Traspaso de pérdidas y ganancias a la utilidad neta del ejercicio

It has been shown many times that public acceptance can be the single most important factor in the success or failure of a water reuse project, often proving more significant than economic and environmental feasibility (Po et al., 2003; Friedler and Lahav, 2006). Public acceptance is not straightforward and even when key factors like high levels of water scarcity, education and treatment capacities exist (Drechsel et al., 2015b) or where there is widespread acceptance of the concept of wastewater use, this does not always translate into successful projects (Po et al., 2003).

47

The disgust or ‘yuck’ factor is often cited as a reason for people’s unwillingness to accept reuse, especially projects that require close personal proximity or involvement (Po et al., 2003; Miller, 2006). It is a psychological barrier that produces a disgust emotion due to fear of dirtiness or contagion (Po et al., 2003; Miller, 2006) and is often something that stakeholders cannot explain. In general people are more willing to accept uses that involve less contact, such as landscape irrigation, than recreational, domestic or potable use (Friedler and Lahav, 2006; Miller, 2006; Drechsel et al., 2015b; Robinson et al., 2005).

Reuse Projects 2.8.1

People are concerned about the risks of using wastewater, even when they are reassured. This may be because experts describe risk in terms of probabilities while the public has a broader perception of risk. So, while a one in a million chance of infection may be acceptable to a scientist, a member of the public may be concerned that the one person could be them or their child (Po et al., 2003). People also use social and moral values, or ‘outrage factors’ to judge risk and may perceive reuse to have unknown future consequences (Po et al., 2003).

The source of the wastewater is also important. Studies have shown that people prefer to reuse their own waste, rather than that of the community or city, and preferentially accept grey water over black water. However, other studies have disputed this, with respondents choosing large scale projects because of the level of treatment and management of the system. Some respondents feel that systems managed by individuals or communities are more likely to fail (Po et al., 2003).

Trust in the authorities or organizations involved in developing and implementing reuse projects is fundamental to stakeholders’ opinions of reuse (Marks, 2006; Dolnicar and Schäfer, 2009; Hartley, 2006; Baggett et al., 2006; Ormerod and Scott, 2012). The public tends to trust academic researchers and scientists over public agencies and officials (Hartley, 2006; Po et al., 2003; Baggett et al., 2006).

Po et al. (2003) cite attitudes to the environment as influencing project success. People who have already implemented environmental projects were more accepting of reuse schemes. Conversely, the availability of alternative sources is a major disincentive to reuse (Drechsel et al., 2015b), even if the quality is poorer or it is more difficult to treat. Miller (2006) suggests that a flawed price system for water, which keeps it unrealistically low, diminishes acceptance of reuse. Knowing the financial viability of a reuse project, not just to the community but from an individual perspective, is

48 Introducing Safe Reuse Practices

2.8.2

Public perceptions also have a bearing on the transition from informal to formal, or unsafe to safe reuse practices, and can affect the risks and benefits (Drechsel et al., 2015a; 2015b). Where reuse of untreated or partially treated wastewater is common and where regulation of the practice is weak, the adoption of safety interventions will depend on: personal risk awareness, interlinked with educational, social and cultural factors; and financial benefits and costs to individuals. In low-income countries people face numerous risks, including insufficient food and water, and inadequate

sanitation, this sets the context for their perception of the risk of wastewater use. This, in turn, can influence their willingness to introduce risk reduction strategies, even though there may be

contradictions between actual and perceived risks, as wastewater farmers seldom associate infections and diseases with their irrigation practice (Rutkowski et al., 2007; Bos et al., 2010).

In Ghana, much of the vegetables produced with wastewater are sold to wealthier urban consumers, whose risk perception may be different to farmers (Dreschel et al., 2015a). In many places

consumers are unaware of the origin of agricultural produce but as they gain knowledge of the provenance of their food their perceptions may change. ‘This not only restricts the market potential but may also affect social interactions, possibly resulting in victimisation or ostracism’ (Bunting, 2004). This is the case in Addis Ababa, where farmers encounter obstacles in marketing their produce because direct buyers recognize that wastewater-irrigated produce may present food- quality and safety risks (Scott and Raschid-Sally, 2012). Consequently authorities may distance themselves from waste reuse practices. Examples exist of this resulting in the decline of wastewater aquaculture systems (Bunting, 2004). Similarly, governments of countries purchasing products may impose restrictions that damage agricultural systems, as happened in Jordan (McCornick et al., 2004).

Drechsel et al. (2015a) identify six components that contribute to behaviour change in relation to the adoption of risk reduction strategies. These are:

• awareness creation, which plays a supporting role and is best achieved through demonstration and local networks;

• incentives, especially direct economic returns;

• social responsibility, facilitated by the private sector through ‘out-grower schemes’ or accreditation;

49

• laws and regulations, based on locally feasible standards; and • media pressure.

Summary 2.8.3

The general message for both planned and unplanned reuse projects is that public engagement and trust building are essential components for success (Po et al., 2003; Dreschel et al., 2015b).Hartling (2001; cited by Friedler and Lahav, 2006) describes three main measures that if implemented correctly may ensure public acceptance of wastewater reuse schemes: to be transparent and reveal all the facts about the project; to talk to the public in a language they understand, and in a clear and interesting way; and to have the public participate in the decision making process. Campaigns should clearly explain risks and potential economic benefits (Friedler and Lahav, 2006). Dolnicar and Schäfer (2009) suggest that successful projects require contributions from three sides: professional

knowledge for the technical foundation; community acceptance and desire; and ‘issue management’ (managing information, maintaining motivation, demonstrating commitment, promoting

communication, ensuring a fair decision making process and outcome, and building and maintaining trust). However both Po et al. (2003) and Marks (2006) are clear that the effectiveness of public consultation and respectful deliberation are far more successful than social marketing and strategic communication, which can be alienating.