

loads/odtn97.pdf.

• Cornish,G.A.,J.B.Aidoo,andI.Ayamba(2001).Informalirrigationintheperi-urban

zone of kumasi, ghana: an analysis of farmer activity and productivity. Report OD/TN 103.

Wallingford, Uk: HR Wallingford. Available from http://books.hrwallingford.co.uk/acata-

log/od_downloads/odtn103.pdf.

• Cornish, G. A., E.Mensah, and P. Ghesquière (1999).Water quality and peri-urban

irrigation: an assessment of surface water quality for irrigation and its implications for

human health in the peri-urban zone of kumasi, ghana. Report OD/TN 95. Wallingford,

Uk: HR Wallingford. Available from http://books.hrwallingford.co.uk/acatalog/od_down-

loads/odtn95.pdf.

• Danso,G., P.Drechsel, andS.C. Fialor (2002). Perceptionsoforganic agricultureby

urban vegetable farmers and consumers in ghana. Urban Agriculture Magazine, vol. 6,

pp. 23-24. Available from http://www.ruaf.org/sites/default/files/Perceptions%20of%20

Organic%20Agriculture.pdf.

• Denny,P.(1997). Implementationofconstructedwetlandsindevelopingcountries.

Water Science Technology, vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 27-34.

• DeutscheGesellschaftfürInternationaleZusammenarbeitandHashemiteKingdom

of Jordan, Ministry of Water and Irrigation (2004). National Water Master Plan of Jordan.

Amman: Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, MWI.

• García,M.,andothers(2008).Acomparisonofbacterialremovalefficienciesincon-

structed wetlands and algae-based systems. Ecological Engineering, vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 238-

243.

• Ghana, Ministry of Local Government, AccraMetropolitan Assembly (1995). Local

government bulletin, No. 19. 1 September 1995. Accra. Available from http://epa.gov.gh/

ghanalex/acts/Acts/LOCAL%20gOvERNMENT%20bULLETIN.pdf.

• GhanaStatisticalService (2002).2000 Population and Housing Census: Summary Re-

port of Final Results. Accra.


• Gijzen,H.J.,andM.Ikramullah(1999).Pre-feasibilityofduckweed-basedwastewater

treatment and resource recovery in bangladesh. Main Report, Comissioned by The World

bank. Delft, The Netherlands: International Institute for Infrastructural, Hydraulic and

Enviornmental Engineering. Available from http://docs.watsan.net/Scanned_PDF_Files/

Class_Code_3_Sanitation/341.9-15750.pdf.

• Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Jordan Institution for Standards and Metrology

(2003). Technical Regulation for Reclaimed Domestic Wastewater. JS893/2002. Amman.

• HashemiteKingdomofJordan,MinistryofWaterandIrrigation(2002).Jordan’s Water

Strategy and Policies. Amman.

• ----------(2009a).MWI Water Budget 2009. Amman.

• ----------(2009b).Water for Life: Jordan’s Water Strategy 2008-2022. Amman. Available

from http://web.idrc.ca/uploads/user-S/12431464431JO_Water-Strategy09.pdf.

• ----------(2010).MWI Annual Report 2010. Amman.

• HashemiteKingdomofJordan,WaterAuthorityJordan,DepartmentofWastewater

Systems (2009). Wastewater Annual Report 2009. Amman.

• HashemiteKingdomofJordan,WaterAuthorityJordan,DepartmentofWastewater

Systems and Water Reuse Environment Unit (2011). Wastewater Sector Annual Report

2011. Amman.

• HashemiteKingdomof Jordan,WaterAuthority Jordan,WaterReuse andEnviron-

ment Unit (2011). Water Reuse and Environment Unit Annual Report 2011. Amman.

• Hussain, I., and others (2002).Wastewater use in agriculture: review of impacts and

methodological issues in valuing impacts. Working Paper, No. 37. Colombo, Sri Lanka:

IWMI. Available from http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Working_Papers/working/

WOR37.pdf.

• Keraita,B.,andothers(2002).Wastewateruseininformalirrigationinurbanandperi-

urban areas of kumasi, ghana. Urban Agriculture Magazine, vol. 8, pp. 11-13.


Available from http://www.ruaf.org/sites/default/files/Wastewater%20Use%20in%20In-

formal%20Irrigation.pdf.

• Keraita,B.,P.Drechsel,andF.Konradsen(2008).Perceptionsoffarmersonhealthrisks

and risk reduction measures in wastewater-irrigated urban vegetable farming in ghana.

Journal of Risk Research, vol. 11, No. 8, pp. 1047-1061.

• Kerri,K.D.(1998).Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants: A Field Study Training Pro-

gram, vol. 1, 4th ed. Sacramento, California: California State University.

• Kramer,A.,andothers (2007).EMWater Guide: Improving Wastewater Treatment and

Reuse Practices in the Mediterranean Countries – A Practical Guide for Decision-Makers. EM-

Water Project, InWEnt – Capacity building International. berlin: Internationale Weiter-

bildung und Entwicklung gmbH. Available from http://www.ppks.net/__downloads/

werbeagentur-referenzen/flyer-broschueren/emwater-guide.pdf.

• Lazarova,V.,andA.Bahri(2008).Waterreusepracticesforagriculture.InWater Reuse:

An International Survey of Current Practice, Issues and Needs, b. Jiménez and T. Asano, eds.

London: IWA Publishing.

• Mara,D.,andS.Cairncross(1989).Guidelines for Safe Use of Wastewater and Excreta in

Agriculture and Aquaculture: Measures for Public Health Protection. geneva: World Health Or-

ganization. Available from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/1989/9241542489.pdf.

• Mensah,E.,andothers(2001).Environmentalconcernsofurbanandperi-urbanag-

riculture: case studies from Accra and kumasi. In Waste Composting for Urban and Peri-

urban Agriculture: Closing the Rural-Urban Nutrient Cycle in Sub-Saharan Africa, P. Drechsel

and D. kunze, eds. Wallingford, Uk: CAbI Publishing; Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI; Rome:

FAO.

• Ongley,E.D.(1996).Controlofwaterpollutionfromagriculture.FAOIrrigationand

Drainage Paper, No. 55. Rome: FAO. Available from http://www.fao.org/docrep/w2598e/

w2598e00.htm


• Qadir,M., ed. (2008). SustainableManagementofWastewater forAgriculture:pro-

ceedings of the First bridging Workshop, 11-15 November 2007, Aleppo, Syria. Aleppo,

Syria: ICARDA; Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI. Available from http://publications.iwmi.org/

pdf/H041867.pdf.

• Qadir,M.,andothers(2007).Agriculturaluseofmarginal-qualitywater—opportuni-

ties and challenges. In Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Wa-

ter Management in Agriculture, D. Molden, ed. London: Earthscan. Available from http://

www.iwmi.cgiar.org/assessment/water%20for%20food%20water%20for%20life/chap-

ters/chapter%2011%20mq%20water.pdf.

• Quiñónez-Diaz,M.D.,andothers (2001).Removalofpathogenicand indicatormi-

croorganisms by a constructed wetland receiving untreated domestic wastewater. Jour-

nal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A vol. 36, No. 7, pp. 1311–1320. Available

from http://lshs.tamu.edu/docs/lshs/end-notes/removal%20of%20pathogenic%20and

-3188529435/removal%20of%20pathogenic%20and%20indicator%20microorgan-

isms%20by%20a%20constructed%20wetland%20receiving%20untreated%20domes-

tic%20wastewater.pdf.

• Raschid-Sally, L., and P. Jayakody (2008).Drivers and characteristics ofwastewater

agriculture in developing countries: results from a global assessment. IMWI Research Re-

port, No. 127. Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI. Available from http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publi-

cations/IWMI_Research_Reports/PDF/PUb127/RR127.pdf.

• Sheikh,B.(2001).Standards, Regulations and Legislation for Water Reuse in Jordan. Am-

man: Hashemite kingdom of Jordan, Ministry of Water and Irrigation, Water Reuse Com-

ponent, Water Policy Support Project.

• Smith,O.B.(2002).OverviewofurbanagricultureandfoodsecurityinWestAfrican

cities. In Advances in Crop–Livestock Integration in West African Cities, O.O. Akinbamijo, S. T.

Fall and O. b. Smith, eds. banjul, The gambia: International Trypanotolerance Centre; Dakar,

Senegal: Institut sénégalais de recherches agricoles; Ottawa, Canada: International Devel-

opment Research Centre. Available from http://www.itc.gm/Downloads/advances.pdf.


• Uleimat,A.A.(2010).Jordan Experience in Watershed Management (Qairwan Spring at

Jarrash Governorate Case Study). Paper presented at the 9th Water Science and Technol-

ogy Association gulf Water Conference. Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, 22-25 March.

• United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division

(2004). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2003 Revision. New york. ST/ESA/SER.A/237.

Available from http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wup2003/WUP2003Re-

port.pdf.

• United Nations Development Program (1998). Capacity assessment and develop-

ment: in a systems and strategic management context. Technical Advisory Paper, No.

3, January 1998. New york. Available from http://mirror.undp.org/magnet/Docs/cap/

CAPTECH3.htm.

• UnitedNationsHumanSettlementsProgramme(2001).Citiesinaglobalizingworld.

global Report on Human Settlement 2001. London: Earthscan. Available from http://

www.unhabitat.org/content.asp?typeid=19&catid=555&cid=5374.

• WorldHealthOrganization(1989).Healthguidelinesfortheuseofwastewaterinag-

riculture and aquaculture. Technical Report Series, No. 778. geneva. Available from http://

whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_778.pdf.

• WorldHealthOrganization,FoodandAgricultureOrganization,andUnitedNations

Environment Programme (2006a). Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and

greywater: Volume I: Wastewater use in agriculture. geneva: WHO. Available from http://

www.who.int/ water_sanitation_health/wastewater/gsuww/en/index.html.

• ----------(2006b).Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater: Vol-

ume II: Wastewater use in agriculture. geneva: WHO. Available from http://www.who.int/

water_sanitation_health/wastewater/gsuww/en/index.html.

11.1 Additional Sources

• Asano,T.,R.G.Smit,andG.Tchobanoglous(1985).Municipalwastewater:treatment

and reclaimed water characteristics. In Irrigation with Reclaimed Municipal Wastewater: A


Guidance Manual, g. S. Pettygrove and T. Asano, eds. Chelsea, Michigan: Lewise Publish-

ers.

• Asano,T.,andA.D.Levine(1996).Wastewaterreclamation,recyclingandreuse:past,

present, and future. Water Science and Technology, vol. 33, No. 10-11, pp. 1-14.

• Bakir,H.(2001).Wastewatermanagementservicesinwaterstressedcountries:guid-

ing principles and options for sustainable development. Paper presented at the 2nd

Asian Conference of Water and Wastewater Management. Tehran, Iran, 8-9 May. Available

from http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsaar/fulltext/hbakir.pdf.

• EuropeanCommission(2011).ToolKitforcapacitydevelopment.ToolsandMethods

Series, Reference Document No. 6. Luxemburg: Office for Official Publications of the Eu-

ropean Communities. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/ensure-aid-

effectiveness/documents/toolkit_cd_en_web_en.pdf .

• FoodandAgricultureOrganization(1997).FAOAquastatIrancountryreport.Rome.

• ----------(2004).Capacitydevelopmentinirrigationanddrainage:issues,challenges

and the way ahead. FAO Water Report, No. 26. Rome. Available from ftp://ftp.fao.org/do-

crep/fao/007/y5524e/y5524e00.pdf.

• ----------(2011).FAOAquastat.Land&Water.Rome.

• ----------(2012)WastewaterdatabaseinAquastat.Rome.Availablefromhttp://www.

fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang.

• Hopper,M.,andE.Boutrif(2007).Strengthening National Food Control Systems: A Quick

Guide to Assess Capacity Building Needs. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. Avail-

able from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1142e/a1142e00.pdf.

• IslamicRepublicofIran,MinistryofEnergy,WaterResearchInstitute(2000).Sedimen-

tation in the Reservoirs of Large Dams in Iran. Tehran.

• Jiménez, B., and others (2010).Wastewater, sludge and excreta use in developing

countries: an overview. In Wastewater Irrigation and Health: Assessing and Mitigating Risk


in Low-Income Countries, P. Drechsel and others, eds. London: IMWI, IDRC, and Earthscan.

Available from http://publications.iwmi.org/pdf/H042601.pdf.

• Jiménez,B.,andT.Asano(2008).Water reclamation and reuse around the world. In Wa-

ter Reuse: An International Survey of Current Practice, Issues and Needs, b. Jiménez and T.

Asano, eds. London: IWA Publishing.

• Mamoudian, S.A., ed. (2008). Iran:water andwastewatermanagement across the

country. In International Water Association Yearbook 2008, International Water Associa-

tion, ed. London: IWA Publishing.

• Pescod,M.B.(1992).Wastewatertreatmentanduseinagriculture.FAOIrrigationand

Drainage Paper, No. 47. Rome: FAO. Available from http://www.fao.org/docrep/t0551e/

t0551e00.htm.

• Qadir,M.,andothers(2010).Wastewaterproduction,treatment,andirrigationinMid-

dle East and North Africa. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, vol. 24, pp. 37-51.

• UnitedStatesofAmerica,UnitedStatesAgencyforInternationalDevelopmentand

Associates in Rural Development Inc. (2001). Standards, regulations and legislation for wa-

ter reuse in Jordan. USAID/ARD Contract No. LAg-I-00-00-00018-00. Amman: Hashemite

kingdom of Jordan, MWI. Available from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACP575.pdf.

• UnitedNations,DepartmentofEconomicandSocialAffairs,DivisionforSustainable

Development (2004). Freshwater and sanitation country profile: the Islamic Republic of

Iran. New york. Available from http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/iran/

Iranwatersanitf.pdf.

• UnitedNations,Educational,ScientificandCulturalOrganization–InstituteforWa-

ter Education (2010). Training and capacity building for the water and wastewater sector

in Iran. Available from http://www.unesco-ihe.org/Project-Activities/Project-Portfolio/

Training-and-Capacity-building-for-the-Water-and-Wastewater-Sector-in-Iran.

• UnitedNationsDevelopmentGroup(2008).UNDGcapacityassessmentmethodolo-

gy: user guide: for national capacity development. New york. Available from http://www.

undg.org/docs/8947/UNDg-Capacity-Assessment-User-guide-Feb-2008-FINAL.doc.


• Vaux,H.,andothers(2005).Water Conservation, Reuse, and Recycling: Proceedings of

an Iranian-American Workshop. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. Avail-

able from http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309092930.

• Winpenny,J.,andothers(2010).Thewealthofwaste:theeconomicsofwastewater

use in agriculture. FAO Water Report, No. 35. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.

Available from http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1629e/i1629e00.htm.

• WorldBank(2005).Iran–NorthernCitiesWaterSupplyandSanitationProject.Report

No. 31984-IR. Washington, D.C. Available from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/

en/2005/04/5788504/iran-northern-cities-water-supply-sanitation-project.

• WorldBank(2004).Iran–AhwazandShirazWaterSupplyandSanitationProject.Re-

port No. 27223-IRN. Washington, D.C. Available from http://documents.worldbank.org/

curated/en/2004/04/3348129/iran-ahwaz-shiraz-water-supply-sanitation-project.

• WorldResources Institute (2006).Water resourcesand freshwaterecosystems: Iran

country profile. Washington, D.C. Available from http://et.climatetrends.org/text/water-

resources/country-profile-87.html.


12. Additional Material

UNW-DPC recently published the 14th issue of its quar-

terly magazine “Capacity Pool” (May 2012), covering the

topic “Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture”. It presents

background information on this issue and includes an in-

terview with partners of the UN-Water Project on the “Safe

Use of Wastewater in Agriculture”.

This issue of the Capacity Pool can be accessed at

http://unwater.unu.edu/file/get/533.

UNW-DPC also recently launched a book on Water and the

Green Economy: Capacity Development Aspects, which in-

cludes new contributions from nine UN-Water members,

partners and programmes involved with the book.

The book can be accessed at http://unwater.unu.edu/

file/get/534.


© U

N-Ph

oto


APPeNDix

* The questionnaire was developed by Javier Mateo-Sagasta of FAO.

*













Adding value in Water-Related Capacity Development

Tel. +49 228 815 0652

[email protected]

www.unwater.unu.edu

UNW-DPC was established in August 2007

Funded by the German Federal Government through the:

Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)

Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation

and Development (BMZ)

UNW-DPC contributes to the International

Decade for Action “Water for Life”

2005-2015

UN-Water Decade Programme on

Capacity Development (UNW-DPC)

United Nations University

UN Campus

Hermann-Ehlers-Str. 10

53113 Bonn, Germany

Adding Value in Water-Related Capacity Development

The UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) is a joint programme of

UN agencies and programmes cooperating within the framework of UN-Water and hosted by the

United Nations University.

Date post:	18-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Mid-Term-Proceedings on Capacity Development ... - UN-Water · 4.1.5 UN-Water Decade Programme on...

Documents