RESEARCH PROGRAM ON Water, Land and Ecosystems Research Reports The publications in this series cover a wide range of subjects—from computer modeling to experience with water user associations—and vary in content from directly applicable research to more basic studies, on which applied work ultimately depends. Some research reports are narrowly focused, analytical and detailed empirical studies; others are wide-ranging and synthetic overviews of generic problems. Although most of the reports are published by IWMI staff and their collaborators, we welcome contributions from others. Each report is reviewed internally by IWMI staff, and by external reviewers. The reports are published and distributed both in hard copy and electronically (www.iwmi.org) and where possible all data and analyses will be available as separate downloadable files. Reports may be copied freely and cited with due acknowledgment. About IWMI IWMI’s mission is to improve the management of land and water resources for food, livelihoods and the environment. In serving this mission, IWMI concentrates on the integration of policies, technologies and management systems to achieve workable solutions to real problems—practical, relevant results in the field of irrigation and water and land resources. IWMI Research Report 147 Urban Wastewater and Agricultural Reuse Challenges in India Priyanie Amerasinghe, Rajendra Mohan Bhardwaj, Christopher Scott, Kiran Jella and Fiona Marshall International Water Management Institute (IWMI) P O Box 2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka i The authors: Priyanie Amerasinghe is a Senior Researcher - Biomedical Sciences and Head of the Hyderabad Office of the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) in Andhra Pradesh, India; Rajendra Mohan Bhardwaj is a Senior Scientist at the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in New Delhi, India; Christopher Scott is Associate Professor in the School of Geography and Development, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy at the University of Arizona, USA, and serves as Co-Director of AQUASEC (Center of Excellence for Water Security); Kiran Jella is Scientific Officer (GIS and Remote Sensing) at the Hyderabad Office of IWMI in Andhra Pradesh, India; and Fiona Marshall is a Senior Lecturer (SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, School of Business, Management and Economics) at the University of Sussex in Brighton, United Kingdom. Amerasinghe, P.; Bhardwaj, R.M.; Scott, C.; Jella, K.; Marshall, F. 2013. Urban wastewater and agricultural reuse challenges in India. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 36p. (IWMI Research Report 147). doi:10.5337/2013.200 / water management / wastewater irrigation / wastewater treatment / sewage / irrigated sites / water quality / water use / water supply / irrigated farming / agriculture / crop production / drinking water / health hazards / sanitation / households / living standards / income / case studies / GIS / India / ISSN 1026-0862 ISBN 978-92-9090-765-7 Copyright © 2013, by IWMI. All rights reserved. IWMI encourages the use of its material provided that the organization is acknowledged and kept informed in all such instances. Front cover photograph shows two women watering a spinach plot with wastewater in peri-urban Hyderabad, India (photo credit: Priyanie Amerasinghe). Please send inquiries and comments to IWMI-Publications@cgiar.org A free copy of this publication can be downloaded at www.iwmi.org/Publications/IWMI_Research_Reports/index.aspx Acknowledgements The roots of this report and many of its data are found in a review carried out by Winrock International India (WII) for IWMI’s Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, in collaboration with the Institute for Studies and Transformations, Ahmedabad, India; Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India; Eco Friends in Lal Bangla, Kanpur, India; Spatial Decisions in New Delhi, India; and Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA) in Mumbai, India. The authors extracted salient and pertinent information from the review, updated data and added new information from the research carried out by IWMI and its partners, government institutions and other studies. The authors would like to acknowledge the external and internal reviewers who provided valuable inputs which helped improve the final version of this report. Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations vi Summary vii Introduction 1 Study Sites and Methods 5 Results 6 Valuing Wastewater Use in Agriculture 8 Case Studies: In-depth Analysis 12 Discussion 22 References 25 v v Acronyms and Abbreviations ADB Asian Development Bank ASP Activated Sludge Process BOD Biological Oxygen Demand COD Chemical Oxygen Demand CoI Census of India CPCB Central Pollution Control Board ECW East Calcutta Wetlands FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GAP Ganga Action Plan mg milligram/s μg microgram/s mld million liters per day mly million liters per year MPN Most Probable Number NRCD National River Conservation Directorate RS Remote Sensing RQ Risk Quotient SAR Sodium Adsorption Ratio STP Sewage Treatment Plant WHO World Health Organization vi Summary Urban wastewater management has become a to Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), challenge in India as infrastructural development to 80% of the pollution of the national surface and regulat ions have not kept pace with waters. The way forward will have to be built population growth and urbanization. Annually, on further investments in treatment capacity more and more people are moving into cities, for septage collected from on-site sanitation and the figures are expected to reach about 600 units, and in particular for industries to avoid million by 2030 making India more peri-urban interference in domestic and industrial waste than rural. Already, there is enormous pressure streams. Reuse could offer business opportunities on planners to provide utility services, and water for cost recovery, while in smaller towns options supply is a priority, especially where peri-urban like riverbank filtration, reed bed technologies and water is exported formally or informally to fulfill phytoremediation should also be explored to turn city requirements. At the same time, the urban the waste stream into a resource. From the data return flow (wastewater) also increases, which is set used for this study, it is evident that over 1.1 usually about 70-80% of the water supply. million ha could be irrigated if rendered safe for This study attempted to analyze the current use. status of wastewater generation, its uses and The major users of wastewater in the livelihood benefits especially in agriculture, study sites include growers of cereal (like rice), based on national data and case studies from horticultural and fodder crops and aquaculture Ahmedabad, New Delhi, Hyderabad, Kanpur and (mostly in East Calcutta Wetlands [ECW] and also Kolkata. in Delhi), and to a lesser extent floriculturists. In The chal lenge of the growing Ind ian Delhi and Kanpur, treated water was issued by economy is that, in many cities, the wastewater farmers for agricultural production. However, with generated is a mixture of domestic and industrial time the quality of wastewater had deteriorated, wastewater which makes risk mitigation and reuse especially in Kanpur and it was no longer suitable recommendations a challenge. Lack of systematic for crop cultivation. In Hyderabad, although the data on the different discharges makes it difficult government did not support the use of partially to estimate the volume and quality of wastewater treated wastewater for irrigation, the farmers used discharged and the total area under (usually it as it was the only source of water downstream informal) wastewater irrigation. Data from more of the city. Industrial pollution was highest at than 900 Class-I cities and Class-II towns (with Kanpur and Ahmedabad so that both water the population of each over 1 million and between quality and crop quality were affected at the 0.5 and 1 million, respectively) showed that more heavily polluted sites. Data from the selected wastewater gets collected than eventually treated. sites show that the financial benefits associated In general, wastewater generation is around with wastewater farming were higher than those 60-70% over the established treatment capacity associated with freshwater-agriculture for cities which varies from city to city. Governmental where domestic wastewater does not mix with efforts to reduce surface water pollution remain industrial sewage. Also, adverse health and jeopardized by the untreated wastewater fraction environmental impacts were lower in such cities. as well as by India’s estimated 160 million latrines The highest gains were reported from the ECW, and septic tanks which contribute, according where sewage farming has been practiced for vii over a century. However, a more holistic analysis management needs much more attention than which includes all household expenses like health, it has received so far. This is required from the food, etc., and considers both direct and indirect perspectives of both health and water resources costs and benefits would be required to calculate management. With nearly 70% of the population the net benefits. Particular attention is required to projected to live in cities, and water scarcity being assess the effects of hazardous contaminants on reported from many parts of the country, planners water, soil and crops. Health risk assessments need to have a strategy on how best to utilize from most cities showed that wastewater farmers the various water resources, including untreated, were more vulnerable than others to certain partially treated and fully treated wastewater, for diseases and environmental hazards. However, different productive purposes. Monitoring and site-specific health risk assessments are needed data collection are increasing in India but they to investigate the short- and long-term health must be carried out in a systematic manner. impacts of wastewater, so that effective remedial Institutionalizing the proposed data collection measures could be adopted. template which links into an extended AQUASTAT Given the increasing peri-urban character database could help collect uniform data sets for of India, this study showed that wastewater strategic planning. viii Urban Wastewater and Agricultural Reuse Challenges in India Priyanie Amerasinghe, Rajendra Mohan Bhardwaj, Christopher Scott, Kiran Jella and Fiona Marshall Introduction I nd ia ’ s u rban cen te rs a re w i tness ing Sectoral Demands for Water unprecedented growth, propelled by new economic reforms. Its population, which is over Sectoral demands for water are reaching new one billion, is now fast converging on cities in heights where irrigation, household supply, energy search of opportunities and a new way of life. and industry seek increased volumes to meet According to recent projections, India’s urban growing needs. The 2050 projections for India population of 380 million (2008) is expected report that it will reqire 1,447 cubic kilometers to increase to 590 million by 2030, twice the (km3) of water of which 74% is identified for current population of USA (MGI 2010), with irrigation, while the rest is for drinking water regional cities expanding at a faster rate than (7%), industry (4%) energy (9%) and others the larger cities. Increased migration of people (6%) (CPCB 2009). However, with rapid urban to cities already exerts enormous pressure growth in its 498 Class-I cities and 410 Class-II on city planners, especially for provisioning towns (CoI 2001), the demand for drinking water utility services. Already, many cities can be is also rising and has a high priority, competing now considered as ‘sponges’ absorbing water with rural water needs, including irrigation. The from peri-urban and rural areas through formal current water supply to these cities is estimated and informal channels (Van Rooijen et al. at about 48,000 million liters per day (mld) and 2005; Molle and Berkoff 2009; CSE 2012). is projected to increase further with the increased In general, public services and infrastructural demand for different sectors (CPCB 2009). A development are not keeping pace with large number of these growing cities are located urbanization, and indeed they may become in major river basin catchments, taking freshwater a constraint on economic growth. Feeding away and discharging wastewater back into the the cities will also become a major challenge, catchments and thus polluting irrigation water as where more and more food supplies will well as posing major challenges for urban and have to be brought from distant rural places, rural planners, especially with regard to urban increasing costs and food prices (Hanjra wastewater management. In fact, the density of and Qureshi 2010). On the other hand, the the emerging cities makes India today more peri- increasing urban ‘return flow’ is posing health urban and urban than rural (Figure 1). That the challenges as well as production opportunities urban return flow is seen not only as a hazard but for feeding the cities. also as an asset was just recently documented in 1 FIGURE 1. Distribution of Class-I cities, Class-II towns and Class-III towns in India in 2011. Source: CoI, 2011. the struggle between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu the environment (MoEF 2009). Studies have for Bangalore’s wastewater (Raghunandan 2012). shown that farmers living close to cities have had to change their crops to suit the declining quality of irrigation water (Buechler and Mekala Wastewater Generation and Treatment 2005). Proactive adaptation to water-quality issues increases the cost of production while suboptimal Despite the keen interest of the government, crop choices reduce benefits of livelihoods to infrastructural development for sewage and these farmers. With many components of the wastewater treatment has not kept pace with water cycle being affected for years and the wastewater generation. As a result, vast amounts increasing water demand for cities, there is a of polluted water are being discharged into natural sense of urgency to explore sustainable water waterways, with poor-quality water and pollutants management strategies, while looking into the above the permissible levels being released into multiple uses of wastewater and alternative 2 wastewater treatment technologies (Lorenzen et tanks constitute one of the most common forms al. 2010). of urban sanitation facilities in India. The major In many Indian cit ies, the wastewater part of urban India has not been connected to discharges comprise domestic and industrial a municipal sewer system which makes people wastewater, and are often mixed and not dependent on the conventional individual septic separately accounted for. Lack of systematic tanks. Access to improved sanitation in urban record-keeping of the different discharges makes India has risen but the management of on-site it difficult to arrive at reasonable estimates of the sanitation systems such as septic tanks remains wastewater discharged and its quality (Heggade a neglected component of urban sanitation and 1998; Misra 1998). For the period 1947-1997, a wastewater management. There are around sixfold increase in wastewater generation was 100 million septic tanks and 60 million latrines recorded in Class-I cities and Class-II towns. in India (World Bank 2006) without treatment Current generation for Class-I cities and Class-II facil i t ies for the generated septage which towns is above 38,000 mld, out of which only 35% contributes to 80% of the pollution of the national is treated (CPCB 2009). surface waters (CSE 2011, 2012). Conservation, augmentation and recycling Based on water pollution, five different of urban water are major foci in India’s national classes of water quality have been identified water policy. The policy also advocates the reuse (Table 1). Data show that, from a 45,000 km of treated sewage in view of the looming water- length of Indian rivers, 6,000 km had a biological scarce future. Thus, the policy support for reuse oxygen demand (BOD) above 3 milligrams per of treated wastewater, primarily from sewage liter (mg/l), making the water unfit for drinking. treatment plants (STPs), is inherently embedded Matters relating to sewage treatment as well as in the overall water policy of India, although in the drinking and industrial water supply are dealt practice, multiple factors affect its implementation with at state level while the municipal authorities at state level. The Ganga Action Plan (GAP) was of cities are responsible for providing these one of the first restoration plans for water bodies, services. The regulatory standards are overseen which commenced in 1985 and led to a larger by the state pollution control boards, which are program bringing the entire country under the linked to the Central Pollution Control Board National River Action Plan. In this program, the (CPCB). Currently, only the networked sewage identification of pollution sources, interception or systems are targeted for treatment, while the diversion and treatment were planned for 157 vast non-point source discharges go undetected major cities along the main rivers. However, fast and untreated. Therefore, the pollution loads urbanization and industrialization have outpaced in rivers are highly variable, depending on the the installation of STPs and regulatory processes season, modulated by rainfall, sewage and solid and, therefore, only marginal improvements are waste management practices in towns and cities, observed. and types of industry in the proximity. While Domestic sewage and industrial waste the regulatory mechanisms have been outlined, are the major causes of deterioration of water uncontrolled industrial discharges contribute quality and contamination of lakes, rivers and to heavy environmental pollution and potential groundwater aquifers (CPCB 2009). Septic health hazards (Rawat et al. 2009). 3 TABLE 1. Water-quality standards for India as per ISI-IS: 2296-1982. Water use class DO BOD Total coliform pH Free EC SAR Boron (mg/l) (mg/l) (MPN/100 ml) NH3 (mg/l) (mg/l) Class A: 6 2 50 6.5-8.5 NA NA NA NA Drinking without conventional treatment Class B: 5 3 500 6.5-8.5 NA NA NA NA Water for outdoor bathing Class C: 4 3 5,000 6.5-8.5 NA NA NA NA Drinking water with conventional treatment Class D: 4 NA NA 6.5-8.5 1.2 NA NA NA Water for wildlife and fisheries Class E: NA NA NA 6.5-8.5 NA 2.25 26 2 Water for recreation and aesthetics, irrigation and industrial cooling Source: CWC, 2010. Notes: ml = milliliters; mg = milligrams; DO = Dissolved Oxygen; BOD = Biological Oxygen Demand; MPN = Most Probable Number; EC = Electrical Conductivity; SAR = Sodium Adsorption Ratio. On the reuse side, the primary users of Against the backdrop of water scarcity and wastewater are smallholder farmers living in cities climate change, it is important to examine issues and peri-urban areas. Generally, they do not related to wastewater reuse more holistically, and seek wastewater but use the water their streams to investigate the challenges and opportunities for and rivers carry. This can be water with different its safe and efficient reuse. Many studies within degrees of pollution, or wastewater of different India have documented site-specific contamination degrees of dilution or natural cleaning or, raw pathways and levels, as well as health risks, but sewage, especially in the dry season. In many they fall short of information on risk reduction and situations wastewater is the only available or remediation along critical control points. reliable water source (Buechler and Mekala 2005; The goal of this study was to assess the Qadir et al. 2010). While the number of farmers scope of wastewater generation and reuse dependent on wastewater is not well documented, challenges in India. Specifically, the objectives more livelihoods are likely sustained through were to provide est imates of wastewater informal than formal wastewater-related activities generation and treatment, synthesize existing data (Raschid-Sally and Jayakody 2008). An inventory on agricultural use of wastewater, and assess the of wastewater-dependent livelihoods is however related benefits and economic value, as well as lacking in order to assess the wastewater-driven the potentially adverse environmental and human- economies within India. health impacts. 4 Study Sites and Methods The study is based on primary and secondary landholding statuses (leased or owned), and data. In order to assess the wastewater gender categories, so that different types of generation across the country, secondary data responses and perceptions were included. were collected from relevant national-, state- Focus group discussions and participatory rural and city-level institutions. Qualitative data were appraisal methods were used to collect qualitative also collected from key informants including data and perceptions on livelihoods, health and policymakers and institutional heads, using environmental degradation. Data were collected semi-structured interviews. To look at livelihood on family size, literacy levels, wastewater irrigated benefits and health impacts of wastewater crops and cropping patterns, input use, cost of use, five cities were selected as case studies. production, crop productivity, irrigation practices, Availability of research data, infrastructure for livestock holdings, health problems, extent wastewater treatment and access of wastewater of wastewater use and treatment, livelihoods to communities engaged in wastewater agriculture supported, and economic aspects associated were the key criteria used for selection of the with the use of wastewater in livelihoods. Data cities. were also collected on surface water/groundwater Based on the above criteria, Ahmedabad (in irrigated crop production within the vicinity, which the Sabarmati River Basin), New Delhi (Yamuna served as a counterfactual for comparison. River), Hyderabad (Musi River), Kanpur and Laboratory studies on water quality, and secondary Kolkata (both Ganga River) were selected (Table data from the case study sites were also used 2). For questionnaire surveys and focus group for comparison. The data collected were used for discussions, households were randomly selected assessment of current wastewater generation and from village communities near wastewater- treatment, livelihoods, health impacts and cost- carrying water bodies covering different castes, benefit analysis of agricultural production. TABLE 2. Number of households surveyed in the selected study sites. City/state Study area River Villages Households (km2) basin (n) Ahmedabad/Gujarat 205 Sabarmati Gyaspur, Asamli, Bakrol, Chitrasar, 289 (230 25’ N and 720 55’ E) Fatehpura, Navapura, Rinza, Saorda and Vautha Delhi/National Capital 1,484 Yamuna Keshopur, Nilauthi, Ranhaula, Mundka, 80 Territory Bakkarwala) and Okhla STP (Madanpur (280 36’36” N and 770 Khadar and Jaitpur) 13’48” E) Hyderabad/Andhra Pradesh 640 Musi Paravathapuram, Kachivanisingaram and 50 (170 45’ N and 780 47’ E) Quthbullapur Kanpur/Uttar Pradesh 1,640 Ganges Pyondi, Sheikhpur and Motipur 193 (260 28’ N and 800 24’ E) Kolkata/West Bengal 185 Ganges Bantala, Chowbaga, Panchannagram, 432 (220 34’ 11” N and 880 Boinchitala, Durgapur, Krolberia and 22’ 11’’ E) Bamonhata 5 Results Estimates of Wastewater Generation have varied significantly. Although several cities could show an increase in treatment capacity, the Wastewater generation across selected Class-I majority struggled to keep pace with urban growth cities (n=498) and Class-II towns (n=410) has been as data from more than 900 Class-I cities and assessed by institutions involved in water supply Class-II towns showed (Bhardwaj 2005; CPCB and sewage treatment (municipal corporations, 2009). In 2007, total urban wastewater generation state water boards, municipalities, public health was around 38,000 mld which was three times the engineering department, pollution control boards existing treatment capacity of about 12,000 mld and other concerned agencies) (CPCB 2009). (CPCB 2009). However, the survey also revealed Estimates show that about 80% of water supplied that nearly 39% of the treatment systems were is returned as wastewater, without accounting not performing to their capacity due to lack of for losses due to evaporation, percolation, and connectivity to the sewage network systems, and/ groundwater recharge, i.e., the actually available or other priorities and availability of funds of the volumes will differ (CPCB 2009). The results respective municipalities. Figure 2 shows not only show that, with the expansion of cities over the share of collected wastewater across the 100 time, wastewater generation has correspondingly largest cities which varies from nearly 0 to 100%, increased while investments in treatment capacities but also the gap between collection and treatment. FIGURE 2. Collected and treated wastewater across urban India. % 100 treated collected 90 % of generated wastewater 80 ater d Uncollecte wastew 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97 C i t i e s Source: Data from NIUA, 2005. Note: Numbers on the X axis refer to cities. 6 To meet the 2050 projected wastewater the targeted wastewater volume was treated, and generation estimates of 122,000 mld for the diverse issues prevented reaching the ultimate country (Bhardwaj 2005) its strategies for target set out by the GAP. These experiences wastewater treatment will need to have clear led to the formation of the NRCD expanding the goals and investment plans in the years to come. pollution abatement activities to a number of states. Monitoring of water quality is carried out at Pollution Abatement Activities of the three levels as part of the Global Environment Government Monitoring System, Monitoring of Indian National Aquatic Resources System and Yamuna Action Three interrelated water acts address issues Plan. Twenty eight parameters are being tested of pollution of water bodies in the country, and including trace metals and 22 pesticides. include the Water Act, 1974 (Prevention and Currently, 1,019 river sampling stations are Control of Pollution), the Water Cess Act, 1977 monitored regularly including 592 rivers and (Prevention and Control of Pollution) and the 321 wells, as well as lakes, drains, tanks and Environment Act, 1986 (Protection). According to creeks. In the latest assessment, the highest the law, pollution of water bodies is prohibited; BOD levels were recorded as 714 mg/ml, in however, enforcement of regulatory measures the Sabarmati River in Gujarat (Table 3). Three and infrastructural capability of the government states, namely Gujarat, Punjab and Andhra as well as of the private sector (especially the Pradesh had some of the most polluted rivers. small industries) fall short of achieving the Overall, 64% of the 1,019 control points indicated desired standards. The CPCB sets the discharge BOD levels less than 3 mg/l, 18% between standards which are expressed as effluent 3 and 6 mg/ml and 18% over 6 mg/ml. Fecal discharge concentrations with parameters set coliform concentrations in 21% of the stations as minimum acceptable standards for selected exceeded 5,000 MPN/100 ml, and 53% showed parameters such as BOD (3 mg/l), Chemical levels less than 500 MPN/100 ml. Fecal coliform Oxygen Demand (COD) (250 mg/l) and Total concentrations were highest in certain stretches Suspended Solids (100 mg/l). As part of their of the Yamuna River (MPN 5.2 x 106 to 3.7 x environment planning action for the country, 106). The STP discharge standards for fecal the CPCB has also prepared a district-wise coliform (MPN/100 ml) are 500 desirable and zoning atlas (spatial environmental planning) 2,500 maximum permissible, and for BOD 3 mg/l depicting industrial areas and industries, and or less (CPCB 2008), a value not met in any of environmentally sensitive areas (http://www.cpcb. the river sampling points listed in Table 3. nic.in/, accessed on January 24, 2013). While concerted efforts are made to monitor The river conservation plans fall under the the water quality of large surface water bodies jurisdiction of the National River Conservation and groundwater, with the involvement of many Directorate (NRCD), which is under the Ministry ministries and institutions at state level, water of Environment and Forests, Government of India. quality in man-made stormwater canals and drains It is responsible for coordinating several river is not measured. The water from these drains conservation plans. Its main mission is to set up is used for urban and peri-urban agriculture, as sewage management and treatment facilities for well as for other activities in many cities and, mitigation of pollution (domestic and industrial) therefore, monitoring all types of water sources through setting up of Individual or Common would help plan for reductions in pollution loads Effluent Treatment Plants. The GAP was one of reaching the open waterways. the first activities commissioned by the directorate Activities related to abatement of water to address the pollution issues linked to major pollution range from simple sedimentation to cities in the Ganga Basin. However, only 65% of more capital-intensive STPs, most of which utilize 7 conventional technologies with activated sludge among which are bank filtration (Lorenzen et al. processes (ASP) and the Upflow Anaerobic 2010), reed beds, natural wetlands, constructed Sludge Blanket being common technologies wetlands (Mittal et al. 2006) and soil aquifer (CPCB 2009). The systems are often not treatment systems (Kumar 2009). Successful operating to their full capacity and treatment is natural treatment systems are exemplified by hampered due to various reasons, such as lack the ECW, which have been in existence for of trained staff and inadequate supply of spare hundreds of years, natural treatment ponds with parts. There is a growing interest in adopting aquatic plants in Pune, and numerous constructed new technologies for water recycling within cities wetlands in other cities of India (CPCB 2002). TABLE 3. BOD levels of some selected rivers in India during the period 2006-2007. River/lake City/District State/Union territory BOD (mg/l) Amalkhardi Ankelshwar Gujarat 714 Ghaggar Moonak Punjab 626 Khari Ahmedabad Gujarat 320 Musi Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 225 Sabarmati Ahmedabad Gujarat 207 Kalinadi Kannuaj Uttar Pradesh 136 Khan Indore Madhya Pradesh 120 Damanganga Kachigaon Gujarat 112 Kalinadi Muzzafarnagar Uttar Pradesh 110 Saroonagar Lake Saroonagar Andhra Pradesh 71 Ghandigudem Medak Andhra Pradesh 60 Hindon Saharanpur Uttar Pradesh 60 Yamuna Delhi Delhi 59 Bhima Pune Maharashtra 36 Hussain Sagar Budamaru Andhra Pradesh 33 Source: CPCB, 2007. Valuing Wastewater Use in Agriculture The value of wastewater can be expressed in is usually part of the informal sector which does many ways. Wastewater is a reliable water supply not receive much recognition from the government for crop production (cereals and vegetables) (Buechler et al. 2002; Buechler and Mekala 2005). where freshwater is scarce; high nutrient content Assessing the economic value of sewage farming helps reduce input costs; it provides an ideal is facing many challenges (e.g., where does diluted medium, e.g., for aquaculture, and can replenish wastewater end and polluted freshwater start?) groundwater reserves. Where trees or fodder are affecting estimated areas under irrigation and produced, land application provides at least a low- related indicators (Weldesilassie et al. 2011). cost, but productive, way for sanitary disposal of With increasing urban water demands, municipal waste. Use of wastewater for irrigation and realization that wastewater irrigation is a and aquaculture is a common practice in India, but common reality, the economic value of municipal 8 wastewater is being gradually recognized. In per mld, and for indirect use 39 ha per mld. The addition, Water Boards of different municipalities area under indirect use accounts for mixing with started exploring the possibility of revenue non-wastewater sources of irrigation. Using these generation from the by-products of wastewater volume-area relationships, the data for Class-I treatment (CPCB 2007; WABAG 2012). In an cities and Class-II towns indicate that the potential assessment done by CPCB, for coastal Class-I irrigable land can be estimated to be around 1.1 cities and Class-II towns, the annual value of million hectares (Mha) (Table 4). the N, P and K loads from a total of about 5,000 A more detailed analysis for all India and mld of wastewater was estimated at INR 1,091 beyond is currently underway by IWMI using million (wastewater, INR 76 million; nutrients, remote sensing (RS) and hydrological modeling. INR 1,015 million) (CPCB 2009), not counting It will extend the FAO AQUASTAT database the environmental damage it is causing. This which distinguishes between treated and untreated computation is of course theoretical but sets an wastewater use but, so far, considers only the important signal towards resource recovery and direct use of collected and treated wastewater. environmental conservation. It is suggested to build any data collection on With the available data for Class-I cities and the larger AQUASTAT data format (treated and Class-II towns and other studies, we attempted to untreated wastewater) to develop strategies for estimate the area irrigable with wastewater, which its treatment and/or appropriate use, especially can be used for farming directly from treatment for agriculture. plants or indirectly (wastewater discharged to The format proposes a participatory method of rivers). When water channels were directly data collection to the extent possible, so that the used for irrigation, accounting for the irrigated same terminology is used across institutions, and areas with wastewater (treated and untreated) country and all input sources are integrated into was possible. However, when large volumes the calculation and data management process. of surface water (rivers and ponds) containing The upper part of the FAO template (Figure wastewater were channeled and l i f ted for 3, wastewater production) could be expanded, irrigation, calculating the wastewater irrigable land as shown in Figure 4, to take into account the became more complicated, challenging also any different sources of water supply for the cities, related economic assessment. Some assumptions and it attempts to record the different streams made in arriving at the estimates were soil of water inputs that eventually contribute to the types, wastewater ratio and application rate per total wastewater volume generated in a city. hectare. Crop varieties were not considered due Together with the FAO framework, it can cover to limitations on data availability. For direct use, the different treatment options the cities might it was assumed that the wastewater was partially have, and attempt to assess the quantities treated, and the volumes were calculated using discharged into the ecosystem. Water quality the design capacity of the sewage channel or assessments and treatment capabilities, coupled treatment plant. For indirect use, wastewater with studies on Geographic Information Systems applied was calculated as a percentage of the (GIS) (Box 1) can support an assessment, water supply to the city (following Van Rooijen et which can provide a better understanding of al. 2005). The estimates of wastewater-irrigated the potential uses and area under wastewater area for direct use were about 6 hectares (ha) irrigation. 9 TABLE 4. Estimates on potential irrigable land with wastewater in Class-I cities and Class-II towns. Volume of Ratio of direct versus Potential irrigable wastewater (mld) indirect use land (ha) Treatment capacity 11,787 6 70,722 Untreated 26,467 39 1,032,213 Source: Adapted from Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. FIGURE 3. A data collection template for assessing wastewater generation in cities based on the FAO AQUASTAT framework. Municipal Industrial Production wastewater wastewater (outside the cities) Collection Not Collected collected Treatment facilities Treatment Treated Not treated Number Capacity Treatment level Discharge or Discharged Discharged direct use Irrigation Irrigation Irrigation area Irrigation area (m3) (ha) (m3) (ha) Direct Direct use use Indirect Industry Indirect Other use use Other Variable present in the AQUASTAT database and data and metadata included, if available. Variable not present in the AQUASTAT database but information, if available, included in the metadata. Source: Modified from Mateo-Sagasta and Salian, 2012. 10 FIGURE 4. Suggested data collection template for assessing wastewater generation in cities, feeding into the AQUASTAT framework (Figure 3). Multi-sectoral participatory data collection process Source of water supply to the city (mld) Surface water (rivers, lakes), groundwater and harvested rainwater Water treatment Industrial water Domestic Private water supply water supply supply Total wastewater generated (mld), percent entering sewerage, on-site sanitation facilities, and the environment Collected (mld) Not collected (mld) Treatment Natural treatment plant processes Volume treated: Volume untreated. Volume and areas with Volume and areas with indirect use direct use of treated of untreated but diluted (reclaimed) wastewater wastewater or direct use of raw and biosolids wastewater/fecal sludge Treated Not treated Municipal Industrial Production wastewater wastewater (outside the cities) Collection Not Collected collected Treatment facilities Treatment Treated Not treated Number Capacity Treatment level Discharge or Discharged Discharged direct use Irrigation Irrigation Irrigation area Irrigation area (m3) (ha) (m3) (ha) Direct Direct use use Indirect Industry Indirect Other use use Other Variable present in the AQUASTAT database and data and metadata included, if available. Variable not present in the AQUASTAT database but information, if available, included in the metadata. 11 BOX 1. Use of GIS to assess the area under wastewater irrigation. GIS-based irrigated area mapping was carried out in selected sites in Hyderabad, India, and Faisalabad, Pakistan, to assess the extent and the different sources of irrigation. The study investigated the health and food safety issues from rapidly expanding wastewater irrigation in these two locations. GIS layers of soil quality, irrigation water typology, land use patterns, water quality, prevalence of infections, and other demographic information produced a rich contextual visualization of agronomic, health, environmental and economic implications related to wastewater use in the area. While all of these individual data sets could be analyzed in their own right, additional layers of information helped link the different components of the study, bringing together different stakeholders to discuss a common issue. The example of a GIS map given in Figure 5, shows the sources and the extent of water used for irrigation in two zones (peri-urban and rural) along the banks of the Musi River, Hyderabad India. Such maps can be overlaid with other indicators like soil and water quality or disease incidence to visualize their spatial distributions and possible associations with wastewater irrigation. In particular, data on crops grown during the year in different plots, crop yield, input use including wastewater, input costs, labor days, outputs, markets and prices, etc., as well as disease incidence and treatment cost and preventive expenditure can be overlaid to estimate the economic value of water for each crop and use. Source: Philipp Weckenbrock and Axel Drescher, University of Freiburg, Germany. FIGURE 5. Characterization of irrigated area in two zones (peri-urban and rural) along the Musi River (Uppal to Pillaipalli), Hyderabad, India. Sources: http://wwiap.iwmi.org/Data/Sites/9/DOCUMENTS/PDF/bmz_india_finalatlas_27oct09.pdf http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/6960 Case Studies: In-depth Analysis The urban wastewater cha l lenges were coverage, sewage t rea tment scenar ios , investigated looking at the water supply to wastewater use, water quality and perceived selected cities, wastewater generation, sanitation health impacts. Secondary and primary data 12 together with livelihood analyses of 289, 80, 50, Kanpur and Kolkata, which is not surprising given 193 and 432 farmers from Ahmedabad, Delhi, the rates of urbanization and decadal population Hyderabad, Kanpur and Kolkata, respectively, growth in the cities and government development formed the basis for the analyses. These cities plans (Table 6). It should be noted, however, were considered as a representative cross that the figures in Table 6 are continuously section of the country. changing, linked to population growth, reporting and infrastructural development. Thus wastewater generation and treatment values given in different Drinking Water Supply: Wastewater publications of the CPCB often do not match. An Generation and Treatment example is Hyderabad where about 585 mld of wastewater were generated in 2008. This exceeds Current wastewater generation figures are an the current treatment capacity by far, but with estimation based on the water supply to the cities. new treatment plants getting commissioned the In all five cities the drinking water supply was capacity will soon be at the same level. However, met by surface water and groundwater sources this will again not be enough to catch up with the in different proportions, with surface water being increased population at that time (Van Rooijen et the primary source (Table 5). The data have to be al. 2010). Ahmedabad has today four STPs with used with caution as there are indications of much a capacity to treat 633 mld, sufficient to cater to greater groundwater exploitation within cities, but all wastewater, but infrastructural development without data to support these indications. City lags behind and the plants run below capacity. water supplies have increased over the years as Under the GAP three treatment plants were set demand has grown and water is lifted from more up in Kanpur; however, even the treated water distant sources with the consequent estimated is reported not to reach the basic standards of wastewater generation. Percentage treatment irrigation water quality as defined by FAO (Pescod capacities varied widely between the cities, 1992). In short, it is very difficult to get reliable and the current treatment capacities have been data, and even if there are data, they might not increased in keeping with the increase in water tell what is really on the ground. supply in cities like Hyderabad (Van Rooijen et al. 2010). However, the waterways are still polluted, due to sewers ending in streams, indiscriminate Wastewater Use, Livelihoods and disposal of non-networked wastewater drainage Financial Benefits and industrial discharges, and also because a new treatment capacity does not imply households Irrigation with wastewater was practiced in all are already connected. five cities, but varied in terms of area, types of Wastewater treatment has improved in some crops, and the quality of water used (Table 7). cities like Hyderabad and Ahmedabad, but has The major users of wastewater in the study sites fallen far behind the requirements in cities like were farmers growing cereals (rice), horticultural TABLE 5. Sources of urban water supply in the study sites. City Surface water (%) Groundwater (%) Ahmedabad* 93 7 Delhi** 86 14 Hyderabad** 99 1 Kanpur** 60 40 Kolkata* 88 12 Source: * ADB 2007; ** Municipal corporations. 13 TABLE 6. An overview of water supply and wastewater generation in the case study cities. City Sewage generation Sewage treatment Treatment (mld) capacity (mld) capacity (%) Ahmedabad 488 472 96 Delhi 3,800 2,330 61 Hyderabad 426 133 31 Kanpur 417 171 41 Kolkata 706 172* 24 Sources: CPCB, 2005, 2009; Van Rooijen et al., 2010. Note: * without wetlands. TABLE 7. Summary of wastewater use and crops in the study sites. Study area Land under Farming Quality of wastewater used Type of use Types of crops wastewater households for irrigation (T-treated; (direct/indirect)↨ irrigation engaged in U-untreated†) (ha)* wastewater irrigation* Ahmedabad 33,600 NA T+U (treated wastewater use Direct and indirect Vegetables, rice, was more; however, the treated other cereals, water is getting increasingly fodder/grasses, contaminated) cotton, fruit trees, ornamentals, pastures Delhi 1,700 12,000** T – Areas close to STPs Direct Summer - Cucurbits, (Keshopur, Okhla) eggplant, okra and U – Along the riverbanks and coriander inside the riverbed Winter - Spinach, mustard, cauliflower, radish and cabbage Hyderabad 10,000 NA T + U Indirect Para grass, rice Treated wastewater is released and vegetables to the Musi River which is used for irrigation downstream Kanpur 2,500 2,447 T+U Direct and indirect Wheat, rice, T or U wastewater is sold to vegetables, farmers. mustard and Industrial water (tannery) is mixed flowers in certain areas. Some farmers use the polluted waters of the Ganga and Pandu rivers for riverbed farming. Kolkata 4,887 2,500 U – All sewage channels are Direct Fish, paddy and diverted to the ECW vegetables Source: Adapted from Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Notes: * Estimated values; ** includes contractors as well as landless laborers; † directly from sewers or polluted river; ↨direct – when a channel specifically reaches the irrigated land; treated/untreated / indirect – when a polluted surface water body is used for irrigation; NA = data not available. 14 and fodder crops, aquacultural businesses (mostly restored gradually and the income generated in the ECW and Delhi), and to a lesser extent was significant (Table 10). Livestock-rearing floriculturists. In Delhi and Kanpur, wastewater was a popular livelihood activity in the study irrigation was supported by the municipalities villages, but some reported that the health where treated effluent was discharged into of livestock was affected due to wastewater specified locations for a fee, so that the farmers consumption. In Kanpur, income was higher could cultivate crops. In Delhi, 22 major drains among the farmers using wastewater than and STPs (Keshopur and Okhla) provide partially those who used groundwater for fodder (Table treated and untreated wastewater for agriculture, 11). In the same city, staple crops like paddy and the survey revealed that 71% of market and wheat appeared to have had a better profit produce in Keshopur and Okhla areas was met margin than fodder or floriculture (roses), when by the crops grown in these two sites. In contrast, wastewater was used for irrigation (Table 12). in Hyderabad, only 1-2% of the wastewater-grown In Hyderabad, over 13 types of vegetable crops vegetables contributed to the market, and the were grown with wastewater to supplement municipality discouraged using wastewater for the household income, especially by women agriculture (IWMI 2008; Amerasinghe et al. 2009). farmers living in the peri-urban regions (Jacobi Over time, the farmers have observed that the et al. 2009). However, the landscapes were quality of wastewater has deteriorated due to the changing with vegetable farms being gradually mixing of domestic and industrial wastewater, and pushed further afield, to accommodate the new many downstream users complain that vast areas city limits. The pattern these data show is that of agricultural land that previously received clean there is no clear-cut answer for how far and river water are now irrigated with increasingly where the use of wastewater (or highly polluted saline water. Since there is no alternative source stream water) is perceived as an advantage of water, users have adapted themselves to or disadvantage. There is a high degree of the situation (by changing the crops) and have variability between soil and crop responses and continued to use the water available, irrespective water quality (Weldesilassie et al. 2011). of its quality. Low-cost technologies like riverbank The ECW ecosystem is a wel l -known filtration are also being tested for their relative example where wastewater is made an asset. merits (Lorenzen et al. 2010), and their wider use These ecosystems support four pr incipal can be expected in the future. resource- recovery and reuse p rac t i ces In general, community reflections on the namely, vegetable farms (using urban waste), past and present uses of wastewater, and the wastewater-fed fishponds, paddy fields using related advantages and disadvantages were fishpond effluent, and sewage-fed brackish similar to those stated by wastewater farmers water aquaculture. The wetlands cover an area of many other countries, but the responses of around 12,742 ha (water bodies: 4,728 ha; were mixed for the same location, reflecting degraded water bodies: 1,124 ha; agricultural the individual experiences (Table 8). The most area: 4,960 ha; (urban waste) farming: 603 common response was that wastewater provides ha; and settlements: 1,327 ha) where up to a rel iable water supply, despite concerns 1,300 mld of wastewater are absorbed (IWMED of water quality. In Ahmedabad and Delhi, 2004). The total area of sewage-fed fisheries is for some, the high nutrient content boosted around 3,900 ha, with around 308 ha of fisheries vegetable production (Table 9), but for others managed by private concerns (93%), cooperatives the soil fertility had declined and impacted (6%) and the State Government (less than 1%) agricultural productivity. The latter attributed (IWMED 2004; Kundu et al. 2005). In 1999-2000, it to poor water quality affecting the soils. estimated production for the ECW was 12.8 Some used less fertilizer, and felt that it was million kg of paddy, 6.9 million kg of fish and 69 profitable, while those who received treated million kg of vegetables (Chattopadhyay 2001), wastewater noted that the soil quality is being supporting a population of around 60,000. The 15 TABLE 8. Perceptions of farmers on wastewater use in the study villages. City Past use Present Perceptions on importance Ahmedabad; 289 Clean river water was the Presently, 90% of the land area There is year-round water households primary source of water for is irrigated with wastewater for supply; however, the quality of farmers cultivating along the cultivating paddy, wheat and water has deteriorated. The fruit riverbanks. horticultural crops. harvests and crop yields have Horticulture was the main reduced over time. income-generating activity. Some Agricultural cropping pattern cereal crops were also grown. has changed. Delhi; 80 Wastewater was used for Diverse uses of wastewater are Scarcity of water and the households agricultural irrigation and being experimented with, but growing demand are forcing aquaculture. the reuse pattern remains the newer and more innovative uses same, which is mostly agriculture, of wastewater. At present, aquaculture and industrial cooling. wastewater plays an important role in supporting local livelihoods. Hyderabad; 50 River water became a perennial The banks of the river are the Year-round water supply has households source of water, with the city areas under cultivation. Para been an asset. Water quality discharges. However, the water grass, rice and vegetables are has improved with a number of was heavily polluted, but still the popular crops grown. STPs being established. used for agricultural production. Kanpur; 193 A sewage farm scheme launched Marginal farmers are irrigating About 70% of the household households by the Central Government in around 1,253 acres of land economy is based on the 1951 was effective and is being during both Rabi and Kharif crops grown with wastewater. used still. The scheme was seasons. However, the quality However, deterioration of created to manage the pollution of the water has deteriorated, quality of wastewater has led of the River Ganga and increase adversely affecting crop to a decrease in both crop agricultural production in the area. production. Agriculture still plays yields and milk production. This was a profitable business. a dominant role in the livelihoods Sewage irrigation has been of people. subjected to criticism in the recent past as high concentrations of heavy metals and other toxicants have been detected. As a consequence, the farmers have refused to pay the fees levied for water since 2000. Kolkata; 432 Domestic sewage has been City development has encroached Wastewater plays an farmers used for aquaculture and on the wetlands reducing the area important role in the livelihoods vegetable cultivation by farmers for aquaculture and other forms of people. No health problems since the 1930s. By the 1960s, of agriculture including paddy have been reported so far. The 2,400 ha of aquacultural ponds cultivation. In the ECW, reduction in productive land due had been converted to paddy aquaculture and paddy cultivation to city expansion and private fields as well. are still popular. Garbage farming developers is becoming a is common in the city waste- concern. dumping yards. Floriculture using wastewater is a recent livelihood activity, and is gaining popularity. Source: Adapted from Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Note: 1 acre = 0.4047 ha (approx.) 16 TABLE 9. Income and expenditure per acre for cultivation of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) during the summer season, using groundwater and treated wastewater in Delhi. Groundwater Treated wastewater Crop yield (tonnes/month) 1.5 2.5 Cost of land (lease cost/month) 3,000 3,000 Seeds 100 100 Irrigation water/month 100 Negligible Fertilizers/month 500 200 Insecticides/month 1,000 1,500 Labor charges/month 3,000 4,500 Equipment operation and maintenance cost (INR) 100 Negligible Total expenses/month (INR) 7,800 9,300 Total income/month (INR)* 15,000 25,000 Net Income 7,200 15,700 Source: Modified from Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Notes: * Average price of okra - INR 10/kg (2005); INR 49.5 = USD 1 (2005). Cost per month is an average for the season; 1 acre = 0.4047 ha (approx.). TABLE 10. Income generation (INR millions) with treated wastewater from STPs in Delhi. Area Okhla area Keshopur area Villages Jasaula, Madanpur, Khadar, Jaitpur, Ali Source of wastewater Okhla STP Keshopur STP Type of crop Okra Number of farmers 400 (80 households) 3,000 (600 households) Area under wastewater irrigation (ha) 205 1,500 Volume of wastewater (mly) 27 200 Annual crop yield (tonnes) 17,220 90,000 Gross annual income (INR millions) 172.2 900.0 Annual expenditure (INR millions) 57.2 418.5 Net annual income (INR millions) 115.0 481.5 Source: Adapted from Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Note: INR 49.5 = USD 1 (2005). 17 TABLE 11. Comparison of income of farmers using freshwater and wastewater for milk production in the city of Kanpur. Production costs Amount/animal Rates (INR) Total (INR) FW WW FW WW FW WW Concentrates 5 kg 7 kg 6/kg 7.8/kg 30.00 55.00 Green fodder 15 kg 6 kg 50/quintal 50/quintal 7.50 3.00 Dry fodder (straw) 10 kg 10 kg 100/quintal 100/quintal 10.00 10.00 Mustard oil 300 1,000 50/liter 25/liter 0.50 0.90 ml/month ml/month Salt/gur (sugar product) 50 g/day - 5/kg NA 0.25 0.45 Maintenance cost/building - - 15/day NA 15.00 3.50 /treatment/labor Total expenditure - - - - 63.25 72.85 Income from livestock products Milk (liters/day/animal) 8 10 10/liter 14/liter 80.00 140.00 Dung (kg/day/animal) 30 20 0.30 - 9.00 - Income from calves - - 500 after 6 - 3.00 - months Gross income - - - - 92.00 140.00 Cost of production/liter - - - - 7.90 7.30 Net profit/buffalo/day - - - - 28.75 67.15 Source: Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Notes: FW = Freshwater; WW = Wastewater; 1 quintal = 100 kg. TABLE 12. Income generation in freshwater and wastewater irrigated areas in Kanpur. Crops Cost of cultivation Gross income Net income (INR/ha) (INR/ha) (INR/ha) FW WW FW WW FW WW Rose 102,681 47,299 175,000 112,500 72,319 65,201 Fodder 19,630 5,204 35,000 7,500 15,370 2,296 Paddy 16,470 8,279 20,925 18,900 4,455 10,621 Wheat 20,941 10,287 29,200 19,500 8,259 9,213 Source: Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Notes: FW = Freshwater; WW = Wastewater; INR 49.5 = USD 1 (2005). 18 revenue generated was impressive, especially and industrial wastes at different degrees, and under vegetable cultivation (Table 13). The gross the possible health impacts will depend on the revenue across paddy, vegetables and fish of pollution load, irrigation history and level of INR 266 million resulted in net returns of INR exposure on the respective sites. The water and 80 million (Chattopadhyay 2001). However, the soil-quality studies in all four study sites (Table revenues were not used at all to improve the 14) clearly showed the presence of elements that sanitation service chain as those benefiting from can have potential health impacts. Ahmedabad the wastewater are not linked to those responsible and Kanpur have a larger number of industries for its management. than the other three cities, and the impacts were evident in the water-quality parameters. There is plenty of evidence in the literature Estimates of Adverse Impacts of that particular chemical hazards have to be Wastewater When Used for Irrigation expected. Water, soil and grain analysis in sites close to Sabarmati River (Ahmedabad) showed Wastewater carries many biological and chemical elevated levels of some metals (Cd, Cr, Cu) in agents that pose hazards and can impact the river water and chromium and copper in the environmental and human health. Wastewater- well water. High levels of lead were found in related health impacts could be direct or indirect, wheat irrigated with groundwater which was also manifesting as short- or long-term i l lness contaminated (Table 14). Heavy metals (Cd, Pb episodes. Most studies tend to look at potential and Zn) were a serious concern in and around health risks by identifying contaminants in water Delhi, as several studies showed elevated levels rather than actual crop contamination and human (above the Indian standards under the Prevention exposure during farm work or consumption of of Food Adulteration Act) (Awasthi 2000) in contaminated food. The well-known agents of commonly eaten vegetables like spinach, okra, wastewater-associated health hazards (biological and cauliflower (Marshall et al. 2003; Singh and and chemical), routes of infection and their relative Kumar 2006). In Kanpur and Delhi, the surface importance are listed in Bos et al., 2010. The water and soils were contaminated with a variety state-level Pollution Control Boards in India have of metals (Cu, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb and Zn), the capacity to test a range of these parameters discharged by small-scale industries which are not in their routine water-quality monitoring, including monitored stringently (Rawat et al. 2003, 2009). physical, chemical and biological parameters However, Kaur and Rani (2006) found that in such as heavy metals and a variety of pesticides peri-urban farming lands of Delhi, bioavailability and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (CPCB of metals like Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, and Pd in the 2008). The soil and agricultural products are not soils and surface water/groundwater was within monitored routinely although they could be tested permissible limits, with the exception of one or on request. two samples showing elevated levels, and the Wastewater used for agriculture in the four geological, soil pH, overirrigation and leaching cities is contaminated with sewage, and hospital characteristics of metals bringing out differential TABLE 13. Income and expenditure for one hectare of farmland in the ECW. Crop Expenditure Income Net return (INR) (INR) (INR) Paddy 12,989 20,295 7,306 Fish 35,385 47,180 11,795 Vegetables and other crops 70,000 125,000 55,000 Source: Chattopadhyay, 2001. Note: INR 45 = USD 1.00 (2005). 19 20 TABLE 14. Mean metal concentrations in water, soil, crops and grains near wastewater irrigated areas in Ahmedabad, Delhi and Kanpur. City Villages Source Unit As Cd Cr Cu Fe Mn Ni Pb Zn Ahmedabad Galiyana River water mg/l 0 0.02 0.5 0.2 - - - 0 0.1 Sahij River water mg/l - 0.02 0.5 0.3 - - - 0.2 0.1 Gyaspur River water mg/l 0 0.01 0.9 1.6 - - - 0.2 0.7 Kanpur Jajmau Surface water mg/l - 0.01 0.06 0.02 6.3 0.3 0.04 0.04 0.1 Ahmedabad Vautha Groundwater mg/l 0 0.01 0.6 0.2 - - - 0.4 0.6 Kanpur Jajmau Groundwater mg/l - 0.001 0.00 0.01 0.77 0.1 0.02 0.03 0.2 Delhi Mundka Groundwater mg/l - 0.0003 0.03 0.04 0.02 - - 0.02 0.0 Madanpur Groundwater mg/l - 0.0009 0.07 0.06 0.01 - - 0.02 0.0 Irrigation quality standards mg/l 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.2 5.0 0.2 0.2 5.0 2.0 Ahmedabad Sahij Soil μg/g 0 0.15 25 19 - - - 0.98 37 Kanpur Jajmau Soil μg/g 0 3.03 249 61 6,700 298 38 90 170 Kanpur Jajmau Vegetables (leafy) μg/g 0 0 0.3 - 0.45 0.51 0.48 0.1 1.4 Ahmedabad Vautha Wheat μg/g 0 0 0 0 - - - 2.67 0 Kanpur Jajmau Grains μg/g 0 0.17 0.01 2.5 51 41 1.12 0.2 47 Source: Compiled from Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), 2006. Notes: mg = milligram/s; μg = microgram/s. occurrences of metals at specific sites. This the health officials in the hospitals stated that shows that the contamination can be site-specific, dysentery/diarrhea, worm infections and skin and containment and abatement strategies need problems were common among the communities, to map areas of actual pollution for realistic action and a good majority did not seek treatment plans. at government hospitals. Therefore, private In general, data on short- and long-term practitioners and local quacks play an important illnesses due to wastewater handling were not role in treating these communities. As a result, available. Hospital-based data on wastewater- these episodes never get into the overall health related diseases are in general difficult to separate statistics. Epidemiological and microbiological from other exposures. Even more challenging are investigations along with health economics consumer surveys as in markets, where produce studies are required to assess the health risks from different farms (safe irrigation water, poor- and economic costs associated with wastewater quality water) gets usually mixed. The responses farming in the communities. to illness episodes were therefore gathered from I n s e v e r a l c a s e s , p r o d u c e g r o w n survey questionnaires and key informant interviews with contaminated water and soils showed of health personnel in the cities. contamination with heavy metals, and worm and Responses to the questionnaire revealed bacterial agents. While a risk assessment of Pb that in Delhi, Kolkata and Hyderabad farmers and Cd in rice and fodder grass along the Musi complained of skin irritations, apart from the River did not show critical levels (Simmons et “smell” that caused breathing problems, but al. 2007), a study in Varanasi (Sharma et al. they did not consider it a major problem. 2009; Singh et al. 2004) reported heavy metals Kolkata farmers were aware of the deteriorating (Cd, Pd and Ni) in vegetables at the production water quality, and were taking precautionary and market sites, partly however due to dust measures to safeguard their skins when engaging deposition. A risk assessment study in Kanpur in wastewater-related activities, using natural developed a risk quotient (RQ) for selected herbs and oils. Both Ahmedabad and Kanpur contaminants (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, and sites were cities with heavy industry, especially Pb), taking into account the daily intake via tanneries and, thus, their complaints were more the medium – water, food grains, vegetables, pronounced, with visible ulceration, callous tissue milk, etc. – in which each toxicant would be formation, heavy skin irritations and dark finger transported into the human body and compared nails. Public health concerns were raised over with the acceptable daily intake to study the the high prevalence of helminth ova in commonly health impacts. Setting the positive risk at an RQ consumed vegetables like mint, lettuce, spinach, of 1.0, none of the elements exceeded values celery and parsley (Gupta et al. 2009). Increased above 1, although the contaminant levels were risks of hookworm infections were observed above the permissible values for vegetables. in farmers (Hyderabad) engaging in sewage Long exposure to heavy metals is known to farming with high levels of helminth eggs (Asacris cause a number of neurobehavioral disorders lumbricoides: 70 ova/l; hookworms: 76 ova/l; and (fatigue, insomnia, decreased concentration, Trichuris trichura: 4 ova/l) increasing the risk of depression, irritability, and gastric, sensory nematode infections among wastewater farmers and motor symptoms), and farmers exposed while further downstream of the Musi River water- to wastewater and contaminated sludge had related risks decreased significantly (Ensink et significantly higher scores for neurobehavioral al. 2008). Significantly higher morbidity rates functions tested, than the controls (Table 15). were also observed among wastewater farmers Urine and blood samples of residents working in in Hyderabad compared to the morbidity rates the wastewater sites of Kanpur had heavy metals of the control group that used groundwater for and pesticide residues so that long-term impacts irrigation (Srinivasan and Ratna Reddy 2009). can be expected unless exposure is minimized Although the communities did not complain, (Singh et al. 2004). 21 TABLE 15. Neurobehavioral functions of cohorts living close to STPs in Kanpur and Varanasi (control). Functions Kanpur Varanasi Fatigue + - Insomnia + - Decreased concentration +++ - Depression ++ - Irritability ++ - Gastric symptoms +++ - Sensory symptoms ++ - Motor symptoms + - Source: Singh et al., 2004. Notes: (+) Significant at p < 0:05; (++) Significant at p < 0:01; (+++) Significant at p < 0:001; (-) nonsignificant. Disease burdens associated with wastewater The threshold values of biological as well as cannot be studied in isolation, as sanitation chemical hazards associated with wastewater infrastructure, general hygienic behavior and use in agriculture were the foci of previous 1989 socioeconomic factors contribute to the overall WHO guidelines while the newer guidelines health status of a community. Low socioeconomic adopted a more holistic approach, including a status, poor housing and lack of access to multi-barrier approach and health-based targets basic amenities like clean water can further for reduction of health risks (WHO 2006). Risk confound findings. Cross-sectional and longitudinal minimization along the exposure pathway from health surveys, as well as market surveys for producer to consumers of wastewater irrigated contamination and economic analyses are produce offers more opportunities where low- needed to assess the real health impacts of quality water is used than reliance on farm wastewater use in agriculture (Hanjra et al. 2012, restrictions (Scheierling et al. 2010; Drechsel et Forthcoming). al. 2010). Discussion This study attempted to look at the overall urban water are being transported from long distances wastewater challenges in India (generation, its (150 km) that are part of the rural agricultural uses, livelihood benefits and health impacts). It waterscape. With concerns over high costs of shows that wastewater management in India is lifting water, energy prices, river pollution, impacts becoming an enormous challenge, as urbanization on groundwater and, above all, water scarcity, and economic development are outpacing the a renewed interest is generated in looking at required infrastructural development. In an wastewater as an asset. However, much needs to attempt to keep up with the demand, municipal be done to explore its full economic potential as authorities are giving high priority to accessing direct and indirect reuse of untreated wastewater drinking water, to the extent that large volumes of dominates formal reuse by far. 22 Clearly, this study shows that wastewater and in a timely manner. With advances made in needs to be considered as an important the IT sector, India could well afford to develop an component of the water cycles within catchments, information management system that connects the if meaningful water management plans are entire country. However, capacity-building and the to be implemented within the country. In infrastructure have to be developed side by side each landscape, water augmentation has to for an overall positive outcome. be considered in conjunction with different Assessments on wastewater i r r igated wastewater treatment strategies for multiple agriculture and livelihood benefits of wastewater uses, and should be supported by public policy are complex. Estimates of potential irrigable land and social incentives. It can then potentially not using simple or complex methods have been only safeguard the downstream users but also attempted (Raschid-Sally 2010; Van Rooijen et provide economic opportunities for alternative al. 2010). Using a crude method of calculation, uses of wastewater within cities and support the this study found that over 1.1 Mha of land ecosystem services that constitute an integral part could be irrigated with wastewater generated of all forms of life. A countrywide approach for from Class-I cities and Class-II towns across wastewater use in agriculture could capture the India. Where wastewater supplies for irrigation diversity seen in the Indian context, and could are provided through dedicated channels and best be done at state level, by identifying nodal infrastructure, calculation of potential irrigable agencies for systematic data collection. Indeed, land is easier than when wastewater is mixed all states must look at the alternative uses of with, and supplied via, natural waterways. This wastewater for their cities, emphasizing the is because dilution changes the water quality, regional priorities, so that effective wastewater and estimations may require a different modeling management plans can be developed to face the approach altogether as currently underway future with less freshwater. The ongoing dispute by IWMI. More methods can be developed by between states within India for freshwater as well using water-quality parameters, crop types and as for wastewater-turned-freshwater shows the soil conditions. Modern tools like RS/GIS and urgency of this matter. more precise mapping of drainage networks can Assessments of wastewater generation also provide better overall outcomes that can and treatment in the country have improved help assess the nutrient loads leaving the city. within the last 10 years although there are still The urban planning sector which is currently many sewers ending without treatment plants embarking on GIS-based mapping of municipal in rivers as well as with treatment plants with a areas can make land-use mapping as part of large enough sewer network to reach treatment their program of work, to develop baselines, upon capacity. The wastewater generated needs to be which future studies can be modeled. Wastewater treated in order to protect the groundwater and irrigation can be a dynamic process in the peri- ecosystems, and reduce downstream impacts urban areas, and land-use patterns can change where many livelihoods are supported (CPCB with development and socioeconomic change; 2009). However, treatment levels can also be therefore, assessments need to involve robust designed to meet the requirements of end users methods to capture this dynamism, spatially and but this requires adequate discussion at locations temporally. where wastewater is to be used. If at sectoral Benefits in terms of income generation level, categories of treatment for end use can be from wastewater use for marginal farmers were agreed upon, and it can be part of the municipal more than evident from the case studies. For development plan, making effective use of many, wastewater agriculture was a primary or wastewater generated in the cities. Moreover, if secondary income source. Case studies showed annual assessments are made at the city/state that wastewater farmers spent less on inputs, and level, based on an agreed format, CPCB can where the nutrient sources could be balanced the perform nationwide projections more effectively, outcome was more positive (Delhi, Kanpur and 23 Kolkata) in terms of cost savings and economic inputs from many sectors and can be further returns. This was only based on agricultural developed at sectoral level, to identify the gaps production, and a more holistic economic analysis and include the required institutional capabilities. needs to be done to capture the net private Such a template will also help strategize on benefits to the households and social benefits to treatment scenarios for respective cities together the communities. with economic aspects of wastewater treatment Wastewater agriculture is however not without and reuse in India (Mekala et al. 2008a, 2008b). negative externalities, and health impacts on Further, decision makers may find it useful for farmers and consumers are of significant concern developing a more holistic national approach for as reported above. From an Indian context more wastewater use in agriculture, with the advantage studies are required in the areas of wastewater of feeding national data straight into international irrigated agriculture, health and food safety, and databases. health economics, specifically at the farm and Wastewater management and treatment consumer levels, to capture the diverse settings in cannot be planned in isolation. They have to which the problems exist. Risk assessment tools like be a core part of the strategic plans for water Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment (QMRA) and supply and sanitation, irrigation and drainage, Quantitative Chemical Risk Assessment (QCRA) energy, and environmental services and other can be used to assess the potential risk, which uses (World Bank 2004). Moreover, it becomes should then be addressed through multiple barrier very important to consider these aspects in light approaches with health-based targets for risk of water availability for cities, and to highlight reduction (WHO 2006). In contrast to the African the need for continuous inter-sectoral dialogue situation, in India, more emphasis needs to be and action plans to address the ever-increasing placed on wastewater treatment processes that water demands (World Bank 2010). Integration of remove heavy metals, which appear to have much water resources development with water services higher levels than in most parts of Africa (Raschid- can provide more support for agricultural water Sally and Jayakody 2008). management. India being today more urban and This study suggests a data collection and peri-urban than rural, it is time safe wastewater collation template for assessing the wastewater use for agriculture was made a priority in its water generation and use within the country. It requires development agenda. 24 References ADB (Asian Development Bank). 2007. 2007 benchmarking and data book of water utilities in India. A partnership between Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India and Asian Development Bank. Manila, Philippines. Amerasinghe, P.; Weckenbrock, P.; Simmons, R.; Acharya, S.; Drescher, A.; Blummel, M. 2009. An atlas of water quality, Health and agronomic risks and benefits associated with “wastewater” irrigated agriculture: A study from the banks of the Musi River, India. Available at http://wwiap.iwmi.org/Data/Sites/9/DOCUMENTS/PDF/ bmz_india_finalatlas_27oct09.pdf (accessed on September 10, 2012). Awasthi, S. K. 2000. Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act No. 37 of 1954) Along with Central and State Rules (as Amended for 1999). Third edition. New Delhi: Ashoka Law House. Bhardwaj, R.M. 2005. Status of wastewater generation and treatment in India. IWG-Env, International Work Session on Water Statistics, Vienna, June 20-22, 2005. 9 pp. Available at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/envpdf/ pap_wasess3b6india.pdf (accessed on April 21, 2012). Bos, R.; Carr, R.; Keraita, B. 2010. Assessing and mitigating wastewater-related health risks in low-income countries: An introduction. In: Wastewater irrigation and health: Assessing and mitigating risk in low-income countries, ed., Drechsel, P.; Scott, C.A.; Raschid-Sally, L.; Redwood, M.; Bahri, A. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI); London, UK: Earthscan; Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre (IDRC). 432 pp. Buechler, S.; Devi, G.; Raschid, L. 2002. Livelihoods and wastewater irrigated agriculture along the Musi River in Hyderabad City, Andhra Pradesh, India. Urban Agriculture Magazine 8: 14-17. Buechler, S.; Mekala, G.D. 2005. Local responses to water resource degradation in India: Groundwater farmer innovations and the reversal of knowledge flows. Journal of Environment & Development 14(4): 410-438. CoI (Census of India). 2001. Census of India. Population statistics. Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs. CoI. 2011. Provisional population totals paper 2 of 2011, India (vol. II). Delhi: Registrar General and Census Commissioner, Government of India. CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2002. Annual Report 2001-2002. Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forests. CPCB. 2005. Annual Report 2004-2005. Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forests. CPCB. 2007. Annual Report 2006-2007. Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forests. CPCB. 2008. Status of groundwater quality in India – part II. Groundwater Quality series GWQS/10/2007-2008. Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forests. CPCB. 2009. Status of water supply, wastewater generation and treatment in class-I cities and class-II towns of India. Control of Urban Pollution series: CUPS/70/2009-10. New Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forests. Chattopadhyay, K. 2001. Environmental conservation and valuation of East Calcutta Wetlands. Theme: Wetlands and Biodiversity. Environmental Economics Research Committee (EERC) Working Paper Series: WB-2. Kolkata: Indian Statistical Institute. CSE (Centre for Science and Environment). 2011. Policy paper on septage management in India. New Delhi. Available at http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/slb/SeptagePolicyPaper.pdf (accessed on October 12, 2012). CSE. 2012. Excreta matters volume 1: How urban India is soaking up water, polluting rivers and drowning in its own waste. 7th report in the State of India’s Environment series. New Delhi. CWC (Central Water Commission). 2010. Tolerance and classification with respect to various water uses. Available at www.cwc.gov.in/main/downloads/Tolerance%20and%20Classification.pdf (accessed on October 22, 2012). 25 Drechsel, P.; Scott, C.A.; Raschid-Sally, L.; Redwood, M.; Bahri, A. (Eds.). 2010. Wastewater irrigation and health: Assessing and mitigating risk in low-income countries. Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI; London, UK: Earthscan; Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre (IDRC). 432 pp. Ensink, J.H.J.; Blumenthal, U.J.; Brooker, S. 2008. Wastewater quality and the risk of intestinal nematode infection in sewage farming families in Hyderabad, India. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 79(4): 561-567. Gupta, N.; Khan, D.K.; Santra, S.C. 2009. Prevalence of intestinal helminth eggs on vegetables grown in wastewater-irrigated areas of Titagarh, West Bengal, India. Food Control 20: 942-945. Hanjra, M.A.; Blackwell, J.; Carr, G.; Zhang, F.; Jackson, T.M. 2012. Wastewater irrigation and environmental health: Implications for water governance and public policy. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 215(3): 255-269. Hanjra, M.A.; Qureshi, M.E. 2010. Global water crisis and future food security in an era of climate change. Food Policy 35(5): 365-377. Hanjra, M.A.; Raschid, L.; Zhang, F.; Blackwell, J. Forthcoming. Extending the framework for the economic valuation of the impacts of wastewater management in an age of climate change. Environmental Management. Heggade, O.D. 1998. Urban development in India: Problems, policies and programmes. New Delhi: Mohit publications. 463 pp. IWMED (Institute of Wetland Management and Ecological Design). 2004. Preliminary study on biodiversity of sewage fed fisheries of East Kolkota Wetland Ecosystem. Final Report submitted to the Department of Environment, Government of West Bengal. West Bengal. 40 pp. IWMI (International Water Management Institute). 2008. Annual Report 2007-2008: Research and Impact highlights. Available at www.iwmi.cgiar.org/About_IWMI/Strategic_Documents/Annual_Reports/2007_2008/ IWMI_AR_2007_2008.pdf (accessed on April 4, 2012). Jacobi, J.; Drescher, A.W.; Amerasinghe, P. 2009. Crop diversity as a livelihood strategy? The case of wastewater irrigated vegetable cultivation along the Musi River in periurban Hyderabad, India. In: Biophysical and socio- economic frame conditions for the sustainable management of natural resources, Tropentag, October 6-8, 2009, Hamburg, Germany. Available at www.tropentag.de/2009/abstracts/links/Jacobi_iMdV2JnR.pdf (accessed in March, 2012). Kaur, R.; Rani, R. 2006. Spatial characterization and prioritization of heavy metal contaminated soil-water resources in peri-urban areas of the National Capitol Territory of Delhi. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 123: 233-247. Kumar, M. 2009. Reclamation and reuse of treated municipal wastewater: An option to mitigate water stress. Current Science 96(7): 886-889. Kundu, N.; Halder, N.; Pal, M.; Saha, S.; Bunting, S.W. 2005. Planning for aquatic production in East Kolkata Wetlands. Urban Agriculture 14: 24-26. Lorenzen, G.; Sprenger, C.; Taute, T.; Pekdeger, A.; Mittal, A.; Massmann, G. 2010. Assessment of the potential for bank filtration in a water-stressed megacity (Delhi, India). Environmental Earth Sciences 61(7): 1419-1434. Marshall, F.; Agarwal, R.; te Lintelo, D.; Bhupal, D.S.; Singh, R.P.B.; Mukherjee, N.; Sen, C.; Poole, N.; Agrawal, M.; Singh, S.D. 2003. Heavy metal contamination of vegetables in Delhi. Executive summary of technical report. Project funded by United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) (R7530 Crop Post Harvest Research Programme). Mateo-Sagasta, J.; Salian, P. 2012. Global database on municipal wastewater production, collection, treatment, discharge and direct use in agriculture. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Mekala, G.D.; Davidson, B.; Samad, M.; Boland, A.M. 2008a. Wastewater reuse and recycling systems: A perspective into India and Australia. IWMI Working Paper 128: Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI. 40 pp. 26 Mekala, G.D.; Davidson, B.; Samad, M.; Boland, A. 2008b. A framework for efficient wastewater treatment and recycling systems. IWMI Working Paper 129. Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI. 23 pp. MGI (McKinsey Global Institute). 2010. India’s urban awakening: Building inclusive cities, sustaining economic growth. India: MGI, McKinsey & Company. 231 pp. Misra, S. 1998. Economies of scale in water pollution abatement: A case of small scale factories in an industrial estate in India. Working Paper No. 57. Delhi: Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi. Mittal, A.K.; Jain, M.; Jamwal, P.; Mouchel, J.M. 2006. Treatment of urban run off using constructed wetlands in New Delhi, India. In: Proceedings of the World Environmental and Water Resource Congress 2006: Examining the Confluence of Environmental and Water Concerns, Nebraska, United States, May 21-25, 2006, ed., Randall Graham, P.E. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2009. State of the environment report. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Available at www.moef.gov.in, http://envfor.nic.in (accessed on May 5, 2012). Molle, F.; Berkoff, J. 2009. Cities vs. agriculture: A review of intersectoral water re-allocation. Natural Resources Forum 33(1): 6-18. NIUA (National Institute of Urban Affairs). 2005. Status of water supply, sanitation and solid waste management in urban areas. New Delhi: Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO), Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India. Pescod, M.B. 1992. Wastewater treatment and use in agriculture. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 47. Rome, Italy: FAO. 125 pp. Qadir, M.; Wichelns, D.; Raschid-Sally, L.; McCornick, P.G.; Drechsel, P.; Bahri, A.; Minhas, P.S. 2010. The challenges of wastewater irrigation in developing countries. Agricultural Water Management 97: 561-568. Raghunandan, P.M. 2012. TN now lays claim to city sewage. Deccan Herald. Available at www.deccanherald.com/ content/244394/tn-now-lays-claim-city.html (accessed on October 22, 2012). Raschid-Sally, L. 2010. The role and place of global surveys for assessing wastewater irrigation. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 24(1-2): 5-21. Raschid-Sally, L.; Jayakody, P. 2008. Drivers and characteristics of wastewater agriculture in developing countries: Results from a global assessment. IWMI Research Report 127. Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI. 29 pp. Rawat, M.; Moturi, M.C.; Subramanian, V. 2003. Inventory compilation and distribution of heavy metals in wastewater from small-scale industrial areas of Delhi, India. Journal of Environmental Monitoring 5(6): 906-912. Rawat, M.; Ramanathan, A.; Subramanian, V. 2009. Quantification and distribution of heavy metals from small-scale industrial areas of Kanpur city, India. Journal of Hazardous Materials 172(2-3):1145-1149. Scheierling, S.M.; Bartone, C.; Mara, D.D.; Drechsel, P. 2010. Improving wastewater use in agriculture: An emerging priority. Policy Research Working Paper WPS 5412. Washington, DC: The World Bank, Energy, Transport and Water Department, Water Anchor (ETWWA). Sharma, R.K.; Agrawal, M.; Marshall, F.M. 2009. Heavy metals in vegetables collected from production and market sites of a tropical urban area of India. Food and Chemical Toxicology 47: 583-591. Simmons, R.W.; Blümmel, M.; Reddy, R.C.; Khan, A.A. 2007. Impact of wastewater irrigation on Cd and Pb concentrations in rice straw and paragrass: Implications for food safety. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Food Safety of Animal Products, Amman, Jordan, November 12-14, 2007. 4 pp. Singh, K.P.; Mohon, D.; Sinha, S.; Dalwani, R. 2004. Impact assessment of treated/untreated waste water toxicants discharge by sewage treatment plants on health, agricultural, and environmental quality in waste water disposal area. Chemosphere 55: 227-255. 27 Singh, S.; Kumar, M. 2006, Heavy metal load of soil, water and vegetables in peri-urban Delhi. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 120: 79-91. Srinivasan, J.T.; Ratna Reddy, V. 2009. Impact of irrigation water quality on human health: A case study in India. Ecological Economics 68(11): 2735-2742. Van Rooijen, D.J.; Biggs, T.W.; Smout, I.; Drechsel, P. 2010. Urban growth, wastewater production and use in irrigated agriculture: A comparative study of Accra, Addis Ababa and Hyderabad. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 24: 53–64. Van Rooijen, D.J.; Turral, H.; Biggs, T.W. 2005. Sponge city: Water balance of mega-city water use and wastewater use in Hyderabad, India. Irrigation and Drainage 54(1): S81-S91. WABAG. 2012. Advanced solutions for sludge treatment: Conversion of residues into an energy source. Technology Report. Available at www.wabag.com/wabag/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/SludgeDigestion_2012_EN_v21_WEB. pdf (accessed in August, 2012). Weldesilassie, A.B.; Amerasinghe, P.; Danso, G. 2011. Assessing the empirical challenges of evaluating the benefits and risks of irrigating with wastewater. Water International 36(4): 441-454. WHO (World Health Organization). 2006. Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater. Volume 2: Wastewater use in agriculture. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO. Winrock International India; Institute for Studies and Transformations; Jadavpur University. Department of Economics; Eco Friends; Spatial Decisions; Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA). 2006. Urban wastewater: Livelihoods, health and environmental impacts in India. Research report submitted to Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. New Delhi, India: Winrock International India. 160p. Available at www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Assessment/files_new/research_projects/Urban%20Wastewater-Full_Report.pdf (accessed on November 16, 2012). World Bank. 2004. Water resources sector strategy: Strategic directions for World Bank engagement. Washington, DC. 88 pp. World Bank. 2006. India water supply and sanitation: Bridging the gap between infrastructure and service. Background paper. Urban water supply and sanitation. Washington, DC. World Bank. 2010. Sustaining water of all in a changing climate. World Bank Group Implementation Progress Report of the Water Resources Sector Strategy. Washington, DC. 117 pp. 28 IWMI Research Reports 147 Urban Wastewater and Agricultural Reuse Challenges in India. Priyanie Amerasinghe, Rajendra Mohan Bhardwaj, Christopher Scott, Kiran Jella and Fiona Marshall. 2013. 146 The Water Resource Implications of Changing Climate in the Volta River Basin. Matthew McCartney, Gerald Forkuor, Aditya Sood, Barnabas Amisigo, Fred Hattermann and Lal Muthuwatta. 2012. 145 Water Productivity in Context: The Experiences of Taiwan and the Philippines over the Past Half-century. Randolph Barker and Gilbert Levine. 2012. 144 Revisiting Dominant Notions: A Review of Costs, Performance and Institutions of Small Reservoirs in Sub-Saharan Africa. Jean-Philippe Venot, Charlotte de Fraiture and Ernest Nti Acheampong. 2012. 143 Smallholder Shallow Groundwater Irrigation Development in the Upper East Region of Ghana. Regassa E Namara, J.A. Awuni, Boubacar Barry, Mark Giordano, Lesley Hope, Eric S. Owusu and Gerald Forkuor. 2011. 142 The Impact of Water Infrastructure and Climate Change on the Hydrology of the Upper Ganges River Basin. Luna Bharati, Guillaume Lacombe, Pabitra Gurung, Priyantha Jayakody, Chu Thai Hoanh and Vladimir Smakhtin. 2011. 141 Low-cost Options for Reducing Consumer Health Risks from Farm to Fork Where Crops are Irrigated with Polluted Water in West Africa. Philip Amoah, Bernard Keraita, Maxwell Akple, Pay Drechsel, R.C. Abaidoo and F. Konradsen. 2011. 140 An Assessment of Crop Water Productivity in the Indus and Ganges River Basins: Current Status and Scope for Improvement. Xueliang Cai, Bharat R. Sharma, Mir Abdul Matin, Devesh Sharma and Sarath Gunasinghe. 2010. 139 Shallow Groundwater in the Atankwidi Catchment of the White Volta Basin: Current Status and Future Sustainability. Boubacar Barry, Benony Kortatsi, Gerald Forkuor, Murali Krishna Gumma, Regassa Namara, Lisa-Maria Rebelo, Joost van den Berg and Wolfram Laube. 2010. 138 Bailout with White Revolution or Sink Deeper? Groundwater Depletion and Impacts in the Moga District of Punjab, India. Upali A. Amarasinghe, Vladimir Smakhtin, Bharat R. Sharma and Nishadi Eriyagama. 2010. 137 Wetlands, Agriculture and Poverty Reduction. Matthew McCartney, Lisa-Maria Rebelo, Sonali Senaratna Sellamuttu and Sanjiv de Silva. 2010. Electronic copies of IWMI's publications are available for free. Visit www.iwmi.org/publications/index.aspx Related Publications Drechsel, P.; Scott, C.A.; Raschid-Sally, L.; Redwood, M.; Bahri, A. (Eds.). 2010. Wastewater irrigation and health: Assessing and mitigating risk in low-income countries. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI); London, UK: Earthscan; Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre (IDRC). 432p. www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/books/pdf/Wastewater_Irrigation_and_Health_book.pdf Hussain, I.; Raschid, L.; Hanjra, M. A.; Marikar, F.; van der Hoek, W. 2002. Wastewater use in agriculture: review of impacts and methodological issues in valuing impacts. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 60p. (IWMI Working Paper 037). www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Working_Papers/working/WOR37.pdf Mekala, G.D.; Davidson, B.; Samad, M.; Boland, A.M. 2008. Wastewater reuse and recycling systems: a perspective into India and Australia. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 35p. (IWMI Working Paper 128). www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Working_Papers/working/WOR128.pdf Raschid-Sally, L.; Jayakody, P. 2008. Drivers and characteristics of wastewater agriculture in developing countries: Results from a global assessment. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 29p. (IWMI Research Report 127). www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/IWMI_Research_Reports/PDF/PUB127/RR127.pdf Scott, C.A.; Faruqui, N.I.; Raschid-Sally, L. (Eds.) 2004. Wastewater use in irrigated agriculture: confronting the livelihood and environmental realities. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing; Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI); Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre (IDRC). 193p. www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Books/pdf/Wastewater_Use_in_Irrigated_Agriculture.pdf Postal Address P O Box 2075 Colombo Sri Lanka Location 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatta Battaramulla Sri Lanka Telephone +94-11-2880000 Fax +94-11-2786854 E-mail iwmi@cgiar.org Website www.iwmi.org ISSN: 1026-0862 ISBN: 978-92-9090-765-7