Original paper

Environ Eng Policy (2002) 3: 6773 DOI 10.1007/s100220100044

Focused environmental assessment of greywater reuse in Jordan

Odeh Al-Jayyousi

Water resources in Jordan are characterized by scarcity, variability, and uncertainty. The annual variations in precipitation are quite high; in dry years the amount of precipitation in the northern parts reaches 200 mm while at the shores of the Dead Sea it may reach to 50 mm. In wet years these values may reach 650 mm and 250 mm respectively. The inow of the Yarmouk River one of the main water sources for water in Jordan, uctuated from about 380 MCM prior to 1988/89 to about 200 MCM in 1998/99. The long-term (19281999) records of the Yarmouk inow show a series of dry years followed by a wet year every 810 years. Introduction Jordan's Water Strategy was approved in 1997 along Jordan is an arid country with an average rainfall volume with other water-related policies. The strategy addressed of about 8.4 billion cubic meters of water that falls on approximately 90,000 km2. About 94% of the area receives the following (Anonymous 1997b): less than 200 mm of annual precipitation. Evaporation is Wastewater [and greywater (GW)] shall be managed and estimated to amount to about 90%. A limited percentage of treated to standards that allow its reuse in unrestricted rainfall water appears as surface and groundwater. The agriculture and other non-domestic purposes, including surface drainage system in Jordan is simple and consists of groundwater recharge. two parts; the eastern part drains rainfall into a desert Marginal quality water and brackish water sources shall depression, and the western part drains water towards the be enlisted to support irrigated agriculture. Jordan Rift Valley which ultimately discharges into the Dead Sea as shown in Fig. 1. Efforts to overcome the unsatised water demand During the past 45 years the population has increased (which amounts to about 200 MCM in the year 2000) in ninefold, from about 0.425 million in 1948 to about 5.0 Jordan include water supply enhancement, optimization of million today. The growth in demand in Jordan has led to water use in all sectors, and demand management. Besides the exhaustion of surface water and to the over-abstraction the conventional ways to address this issue through supply of groundwater. By overdrawing its groundwater aquifers, augmentation, many measures were taken to enhance Jordan is losing an irreplaceable supply, increasing water water supply and reduce demand. These include: wastecosts and lowering the water quality. water reuse, desalination, water harvesting, cloud seeding, Jordan's water resources are composed of 743 MCM/ and public awareness (Al-Jayyousi and Mamlouk 2000). It year of surface water (only 505 MCM/year of the is documented that 75 MCM of desalinated brackish water 743 MCM/year is considered usable) and 275 MCM/year in the Central Jordan Valley may be utilized for domestic of renewable groundwater, reaching 1,018 MCM/year of and industrial uses (Anonymous 1995). Many studies have total renewable resources (Anonymous 1997a). In 1997 the proposed different solutions to future water policies in total water used was about 875 MCM. The municipal, in- Jordan (Al-Jayyousi and Shatanawi 1995). Fog collection dustrial, irrigation, and livestock uses amounted to about experiments were carried out to enhance water supply in 235, 37, 591, and 11 MCM respectively. remote areas (Al-Jayyousi and Mohsen 1999). The objective of this paper is to assess the environmental impacts of a GW pilot project in Tala, Jordan during the period 19972000. Abstract This paper aims to assess both the opportunities and constraints for greywater (GW) reuse for irrigation. A case study was conducted for 25 users who used GW for small-scale irrigation for the period 19971999. Laboratory analyses of plant, soil, and GW were conducted. A focused environmental assessment was carried out to determine the viability of GW reuse for irrigation. The study concluded that GW reuse is feasible under specic conditions. Policy implications and recommendations for modications of building code were outlined.
Received: 4 January 2001 / Published online: 15 August 2001 Springer-Verlag 2001 O. Al-Jayyousi Applied Science University, College of Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, Amman 11931, Jordan E-mail: jayousi@go.com.jo

67

Theoretical framework The centralized, large scale approach to water supply, sewerage and stormwater disposal has been described as ``big pipes in and big pipes out'' engineering from the last century (Newman 1993). This paradigm is inappropriate in the modern world and it may take a major catastrophe to convince the engineering community of this (Beder

Environ Eng Policy 3 (2002)

68

Fig. 1. Map of Jordan

1993). Moreover, it is inappropriate to transfer this expensive, wasteful paradigm to developing countries Niemczynowicz 1993). A new paradigm in water management is currently taking place in Jordan. This model is addressing the water shortage by focusing on participatory water management solutions at local level. Local and community-based water resource management models were proposed by Ghai and Vivian (1992) and Ghai (1994). This concept dates back to The Ecologist's Blueprint for Survival (Anonymous 1972), Schumacher's Small is Beautiful (Schumacher 1973) and more recently the Brundtland Commission (WCED 1987). The 1992 Earth Summit and Agenda 21 advocate solutions in water management that are characterized by a combination of government decentralization, devolution to local communities of responsibility for natural resources, and community participation. During the past three decades, the development of water resources in Jordan has been mainly focused on large-scale supply-side water development plans, such as building hydraulic structures in the public sector and exploiting of groundwater in the private. These efforts were meant to increase agricultural production and to meet the demands of a growing urban population. However, these efforts never met the unsatised water demands in urban areas (Al-Jayyousi 2001). Analysis of the role of water in poverty alleviation is evident at the macro-scale. At the national level, agricul-

ture contributes to about 8% of GNP. However, at the local level, the gross margin for urban agriculture in Amman was estimated to be about U.S.$0.72/m2 (Department of Statistics 2000). Greywater (GW) reuse for irrigation in the southern parts of Jordan (Taleh) contributed to about 22% of the household income (INWRDAM 2000). The statistics of poverty in Jordan show that 26% of households in Jordan are below absolute poverty line. The absolute poverty line is about U.S.$270 per month per household (Royal Scientic Society 1998). To have a signicant impact on water and energy use GW reuse needs to be coincidental with water-sensitive garden design, reduced lawn areas and growing food at home and in public open space. GW reuse can result in cost savings (to both the consumer and state water authority), reduced sewage ows and potable water savings of up to 38% when combined with sensible garden design (Water Authority of Western Australia 1993). Policy options for GW reuse may be formulated considering three fundamental factors. These include: water scarcity, water productivity, and the role of GW in poverty alleviation. Regulations should be enforced to ensure social equity, economic feasibility, and environmental sustainability.

Greywater reuse: literature review GW is specically wash water. That is bath, dish, and laundry water excluding toilet and food wastes. When

O. Al-Jayyousi: Focused environmental assessment of greywater reuse in Jordan

dealt with appropriately, GW is a valuable resource for horticulture, agriculture, and home gardening uses. The phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen in GW are excellent sources of nutrition to plants. Dish, shower, sink, and laundry water make up 5080% of residential wastewater. This water may be used for landscape irrigation. The benets of GW recycling include: reduction of fresh water use, effective purication, groundwater recharge, and plant growth. GW reuse can be incorporated in ecological design (www.oasisdesign.net/ content/greywater.htm). By law the use of toilet waste for irrigation is not permitted (www.psu.edu). In 1966, Karagren and Tullander prepared a report on GW entitled: Residential Wastewater. The report aimed to make clear distinctions between blackwater (BW) and GW. GW contains only 1/10 of the nitrogen in BW. Nitrogen (as nitrite and nitrate) is the most serious and difcult-toremove pollutant affecting our potential drinking water. More recently, in the state of New South Wales, Australia, treated efuent from centralized plants has been allowed in urban areas (www.rosneath.com.au). Model guidelines for domestic GW reuse in Australia have also been prepared (Jeppeson 1996). These covered hand basin toilets, primary GW systems (direct subsurface application) and secondary GW systems (mesh, membrane, or sand ltration). Procedures, criteria, and components are specied for the design of individual systems. Separating GW from BW will dramatically reduce the danger posed by pathogens. The organic content typical of GW decomposes much faster than the content typical of BW. The biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of GW constitutes 90% of the total or ultimate oxygen demand (UOD) required for complete decomposition. The BOD for BW is only 40% of the oxygen required. This faster rate of stabilization for GW is advantageous to prevention of water pollution, as the impact of GW discharge generally does not travel as far from the point of discharge as combined wastewater. Options for making safe use of GW as a source for irrigation are many and diverse. A key to successful GW treatment lies in its immediate processing and reuse before it has reached the anaerobic state. The simplest GW treatment consists of directly introducing freshly generated GW into an active, live topsoil environment. Many new technologies have been developed to treat GW. These include Planter soilbox design, and pressure leach chamber.

69
Fig. 2. Methodology of research

sustainability of the project. Both explicit and implicit preferences and needs of the users were recorded. The outcome from this effort was reected in the design of the study questionnaire. Laboratory analysis of soil, GW, and plants were performed to assess the impact of GW reuse in irrigation after about 3 years.

Analysis of results The following analysis is based on eld observations, analysis of samples of GW, tapwater, soil, and plants, and on a questionnaire of 15 GW users. Thirteen families out of 15 (86.6%) separate GW for reuse in irrigation of crops; the rest of the participants (13.4%) do not separate GW. One of the sample does not separate GW due to the insufcient amount of GW that can be collected. The most common source for GW collection in all cases is the kitchen. Some of the families (42.8%) mix GW from the kitchen with laundry rinse water. The volume of GW collected was estimated between 40 and 200 l daily with the average weighted mean of 80 l per day. The percentage of GW collected ranged from 6.5 to 27% from total domestic water billed for the whole year. In summer, the average per capita water consumption, based on a ve-member family, is 50 l per capita per day while in winter it is 38 l per capita per day. These gures for domestic water consumption are below the national yearly average value of 135 l per capita per day. Greywater collection and application The majority of families (84.6%) transfer the separated GW by buckets directly to the garden and only 15.6% do not transfer GW by hand. Respondents consider separation of GW to be easy, but one of the families faced problems in separating GW and they thought it needed a lot of effort plus it may cause annoying smells to neighbors. Only one family stopped separating GW because of the small amount that can be collected. This family can hardly collect 40 l daily, which they believe is not enough to grow crops. The GW separated was generally used immediately but two families reported that they store the GW for short periods before using it for irrigation. The collected GW is usually stored in an open barrel for 1 day or more. On the other hand, one family shifted from pipe separation to manual separation because they experienced negative impacts of smell, water color, and mosquitoes.

Methodology The methodology adopted in this paper is a combination of eld observations, questionnaire, and laboratory analysis of GW, soil, and plants. The outcome of these methods was used to conduct a focused environmental assessment (FEA) as shown in Fig. 2. The following section is a brief description of the components of the methodology. A questionnaire was carried out to document the salient features of the project area and to assess the users' knowledge, attitudes, and practices of GW collection and reuse. Personal interviews were conducted to assess the level of commitment and

Environ Eng Policy 3 (2002)

70

Greywater reuse in agriculture Most respondents (86.6%) used GW for irrigation. The survey revealed that GW was used for cultivating different crops. Some of these families used GW to irrigate fruit trees (olives, plums, peaches, loquat, grapes, apricots, pears, cactus pears), whereas others used it mainly for irrigating olives trees while few families used GW for cultivating vegetables. Only one family used it on ornamentals, and 42.8% used GW to grow aromatic and medicinal plants (thyme, sage, mints). One of the concerns based on our eld observations is that direct GW application to crop stems and foliage may cause negative impacts on plants due to high content of solids, salinity, or TCC. The area planted per household varied considerably. Some families have only 40 m2 of land for planting and only one family owned a plot of over 1 ha planted with olives, grapes, and other trees. The users' preferences for crops were as follows: olive trees, grapes, mint, squash, gs, and cactus. 53.8% of families plant grapes and/or olives, and 23% of families plant mint, sage, and thyme. This analysis shows that the area of Ein-Al Baida is poor in quantity and distribution of rainfall. The volume of rainfall runoff that can be collected for storage is only 2.38 m3 per 100 m2 per year.

are high, but the water quality in terms of EC, SAR is acceptable in the short term. The range of BOD values for GW ranged from 275 to 2287 mg/l. COD values ranged from 680 to 3247 mg/l. The TSS range was between 111 and 1110 mg/l. The pH value of tap water is 8.35 in the project area. However, pH values of the GW show wide variations. Some samples are at a pH higher than 8.5 while the rest of the samples are lower than pH 6.7. The high pH could be due to use of detergents. All families sampled said they use a common liquid detergent, which has a pH of 9. The average SAR of samples 2, 3, 4, and 5 is considered suitable for irrigation for most crops. The average electrical conductivity (EC) of the same samples is 980 lS/cm. This means that the water is suitable for irrigation under most conditions according to FAO standards. Most of the tested GW samples contain some amount of nutrients such as N and Mg. This is an added advantage in the GW treatment and for irrigation. The N content of tomato plants was lower than the allowable range in one location but it was within the optimal range in the second location. Olive samples showed lower N levels than the optimal range. The P content in both crops analyzed was in the optimal range. Similarly, the K content was in the optimal range of the assigned species. The Mg content of both tomato and olive plants irrigated with GW was higher than that reported as the optimal level for the Environmental impacts Most of the families in Ein Al-Baida are low income. Their above crops. Zn showed lower levels in both tomatoes and average monthly income ranges from U.S.$100 to 500. The olives when irrigated with GW. These variations are attributed to soil conditions and other site-specic reasons respondents use liquid detergents for dish washing and some use powder detergents of brand names for clothes rather than due to the irrigation water quality. The soil samples from different locations at Ein Alwashing. It is important to note that application of GW was for about 3 years (1997-2000). This means that few Baida showed that the pH ranged from 7.6 to 8.0 and this impacts if any are expected to appear over this time pe- was typical for most Jordanian soils. The EC of soil from different locations ranged from 0.93 to 6.75 dS/cm with a riod. Samples of tap water, GW, soil, and plant leaves were median of 12 dS/cm. The organic matter in the soils was in the range of 3.25%. The SAR is low and ranged from collected and analyzed to investigate any indications of 1.54 to 5.59. impacts from using GW for irrigation. The results of Laboratory analysis of plants showed that the contents GW laboratory analysis are shown in Table 1. The gure reveals that the content of organic matter and detergents of N and K where below the lower normal limits whereas
Table 1. Laboratory analysis of GW

Parameter pH EC MBASa TDS TSS BOD5 COD FOGb Na Ca Mg SAR Cl T.Kj.N TCC TTCCc

Unit SU lS/cm mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l MPN/100 ml MPN/100 ml

Sample number 1 9.83 533 1.2 288 35 12 90 2 38 40 14 1.3 71 3 310+03 110+02 2 6.6 1135 170 956 468 733 1176 135 202 45 13 6.8 88 22 510+08 310+07 3 8.75 914 153 968 111 275 680 7 150 79 4 4.5 69 3 210+04 910+03 4 5.37 1045 89 2044 352 1921 2892 57 132 63 27 3.5 88 37 210+09 210+08 5 6.7 829 45 1294 1110 2287 3247 230 51 73 27 1.3 75 32 510+07 310+06 6 9.2 457 0.4 234 13 12 24 <2 27 33 17 1 45 3

910+02 21010

O. Al-Jayyousi: Focused environmental assessment of greywater reuse in Jordan

the other nutrients P, Ca, Zn were within the normal range. Table 2. Stakeholders' list and impact matrix The low N could be due to the presence of microorganisms Impact Issue that compete for this limited N source, or acidication of media, which resulted in lowering of the N content. GW quantity The quantity of GW collected

Focused environmental assessment (FEA) To assess the environmental impact of GW reuse, an FEA was conducted. Impact scoping is dened by Ross (1987) as a process for identifying and assessing priority for the issues associated with a proposed action. The components of impact scoping include (1) identication of concerns and interests, (2) evaluation of issues, and (3) assigning of priorities to the issues that warrant further investigation and elimination of those that do not. Another paradigm considers impact scoping as a tool in the EIA process. Beanlands and Duinker (1983) rened the concept of analytical impact scoping and considered the term scoping to refer to the design of the assessment portion of the EIA. Beanlands and Duinker (1983) argued that social scoping provides a guide to the areas of impact perceived by society to be important. Ecological scoping, on the other hand, includes the identication and assessment of valued ecosystem components (VECs). The determination and judgments of the signicance of impacts direct the scope of the EIA. Beanlands (1988) elaborates on scoping signicance that often inuences impact scoping: (1) primary concern for human health and safety, (2) loss of commercial production (and species), (3) loss of species or lands of recreational or aesthetic importance, (4) concern for rare or endangered species, and (5) loss of critical habitats that precludes future production. The FEA process, as shown in Fig. 3, was developed by Kennedy (1991). The FEA encourages the early identication of impacts through three stages of impact documentation and review. The rst stage is termed the impact identication stage, which represents early problem and/or issue identication. This step is the most important impact scoping effort in the FEA. The second stage is the assessment phase. The activities in this stage include the organization of impact statements and pathway diagrams as well as the validation and determination of the importance of the impacts. The nal stage is impact management planning. This includes impact monitoring and mitigation planning. Figure 3 shows the methodology adopted for FEA through three distinct stages as outlined below:

GW odor Impact on plants Impact on sale Impact of ies People stop separation of GW

is small There is some odor from GW Some plants lost leaves/color There is impact on sale There are some ies/mosquitoes Some users stop separating GW

71
Table 3. Impact matrix for further analysis

Impact Quantity of GW is small Effect of ies and mosquitoes Effect on plants Effect of odor Effect of detergents Effect of storage

Level of impact (high/moderate/low) Low Low Low Low High High

The following input was collected through the study team eld observation at the beginning of the study. Table 2 shows the stakeholders' list and impact matrix. As a result of eld observation and interviews with beneciaries, the above-mentioned impacts and issues were documented through a collaborative consultation with users. As a result of stage 2 mentioned above, Table 3, which includes an impact matrix for further analysis, was developed. The input matrix contains baseline data which represents the quality of water, plants, and the environment prior to or without GW reuse. These data were collected using laboratory analysis of water, soil, and plants. In this stage, the study team dened the following impact hypothesis:

Hypothesis GW is a potential water source for irrigation if appropriate measures are taken. Validation and documentation The hypothesis was validated and documented through laboratory analysis of GW, tap water, soil, and plants. The output of this stage is the determination of valued ecosystem components. These include two components, soil and plants. With respect to soil, a study of the longterm accumulation of salts is needed. For plants, no major effects were found in the short term. In terms of impact management planning, three main tasks are required. These include:
1. Identify mitigation measures, which include type of collection and storage of GW, effective irrigation techniques, type of plants, and irrigation management. 2. Recommend research that aims to assess and develop environmentally friendly detergents, develop GW collection systems, and assess the use of GW in toilet ushing, horticulture, landscape, and irrigation.

Fig. 3. Components of focused environmental assessment

Environ Eng Policy 3 (2002)

3. Assess residual impacts of GW with respect to odor and is the sanitary wastewater emanating from buildings. Thus, standard 389 will apply in regulating use or disposal of accumulation of salts. treated or raw GW. Three policy options may be developed for possible The mitigation measures include the following four major implementation of GW reuse. These include: components:

Mitigation plans
1. Enforcement of use of appropriate detergents 2. Limit irrigation to salt-tolerant crops and landscape needs 3. Pre-treatment of GW

72

Monitoring plans
1. Standardize monitoring of quality of GW and soil 2. Assess the sustainability of the system

1. Allowing GW reuse to be applied by the local communities in unsewered areas with additional monitoring by Local Government 2. Permitting and encouraging GW reuse in both sewered and unsewered areas 3. Incorporating active promotion of reclaimed water (treated wastewater) through appropriate technology.

The level of treatment recommended is secondary plus ltration and pathogen reduction. The ltration is required to further reduce suspended matter thereby making Residual impacts pathogen reduction via chlorination more effective. Pathogen reduction by disinfection (e.g. chlorination) or 1. Assess the level of toxicity in plants detention (e.g. lagoons) is required. 2. Measure the impact of odor and/or ies GW reuse is being studied in Jordan to optimize water Research priorities use. However, people have to be convinced to adapt to these water use patterns. This requires the enhancement of 1. Develop environmentally friendly detergents 2. Improve local technologies for GW reuse, collection, the social adaptive capacity, which refers to the set of norms and attitudes of people to coping with a water and treatment decit. This means people's ability to harness technology, 3. Measure the impact of crops on human health. to accept institutional changes, and adapt to new consumption patterns. Specically, the basic recommendations are: Recommendations The policy implications of GW collection, treatment, and 1. GW reuse for irrigation must be practiced with care; reuse are linked to building codes and institutional arGW should be kept off foliage by allowing GW to soak rangements, and to law enforcement. into soil under the plant. It is recommended to use a Collection of the GW from houses and from institumulch layer in the rows to help in the ltering action. tional buildings require modication of existing building 2. GW should be rotated with fresh water to leach out any codes that are related to construction of sanitary collecharmful build up. tion systems. The use of GW for irrigation should be 3. It is recommended to avoid chlorine bleach since it may regulated so that public health and environment protecnegatively affect foliage. It is also advisable to use biotion concerns are properly addressed. Specically, in degradable soaps. volume 19 of the Building Codes for Sanitary Disposal in 4. To avoid side effect of sodium, the use of potassiumBuildings (BCSD), which was issued in 1988, both wastebased soap is recommended. water and GW are collected in the same sewer. This im5. GW storage should be restricted unless proper treatplies that GW cannot be separated from wastewater under ment is applied. current BCSD. Many standards and institutions exist for monitoring References wastewater in Jordan. The Water Authority of Jordan Al-Jayyousi O (2001) Capacity building for desalination in Jordan. (WAJ) issued in 1994 ``Regulations for Disposal of Paper presented at Desalination Conference, Tunis, Djerba, Wastewater to Public Sewers by Industry and Commerce''. October 2000. Int. J Desalination, in press The Ministry of Heath operates under the ``Public Heath Al-Jayyousi O, Mamlouk R (2000) Expert knowledge-based system for Law'' and can control all activities in Jordan that could evaluating water conservation programs in Jordan using fuzzy sets. In: IEEE Proceedings on Computer Simulations and Modelhave possible impacts on public health, including moniing, Philadelphia University, Amman, Jordan, 24 August 2000. toring safety of water, food, and work environment. The IEEE, New York, pp. 136142 Ministry of Health implements the general guidelines of Al-Jayyousi O, Mohsen M (1999) Evaluation of fog collection in the United Nations World Health Organization with reJordan. J Wat Environ Manage 13:195199 Al-Jayyousi O, Shatanawi M (1995) An analysis of future water gard to control of water and wastewater quality. The policies in jordan using decision support systems. Int J Wat standard 202 is specic for disposal of industrial efuents. Resources Dev 11(3):315330 Limits of wastewater quality in case of reuse for irrigation The Ecologist (1972) Blueprint for survival. The Ecologist 2 (1):143 are mentioned. All parameters of concern such as BOD, Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) (1995) The study on brackish groundwater desalination in Jordan. JICA, Tokyo, COD, detergents, and TCC are not controlled for irrigation Japan reuse. Therefore, there is no need to suggest modication Irrigation (MWI) (1997a) Annual Report. of the 202 to suit GW reuse or accidental disposal. Stan- Ministry of Water andand Irrigation (MWI), Amman, Jordan Ministry of Water dard 389 applies to treated domestic wastewater. GW can Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI) (1997b) Jordan's water legally be considered as sewage efuent because its origin strategy. Ministry of Water and Irrigation, Amman, Jordan

O. Al-Jayyousi: Focused environmental assessment of greywater reuse in Jordan

Beanlands G (1988) Scoping methods and baseline studies in EIA. In: Wathern P (ed) Environmetal impact assessment theory and practice. Unwin Hyman, London, pp 5288 Beanlands GE, Duinker PN (1983) An ecological framework for environmental impact assessment in Canada. Institute for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia Beder S (1993) Pipelines and paradigms: the development of sewerage engineering. Austr Civil Eng Trans CE35 (1) Department of Statistics (DOS) (2000) Workshop on Urban Agriculture. Department of Environmental Statistics, Amman, Jordan Ghai D (ed) (1994) Development and environment: sustaining people and nature, (special issue). Dev Change 25(1) Ghai D, Vivian J (eds) (1992) Grassroots environmental action: people's participation in sustainable development. Routledge for UNRISD, London Islamic Network for Water Resources Development (INWRDAM) (2000) Evaluating of permaculture and greywater reuse project, Tala, Jordan, November, 2000. Amman, Jordan Jeppeson B (1996) Model guidelines for domestic greywater reuse for Australia, Research Report 107. Urban Water Research Association of Australia, Melbourne

Kennedy CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment assessment process: A new approach to impact scoping for environmental assessments. PhD thesis, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada Newman PWG (1993) Prioritising urban water research. In: Urban Water Research Forum in Australian. Water and Wastewater Association Federal Convention, Gold Coast Niemczynowicz J (1993) Water management and ecotechnology towards 2020. In: Workshop on Sustainable Urban Water Systems and Ecotechnology, ISTP/RADG, Murdoch University, Perth, 18 November Ross WA (1987) Scoping in Canadian environmental assessment reviews. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Seminar on EIA, Warsaw, Poland, 2125 September 1987 Royal Scientic Society (RSS) (1998) Poverty and unemployment in Jordan. September 1998. Amman, Jordan Schumacher EF (1973) Small is beautiful: a study of economics as if people mattered. Blond and Briggs, London Water Authority of Western Australia (WAWA) (1993) What is wastewater? In: Wastewater 2040, Perth WCED (1987) Our common future. report of the world commission on environment and development. Oxford University Press, Oxford

73