Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Sustainable wastewater reuse for agriculture

Nature Reviews Earth & Environment volume 5, pages 504–521 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 23 September 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

Effective management of water resources is crucial for global food security and sustainable development. In this Review, we explore the potential benefits and challenges associated with treated wastewater (TW) reuse for irrigation. Currently, 400 km3 yr−1 of wastewater is generated globally, but <20% is treated, and of that TW, only 2–15% is reused for irrigation depending on region. The main limitation of TW for irrigation is the inability of current treatment technologies to completely remove all micropollutants and contaminants of emerging concern, some of which have unknown impacts on crops, environment and health. However, advanced water treatment and reuse schemes, supported by water quality monitoring and regulations, can provide a stable water supply for agricultural production, as demonstrated in regions such as the USA and Israel. Such schemes could potentially serve a net energy source, as the embedded energy in wastewater exceeds treatment needs by 9 to 10 times. Agriculturally useful nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium could be also recovered and reused. TW reuse for irrigation could act as a major contributor to a circular economy and sustainable development, but the first steps will be funding and implementation of advanced and sustainable treatment technologies and social acceptance.

Key points

  • Over 80% of global wastewater is discharged untreated (over 95% in some of the least developed countries) into groundwater, rivers or lakes. This untreated wastewater is also sometimes used directly or indirectly for the production of potentially contaminated feed or food.

  • Advanced water treatment and reuse schemes, supported by water quality monitoring and regulations, can provide a safe and stable water supply for agricultural production, freeing up equal volumes of fresh water for drinking and other uses.

  • Treated wastewater (TW) reuse for irrigation has the potential to alleviate irrigation water imbalances, especially in water-scarce regions, and boost or sustain food production by expanding irrigated agriculture, thus promoting global food and water security.

  • Advanced wastewater treatment processes necessitate ongoing research and site-specific evaluations for cost-effective and sustainable reuse practices.

  • Technological opportunities can transform wastewater treatment plants into water, energy and nutrient recovery facilities, achieving energy–carbon neutrality.

  • Comprehensive regulatory frameworks and risk management plans are essential to safeguard the smooth functioning and sustainability of TW reuse systems, and they are vital to ensure environmental and public health, and social acceptance.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Annual volume and percentage of TW reused directly for irrigation.
Fig. 2: Wastewater generation, treatment and reuse.
Fig. 3: Challenges and limitations in treated water (TW) reuse.
Fig. 4: Effective wastewater reuse management and risk planning.
Fig. 5: Emerging technologies that have the potential to transform the wastewater treatment sector into a circular economy framework.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Huggins, X. et al. Hotspots for social and ecological impacts from freshwater stress and storage loss. Nat. Commun. 13, 439 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Schewe, J. et al. State-of-the-art global models underestimate impacts from climate extremes. Nat. Commun. 10, 1005 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schumacher, D. L. et al. Amplification of mega-heatwaves through heat torrents fuelled by upwind drought. Nat. Geosci. 12, 712–717 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rahman, M. F. et al. As the UN meets, make water central to climate action. Nature 615, 582–585 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Naddaf, M. The world faces a water crisis — 4 powerful charts show how. Nature 615, 774–775 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Mueller, J. T. & Gasteyer, S. The widespread and unjust drinking water and clean water crisis in the United States. Nat. Commun. 12, 3544 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ovink, H., Rahimzoda, S., Cullman, J. & Imperiale, A. J. The UN 2023 Water Conference and pathways towards sustainability transformation for a water-secure world. Nat. Water 1, 212–215 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. UN DESA. The sustainable development goals report 2022 (UN DESA, 2022).

  9. Flörke, M., Schneider, C. & McDonald, R. I. Water competition between cities and agriculture driven by climate change and urban growth. Nat. Sustain. 1, 51–58 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhu, P. et al. Warming reduces global agricultural production by decreasing cropping frequency and yields. Nat. Clim. Change 12, 1016–1023 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fito, J. & Van Hulle, S. W. Wastewater reclamation and reuse potentials in agriculture: towards environmental sustainability. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 23, 2949–2972 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Maffettone, R. & Gawlik, B. Technical Guidance Water Reuse Risk Management for Agricultural Irrigation Schemes in Europe. JRC129596 (Publications Office of the European Union, 2022).

  13. FAO. Water for sustainable food and agriculture, Rome, 2017 (FAO, 2017).

  14. FAO. The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture — Systems at Breaking Point. Synthesis report 2021 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2021).

  15. European Investment Bank (EIB). Wastewater as a resource (European Investment Bank, 2022).

  16. WWAP (United Nations World Water Assessment Programme). The United Nations World Water Development Report 2017. Wastewater: the Untapped Resource (UNESCO on behalf of UN-Water, 2017).

  17. Salgot, M. & Folch, M. Wastewater treatment and water reuse. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2, 64–74 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tortajada, C. Contributions of recycled wastewater to clean water and sanitation Sustainable Development Goals. NPJ Clean Water 3, 22 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. van Daalen, K. R. et al. The 2022 Europe report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: towards a climate resilient future. Lancet Public Health 7, e942–e965 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ballester, J. et al. Heat-related mortality in Europe during the summer of 2022. Nat. Med. 29, 1857–1866 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Dimitrova, A., McElroy, S., Levy, M., Gershunov, A. & Benmarhnia, T. Precipitation variability and risk of infectious disease in children under 5 years for 32 countries: a global analysis using Demographic and Health Survey data. Lancet Planet. Health 6, e147–e155 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cipolletta, G. et al. Policy and legislative barriers to close water-related loops in innovative small water and wastewater systems in Europe: a critical analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 288, 125604 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Angelakis, A. N., Asano, T., Bahri, A., Jimenez, B. E. & Tchobanoglous, G. Water reuse: from ancient to modern times and the future. Front. Environ. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2018.00026 (2018).

  24. Singh, V. & Suthar, S. Occurrence, seasonal variation, mass loading and fate of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in sewage treatment plants in cities of upper Ganges bank, India. J. Water Process Eng. 44, 102399 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rizzo, L. et al. Best available technologies and treatment trains to address current challenges in urban wastewater reuse for irrigation of crops in EU countries. Sci. Total Environ. 710, 136312 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Daw, J., Hallett, K., DeWolfe, J. & Venner, I. Energy efficiency strategies for municipal wastewater treatment facilities (NREL, 2012).

  27. McCarty, P. L., Bae, J. & Kim, J. Domestic wastewater treatment as a net energy producer — can this be achieved? Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 7100–7106 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Yalin, D. et al. Mitigating risks and maximizing sustainability of treated wastewater reuse for irrigation. Water Res. X 21, 100203 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Alygizakis, N. A. et al. Evaluation of chemical and biological contaminants of emerging concern in treated wastewater intended for agricultural reuse. Environ. Intern. 138, 105597 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhong, L. et al. Bibliometric overview of research progress, challenges, and prospects of rural domestic sewage: treatment techniques, resource recovery, and ecological risk. J. Water Process Eng. 51, 103389 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Torre, A., Vázquez-Rowe, I., Parodi, E. & Kahhat, R. Wastewater treatment decentralization: is this the right direction for megacities in the Global South? Sci. Total Environ. 778, 146227 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Jung, Y. T., Narayanan, N. & Cheng, Y.-L. Cost comparison of centralized and decentralized wastewater management systems using optimization model. J. Environ. Manag. 213, 90–97 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Massoud, M. A., Tarhini, A. & Nasr, J. A. Decentralized approaches to wastewater treatment and management: applicability in developing countries. J. Environ. Manag. 90, 652–659 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen, P. et al. Research progress on integrated treatment technologies of rural domestic sewage: a review. Water 14, 2439 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Arias, A., Feijoo, G. & Moreira, M. T. in Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering (eds Mannina, G. et al.) 259–287 (Elsevier, 2020).

  36. Yang, F. et al. Performance analysis and evaluation of the 146 rural decentralized wastewater treatment facilities surrounding the Erhai Lake. J. Clean. Prod. 315, 128159 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Hube, S. & Wu, B. Mitigation of emerging pollutants and pathogens in decentralized wastewater treatment processes: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 779, 146545 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Datta, A., Singh, H. O., Raja, S. K. & Dixit, S. Constructed wetland for improved wastewater management and increased water use efficiency in resource scarce SAT villages: a case study from Kothapally village, in India. Int. J. Phytorem. 23, 1067–1076 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Bixio, D. et al. Wastewater reuse in Europe. Desalination 187, 89–101 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Lau, S. S. et al. Toxicological assessment of potable reuse and conventional drinking waters. Nat. Sustain. 6, 39–46 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Liu, L. et al. The importance of system configuration for distributed direct potable water reuse. Nat. Sustain. 3, 548–555 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zawadzka, J., Gallagher, E., Smith, H. & Corstanje, R. Ecosystem services from combined natural and engineered water and wastewater treatment systems: going beyond water quality enhancement. Ecol. Eng. 142, 100006 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Padrón-Páez, J. I., Almaraz, S. D.-L. & Román-Martínez, A. Sustainable wastewater treatment plants design through multiobjective optimization. Comput. Chem. Eng. 140, 106850 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. European Environmental Agency. WISE Freshwater database. https://water.europa.eu/freshwater/countries/uwwt/european-union (2020).

  45. Jones, E. R., Van Vliet, M. T., Qadir, M. & Bierkens, M. F. Country-level and gridded estimates of wastewater production, collection, treatment and reuse. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 13, 237–254 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. AQUASTAT Database. www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/main/index.stm (2020).

  47. Alcalde-Sanz, L. & Gawlik, B. Science for policy report: minimum quality requirements for water reuse in agricultural irrigation and aquifer recharge. Towards a legal instrument on water reuse at EU level (Publications Office of the European Union, 2017).

  48. Radini, S., González-Camejo, J., Andreola, C., Eusebi, A. & Fatone, F. Risk management and digitalisation to overcome barriers for safe reuse of urban wastewater for irrigation — a review based on European practice. J. Water Process Eng. 53, 103690 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. European Union. Regulation (EU) 2020/741 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 on minimum requirements for water reuse. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32020R0741 (2020).

  50. Cui, Q. et al. Bacterial removal performance and community changes during advanced treatment process: a case study at a full-scale water reclamation plant. Sci. Total Environ. 705, 135811 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Xiao, R. et al. Disinfection by-products as environmental contaminants of emerging concern: a review on their occurrence, fate and removal in the urban water cycle. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 19–46 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kümmerer, K., Dionysiou, D. D., Olsson, O. & Fatta-Kassinos, D. Reducing aquatic micropollutants — increasing the focus on input prevention and integrated emission management. Sci. Total Environ. 652, 836–850 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Ungureanu, N., Vlăduţ, V. & Voicu, G. Water scarcity and wastewater reuse in crop irrigation. Sustainability 12, 9055 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Israel Water Authority. Master plan for the sewage system 2030–2050 https://www.gov.il/he/departments/policies/master_plan_for_the_sewage_system (2023).

  55. Ritter, W. State regulations and guidelines for wastewater reuse for irrigation in the US. Water 13, 2818 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Parsons, L. R. Agricultural use of reclaimed water in Florida: food for thought. J. Contemp. Water Res. Educat. 165, 20–27 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Gile, B. C., Sciuto, P. A., Ashoori, N. & Luthy, R. G. Integrated water management at the peri-urban interface: a case study of Monterey. California Water 12, 3585 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Nikiema, J. et al. Wastewater treatment practices in Africa — experiences from seven countries. Ratio 658, 26–34 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Hu, H.-Y., Chen, Z., Hao, S. & Wu, Y. Towards the new era of water reuse in China. The Source (IWA) https://thesourcemagazine.org/towards-the-new-era-of-water-reuse-in-china/ (2021).

  60. Kitano, N., Qu, F. & Bennon, M. Building Gaobeidian: developing the environmental infrastructure of modern Beijing. Asian Development Bank Institute https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/898301/adbi-building-gaobeidian-developing-environmental-infrastructure-modern-beijing.pdf (2023).

  61. Bassi, N., Gupta, S. & Chaturvedi, K. Reuse of treated wastewater in India. Market potential and recommendations for strengthening governance. The Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) https://www.ceew.in/sites/default/files/scaling-wastewater-reuse-treatment-and-management-india.pdf#page=4.10 (2023).

  62. Estévez, S., González-García, S., Feijoo, G. & Moreira, M. T. How decentralized treatment can contribute to the symbiosis between environmental protection and resource recovery. Sci. Total Environ. 812, 151485 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Ramirez, C., Almulla, Y. & Nerini, F. F. Reusing wastewater for agricultural irrigation: a water-energy-food nexus assessment in the North Western Sahara Aquifer System. Environ. Res. Let. 16, 044052 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Miller-Robbie, L., Ramaswami, A. & Amerasinghe, P. Wastewater treatment and reuse in urban agriculture: exploring the food, energy, water, and health nexus in Hyderabad, India. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 075005 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Friedrichsen, C. N., Monroe, M. C., Daroub, S. H. & Wani, S. P. Yuck! Plural valuation of constructed wetland maintenance for decentralized wastewater treatment in rural India. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4, 564539 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Marinelli, E. et al. Water-energy-food-climate nexus in an integrated peri-urban wastewater treatment and reuse system: from theory to practice. Sustainability 13, 10952 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Alfarra, A., Kemp-Benedict, E., Hötzl, H., Sader, N. & Sonneveld, B. A framework for wastewater reuse in Jordan: utilizing a modified wastewater reuse index. Water Res. Manag. 25, 1153–1167 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Aragüés, R. et al. Soil salinization as a threat to the sustainability of deficit irrigation under present and expected climate change scenarios. Irrig. Sci. 33, 67–79 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Nadav, I., Tarchitzky, J. & Chen, Y. Soil cultivation for enhanced wastewater infiltration in soil aquifer treatment (SAT). J. Hydrol. 470–471, 75–81 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Leuther, F., Weller, U., Wallach, R. & Vogel, H.-J. Quantitative analysis of wetting front instabilities in soil caused by treated waste water irrigation. Geoderma 319, 132–141 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Kurtzman, D., Kanner, B., Levy, Y., Nitsan, I. & Bar-Tal, A. Maintaining intensive agriculture overlying aquifers using the threshold nitrate root-uptake phenomenon. J. Environ. Qual. 50, 979–989 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Zhao, Q., Zhang, R., Wang, L., Sun, H. & Liu, C. Boron accumulation in soil, sediment, and plant of wastewater-irrigated areas in Tianjin, China. Environ. Monitor. Assess. 195, 110 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Becerra-Castro, C. et al. Wastewater reuse in irrigation: a microbiological perspective on implications in soil fertility and human and environmental health. Environ. Int. 75, 117–135 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Ofori, S., Puškáčová, A., Růžičková, I. & Wanner, J. Treated wastewater reuse for irrigation: pros and cons. Sci. Total Environ. 760, 144026 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Fennell, B. D., Mezyk, S. P. & McKay, G. Critical review of UV-advanced reduction processes for the treatment of chemical contaminants in water. ACS Environ. Au 2, 178–205 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Zhang, Y. et al. Characterization of UV/chlorine process for micropollutant abatement by probe compound-based kinetic models. Water Res. 237, 119985 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Zhang, Z. et al. Effects of UV disinfection on phenotypes and genotypes of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in secondary effluent from a municipal wastewater treatment plant. Water Res. 157, 546–554 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Balachandran, S. et al. Simultaneous inactivation of multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli and enterococci by peracetic acid in urban wastewater: exposure-based kinetics and comparison with chlorine. Water Res. 202, 117403 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Maffettone, R. et al. Performic acid disinfection of municipal secondary effluent wastewater: inactivation of murine norovirus, fecal coliforms, and enterococci. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 12761–12770 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Shu, Z. et al. Pilot-scale UV/H2O2 advanced oxidation process for municipal reuse water: assessing micropollutant degradation and estrogenic impacts on goldfish (Carassius auratus L.). Water Res. 101, 157–166 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Hembach, N., Alexander, J., Hiller, C., Wieland, A. & Schwartz, T. Dissemination prevention of antibiotic resistant and facultative pathogenic bacteria by ultrafiltration and ozone treatment at an urban wastewater treatment plant. Sci. Rep. 9, 12843 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Drigo, B. et al. Inactivation, removal, and regrowth potential of opportunistic pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes in recycled water systems. Water Res. 201, 117324 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Brienza, M. et al. Reclaimed wastewater reuse in irrigation: role of biofilms in the fate of antibiotics and spread of antimicrobial resistance. Water Res. 221, 118830 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Christou, A. et al. The potential implications of reclaimed wastewater reuse for irrigation on the agricultural environment: the knowns and unknowns of the fate of antibiotics and antibiotic resistant bacteria and resistance genes — a review. Water Res. 123, 448–467 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Piña, B. et al. On the contribution of reclaimed wastewater irrigation to the potential exposure of humans to antibiotics, antibiotic resistant bacteria and antibiotic resistance genes — NEREUS COST Action ES1403 position paper. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2018.01.011 (2018).

  86. Beretsou, V. G. et al. Multiclass target analysis of contaminants of emerging concern including transformation products, soil bioavailability assessment and retrospective screening as tools to evaluate risks associated with reclaimed water reuse. Sci. Total Environ. 852, 158391 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Wang, F.-H. et al. Impact of reclaimed water irrigation on antibiotic resistance in public parks, Beijing, China. Environ. Pol. 184, 247–253 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Shah, A. I. et al. Prospectives and challenges of wastewater treatment technologies to combat contaminants of emerging concerns. Ecol. Eng. 152, 105882 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Mordechay, E. B., Mordehay, V., Tarchitzky, J. & Chefetz, B. Fate of contaminants of emerging concern in the reclaimed wastewater-soil-plant continuum. Sci. Total Environ. 822, 153574 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Paltiel, O. et al. Human exposure to wastewater-derived pharmaceuticals in fresh produce: a randomized controlled trial focusing on carbamazepine. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 4476–4482 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Schapira, M. et al. Involuntary human exposure to carbamazepine: a cross-sectional study of correlates across the lifespan and dietary spectrum. Environ. Int. 143, 105951 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Zhang, C., Barron, L. & Sturzenbaum, S. The transportation, transformation and (bio)accumulation of pharmaceuticals in the terrestrial ecosystem. Sci. Total Environ. 781, 146684 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Tian, R. et al. Uptake and metabolism of clarithromycin and sulfadiazine in lettuce. Environ. Pollut. 247, 1134–1142 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Christou, A. et al. Stress-related phenomena and detoxification mechanisms induced by common pharmaceuticals in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) plants. Sci. Total Environ. 557–558, 652–664 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Christou, A., Michael, C., Fatta-Kassinos, D. & Fotopoulos, V. Can the pharmaceutically active compounds released in agroecosystems be considered as emerging plant stressors? Environ. Int. 114, 360–364 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Mansilla, S. et al. Compounds of emerging concern as new plant stressors linked to water reuse and biosolid application in agriculture. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 9, 105198 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Christou, A., Karaolia, P., Hapeshi, E., Michael, C. & Fatta-Kassinos, D. Long-term wastewater irrigation of vegetables in real agricultural systems: concentration of pharmaceuticals in soil, uptake and bioaccumulation in tomato fruits and human health risk assessment. Water Res. 109, 24–34 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Christou, A. et al. Ranking of crop plants according to their potential to uptake and accumulate contaminants of emerging concern. Environ. Res. 170, 422–432 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Mordechay, E. et al. Wastewater-derived organic contaminants in fresh produce: dietary exposure and human health concerns. Water Res. 223, 118986 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Ali, I. et al. Micro- and nanoplastics in wastewater treatment plants: occurrence, removal, fate, impacts and remediation technologies — a critical review. Chem. Eng. J. 423, 130205 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Carr, S. A., Liu, J. & Tesoro, A. G. Transport and fate of microplastic particles in wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 91, 174–182 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Xia, Y. et al. Plastic materials and water sources actively select and shape wastewater plastispheres over time. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 16, 145 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Liu, P. et al. Sources of micro(nano)plastics and interaction with co-existing pollutants in wastewater treatment plants. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 865–885 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Junaid, M. et al. Wastewater plastisphere enhances antibiotic resistant elements, bacterial pathogens, and toxicological impacts in the environment. Sci. Total Environ. 841, 156805 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Manoli, K. et al. Investigation of the effect of microplastics on the UV inactivation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in water. Water Res. 222, 118906 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Cui, Q., Wang, F., Wang, X., Chen, T. & Guo, X. Environmental toxicity and ecological effects of micro(nano)plastics: a huge challenge posed by biodegradability. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 164, 117092 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Wang, F. et al. Micro(nano)plastics and terrestrial plants: up-to-date knowledge on uptake, translocation, and phytotoxicity. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 185, 106503 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Naziri, A. et al. Looking into the effects of co-contamination by micro(nano)plastics in the presence of other pollutants on irrigated edible plants. Sci. Total Environ. 892, 164618 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Liu, Y. et al. Uptake, transport and accumulation of micro- and nano-plastics in terrestrial plants and health risk associated with their transfer to food chain — a mini review. Sci. Total Environ. 902, 166045 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Rout, P. R. et al. Micro- and nanoplastics removal mechanisms in wastewater treatment plants: a review. J. Hazard. Mat. Adv. 6, 100070 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Maculewicz, J. et al. Transformation products of pharmaceuticals in the environment: their fate, (eco)toxicity and bioaccumulation potential. Sci. Total Environ. 802, 149916 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Yin, L. et al. Pay special attention to the transformation products of PPCPs in environment. Emerg. Contam. 3, 69–75 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Murrell, K. A., Teehan, P. D. & Dorman, F. L. Determination of contaminants of emerging concern and their transformation products in treated-wastewater irrigated soil and corn. Chemosphere 281, 130735 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Madmon, M. et al. Pharmacokinetics of the recalcitrant drug lamotrigine: identification and distribution of metabolites in cucumber plants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57, 20228–20237 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Löffler, P., Escher, B. I., Baduel, C., Virta, M. P. & Lai, F. Y. Antimicrobial transformation products in the aquatic environment: global occurrence, ecotoxicological risks, and potential of antibiotic resistance. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57, 9474–9494 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Ashbolt, N. J. et al. Human health risk assessment (HHRA) for environmental development and transfer of antibiotic resistance. Environ. Health Perspect. 121, 993–1001 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Han, X.-M. et al. Impacts of reclaimed water irrigation on soil antibiotic resistome in urban parks of Victoria, Australia. Environ. Pollut. 211, 48–57 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Zammit, I., Marano, R. B., Vaiano, V., Cytryn, E. & Rizzo, L. Changes in antibiotic resistance gene levels in soil after irrigation with treated wastewater: a comparison between heterogeneous photocatalysis and chlorination. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 7677–7686 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Summerlin III, H. N. et al. Prevalence of Escherichia coli and antibiotic-resistant bacteria during fresh produce production (romaine lettuce) using municipal wastewater effluents. Front. Microbiol. 12, 660047 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Marano, R. B., Zolti, A., Jurkevitch, E. & Cytryn, E. Antibiotic resistance and class 1 integron gene dynamics along effluent, reclaimed wastewater irrigated soil, crop continua: elucidating potential risks and ecological constraints. Water Res. 164, 114906 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Marano, R. B., Gupta, C. L., Cozer, T., Jurkevitch, E. & Cytryn, E. Hidden resistome: enrichment reveals the presence of clinically relevant antibiotic resistance determinants in treated wastewater-irrigated soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 6814–6827 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Kampouris, I. D. et al. Antibiotic resistance gene load and irrigation intensity determine the impact of wastewater irrigation on antimicrobial resistance in the soil microbiome. Water Res. 193, 116818 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Zhuang, M. et al. Distribution of antibiotic resistance genes in the environment. Environ. Pollut. 285, 117402 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Seyoum, M. M., Lichtenberg, R., Orlofsky, E., Bernstein, N. & Gillor, O. Antibiotic resistance in soil and tomato crop irrigated with freshwater and two types of treated wastewater. Environ. Res. 211, 113021 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Liu, Y. et al. Cropping system exerts stronger influence on antibiotic resistance gene assemblages in greenhouse soils than reclaimed wastewater irrigation. J. Hazard. Mat. 425, 128046 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  126. Cerqueira, F. et al. Antibiotic resistance gene distribution in agricultural fields and crops. A soil-to-food analysis. Environ. Res. 177, 108608 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Leiva, A. M., Piña, B. & Vidal, G. Antibiotic resistance dissemination in wastewater treatment plants: a challenge for the reuse of treated wastewater in agriculture. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 20, 1043–1072 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Guo, Y. et al. Diversity and abundance of antibiotic resistance genes in rhizosphere soil and endophytes of leafy vegetables: focusing on the effect of the vegetable species. J. Hazard. Mat. 415, 125595 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Xu, H. et al. Antibiotic resistance gene-carrying plasmid spreads into the plant endophytic bacteria using soil bacteria as carriers. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 10462–10470 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  130. Xiao, R. et al. Antibiotic resistance in soil-plant systems: a review of the source, dissemination, influence factors, and potential exposure risks. Sci. Total Environ. 869, 161855 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Garner, E. et al. Towards risk assessment for antibiotic resistant pathogens in recycled water: a systematic review and summary of research needs. Environ. Microbiol. 23, 7355–7372 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Djordjevic, S. P. et al. Genomic surveillance for antimicrobial resistance — a One Health perspective. Nat. Rev. Genet. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-023-00649-y (2023).

  133. Berendonk, T. U. et al. Tackling antibiotic resistance: the environmental framework. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 13, 310–317 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  134. Ben, Y. et al. Human health risk assessment of antibiotic resistance associated with antibiotic residues in the environment: a review. Environ. Res. 169, 483–493 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  135. Gudda, F. O. et al. Antibiotic-contaminated wastewater irrigated vegetables pose resistance selection risks to the gut microbiome. Environ. Pollut. 264, 114752 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  136. Scaccia, N., Vaz-Moreira, I. & Manaia, C. M. The risk of transmitting antibiotic resistance through endophytic bacteria. Trends Plant. Sci. 26, 1213–1226 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  137. Yin, X. et al. Toward a universal unit for quantification of antibiotic resistance genes in environmental samples. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57, 9713–9721 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  138. Manaia, C. M. Framework for establishing regulatory guidelines to control antibiotic resistance in treated effluents. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 754–779 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Breitenmoser, L. et al. Perceived drivers and barriers in the governance of wastewater treatment and reuse in India: insights from a two-round Delphi study. Resour. Conserv. Recyc. 182, 106285 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  140. NRMMC, EPHC & AHMC. Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling: managing health and environmental risks (phase 1) https://www.waterquality.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/water-recycling-guidelines-full-21.pdf (2006).

  141. US Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for water reuse (EPA, 2012).

  142. ISO. ISO 20426:2018 — guidelines for non-potable water reuse (ISO, 2018).

  143. ISO. ISO 16075:2020 — guidelines for treated wastewater use for irrigation projects — parts 1 to 4 (ISO, 2020).

  144. WHO. Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater in agriculture and aquaculture (WHO, 2006).

  145. Walton, M. The energy sector should care about wastewater. International Energy Agency https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-energy-sector-should-care-about-wastewater (2018).

  146. Lu, L. et al. Wastewater treatment for carbon capture and utilization. Nat. Sustain. 1, 750–758 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Zhang, X. & Liu, Y. Resource recovery from municipal wastewater: a critical paradigm shift in the post era of activated sludge. Biores. Technol. 363, 127932 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  148. Tian, X., Richardson, R. E., Tester, J. W., Lozano, J. L. & You, F. Retrofitting municipal wastewater treatment facilities toward a greener and circular economy by virtue of resource recovery: techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 8, 13823–13837 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  149. Zhang, X. & Liu, Y. Circular economy is game-changing municipal wastewater treatment technology towards energy and carbon neutrality. J. Chem. Eng. 429, 132114 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  150. Kehrein, P. et al. A critical review of resource recovery from municipal wastewater treatment plants — market supply potentials, technologies and bottlenecks. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 6, 877–910 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  151. Furness, M., Bello-Mendoza, R., Dassonvalle, J. & Chamy-Maggi, R. Building the ‘bio-factory’: a bibliometric analysis of circular economies and life cycle sustainability assessment in wastewater treatment. J. Clean. Prod. 323, 129127 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  152. Robles, Á. et al. New frontiers from removal to recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus from wastewater in the circular economy. Bioresour. Technol. 300, 122673 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  153. Rani, A., Snyder, S. W., Kim, H., Lei, Z. & Pan, S.-Y. Pathways to a net-zero-carbon water sector through energy-extracting wastewater technologies. npj Clean Water 5, 49 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  154. Chhipi-Shrestha, G., Hewage, K. & Sadiq, R. Fit-for-purpose wastewater treatment: conceptualization to development of decision support tool (I). Sci. Total Environ. 607–608, 600–612 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  155. Raza, A., Altaf, S., Ali, S., Ikram, M. & Li, G. Recent advances in carbonaceous sustainable nanomaterials for wastewater treatments. Sustain. Mat. Technol. 32, e00406 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. Pervez, M. N. et al. A critical review on nanomaterials membrane bioreactor (NMs-MBR) for wastewater treatment. npj Clean Water 3, 43 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  157. Hodges, B. C., Cates, E. L. & Kim, J.-H. Challenges and prospects of advanced oxidation water treatment processes using catalytic nanomaterials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 642–650 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  158. Matheri, A. N., Mohamed, B., Ntuli, F., Nabadda, E. & Ngila, J. C. Sustainable circularity and intelligent data-driven operations and control of the wastewater treatment plant. Phys. Chem. Earth A/B/C 126, 103152 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Matheri, A. N., Ntuli, F., Ngila, J. C., Seodigeng, T. & Zvinowanda, C. Performance prediction of trace metals and cod in wastewater treatment using artificial neural network. Comput. Chem. Eng. 149, 107308 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  160. Kamali, M., Appels, L., Yu, X., Aminabhavi, T. M. & Dewil, R. Artificial intelligence as a sustainable tool in wastewater treatment using membrane bioreactors. Chem. Eng. J. 417, 128070 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  161. Zhao, L. et al. Application of artificial intelligence to wastewater treatment: a bibliometric analysis and systematic review of technology, economy, management, and wastewater reuse. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 133, 169–182 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  162. Newhart, K. B., Holloway, R. W., Hering, A. S. & Cath, T. Y. Data-driven performance analyses of wastewater treatment plants: a review. Water Res. 157, 498–513 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  163. Kuo, E. Y. et al. Multiomics approaches and genetic engineering of metabolism for improved biorefinery and wastewater treatment in microalgae. Biotechnol. J. 17, 2100603 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  164. Fernández-Arévalo, T. et al. Quantitative assessment of energy and resource recovery in wastewater treatment plants based on plant-wide simulations. Water Res. 118, 272–288 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Li, L. et al. Carbon neutrality of wastewater treatment — a systematic concept beyond the plant boundary. Environ. Sci. Ecotech. 11, 100180 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  166. Abdel Wahaab, R., Mahmoud, M. & van Lier, J. B. Toward achieving sustainable management of municipal wastewater sludge in Egypt: the current status and future prospective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 127, 109880 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  167. Qadir, M. et al. Global and regional potential of wastewater as a water, nutrient and energy source. Nat. Resour. Forum 44, 40–51 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  168. Iqbal, A. et al. Potential for co-disposal and treatment of food waste with sewage: a plant-wide steady-state model evaluation. Water Res. 184, 116175 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  169. Arthur, P. M. A. et al. Performance evaluation of a full-scale upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor coupled with trickling filters for municipal wastewater treatment in a developing country. Heliyon 8, e10129 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  170. Kong, Z. et al. Insights into the carbon neutrality for the treatment process engineering of municipal wastewater by anaerobic membrane bioreactor integrated with partial nitritation-anammox: CO2 reduction and energy recovery. J. Water Process Eng. 49, 102996 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Gu, J., Yang, Q. & Liu, Y. Mainstream anammox in a novel A-2B process for energy-efficient municipal wastewater treatment with minimized sludge production. Water Res. 138, 1–6 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  172. Cruz, H. et al. Mainstream ammonium recovery to advance sustainable urban wastewater management. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 11066–11079 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  173. Ardakani, M. N. & Gholikandi, G. B. Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) in integration with anaerobic treatment processes (AnTPs) and membrane bioreactors (MBRs) for simultaneous efficient wastewater/sludge treatment and energy recovery — a state-of-the-art review. Biomass Bioenergy 141, 105726 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  174. Pandey, P. et al. Recent advances in the use of different substrates in microbial fuel cells toward wastewater treatment and simultaneous energy recovery. Appl. Energy 168, 706–723 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  175. Chen, Y. Mining wastewater for hydrogen. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 3, 551 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  176. Barbieri, P., MacDonald, G. K., Bernard de Raymond, A. & Nesme, T. Food system resilience to phosphorus shortages on a telecoupled planet. Nat. Sustain. 5, 114–122 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  177. Sniatala, B., Kurniawan, T. A., Sobotka, D., Makinia, J. & Othman, M. H. D. Macro-nutrients recovery from liquid waste as a sustainable resource for production of recovered mineral fertilizer: uncovering alternative options to sustain global food security cost-effectively. Sci. Total Environ. 856, 159283 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  178. Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F. L. & Stensel, H. D. Wastewater Engineering — Treatment and Reuse (McGraw-Hill, 2003).

  179. Ye, Y. et al. Nutrient recovery from wastewater: from technology to economy. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 11, 100425 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  180. Zhang, C., Guisasola, A. & Baeza, J. A. A review on the integration of mainstream P-recovery strategies with enhanced biological phosphorus removal. Water Res. 212, 118102 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  181. Vecino, X., Reig, M., Gibert, O., Valderrama, C. & Cortina, J. L. Integration of liquid-liquid membrane contactors and electrodialysis for ammonium recovery and concentration as a liquid fertilizer. Chemosphere 245, 125606 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  182. Díaz, V. et al. Microalgae bioreactor for nutrient removal and resource recovery from wastewater in the paradigm of circular economy. Bioresour. Technol. 363, 127968 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  183. Chen, Y.-Z. et al. Sustainable treatment of nitrate-containing wastewater by an autotrophic hydrogen-oxidizing bacterium. Environ. Sci. Ecotech. 9, 100146 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  184. Zhang, F., Li, J. & He, Z. A new method for nutrients removal and recovery from wastewater using a bioelectrochemical system. Bioresour. Technol. 166, 630–634 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  185. Arun, S., Sinharoy, A., Pakshirajan, K. & Lens, P. N. L. Algae based microbial fuel cells for wastewater treatment and recovery of value-added products. Renewab. Sustain. Energy Rev. 132, 110041 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  186. Goswami, R. K., Mehariya, S., Verma, P., Lavecchia, R. & Zuorro, A. Microalgae-based biorefineries for sustainable resource recovery from wastewater. J. Water Process Eng. 40, 101747 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  187. Tal, A. Rethinking the sustainability of Israel’s irrigation practices in the drylands. Water Res. 90, 387–394 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  188. European Environment Agency. Water scarcity conditions in Europe (water exploitation index plus) (8th EAP). European Environment Agency https://www.eea.europa.eu/ims/use-of-freshwater-resources-in-europe-1) (2023).

  189. Christou, A., Eliadou, E., Michael, C., Hapeshi, E. & Fatta-Kassinos, D. Assessment of long-term wastewater irrigation impacts on the soil geochemical properties and the bioaccumulation of heavy metals to the agricultural products. Environ. Monit. Assess. 186, 4857–4870 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  190. Liu, X., Liang, C., Liu, X., Zhao, F. & Han, C. Occurrence and human health risk assessment of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in real agricultural systems with long-term reclaimed wastewater irrigation in Beijing, China. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 190, 110022 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  191. Radcliffe, J. C. Water recycling in Australia — during and after the drought. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 1, 554–562 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  192. Radcliffe, J. C. & Page, D. Water reuse and recycling in Australia — history, current situation and future perspectives. Water Cycle 1, 19–40 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  193. Radcliffe, J. C. Current status of recycled water for agricultural irrigation in Australia, potential opportunities and areas of emerging concern. Sci. Total Environ. 807, 151676 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  194. US Environmental Protection Agency. Regulations and end-use specifications explorer (REUSExplorer). US Environmental Protection Agency https://www.epa.gov/waterreuse/regulations-and-end-use-specifications-explorer-reusexplorer (2023).

  195. Inbar, Y. in Wastewater Reuse — Risk Assessment, Decision-Making and Environmental Security (ed. Zaidi, M. K.) 291–296 (Springer, 2007).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to T. Mina and A. Naziri (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and NIREAS - International Water Research Center of the University of Cyprus) and T. Casado Poblador for their invaluable contribution to the development of the figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agricultural Research Institute, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Ministry of Rural Development and Environment, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Anastasis Christou

  2. Nireas - International Water Research Center, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Anastasis Christou, Vasiliki G. Beretsou, Iakovos C. Iakovides, Popi Karaolia, Costas Michael & Despo Fatta-Kassinos

  3. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Vasiliki G. Beretsou, Iakovos C. Iakovides, Popi Karaolia & Despo Fatta-Kassinos

  4. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    Tarik Benmarhnia

  5. IRSET - UMR_S 1085, EHESP, INSERM, Université de Rennes, Rennes, France

    Tarik Benmarhnia

  6. Department of Soil and Water Sciences, Institute of Environmental Sciences, Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel

    Benny Chefetz

  7. Future Industries Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    Erica Donner

  8. Cooperative Research Centre for Solving Antimicrobial Resistance in Agribusiness, Food and Environments (SAAFE CRC), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    Erica Donner

  9. Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy

    Bernd Manfred Gawlik & Roberta Maffettone

  10. School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Engineering, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST), Gwangju, Republic of Korea

    Yunho Lee

  11. School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Teik Thye Lim

  12. Urban Pollution Research Centre, Middlesex University, London, UK

    Lian Lundy

  13. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno, Fisciano, Italy

    Luigi Rizzo

  14. Agroecology Unit, Bourgogne-Franche-Conté Research Centre, Dijon, France

    Edward Topp

  15. Department of Biology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

    Edward Topp

Authors
  1. Anastasis Christou
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vasiliki G. Beretsou
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Iakovos C. Iakovides
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Popi Karaolia
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Costas Michael
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tarik Benmarhnia
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Benny Chefetz
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Erica Donner
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Bernd Manfred Gawlik
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Yunho Lee
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Teik Thye Lim
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Lian Lundy
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Roberta Maffettone
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Luigi Rizzo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Edward Topp
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Despo Fatta-Kassinos
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.C. and D.F.-K. led the conceptualization, writing, editing and revision of the Review. A.C., V.G.B., I.C.I., P.K., C.M., T.B., B.C., E.D., B.M.G., Y.L., T.T.L., L.L., R.M., L.R., E.D. and D.F.K. contributed to the data collection, analysis and writing of the Review. All authors also reviewed and edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Despo Fatta-Kassinos.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Earth & Environment thanks J. Camejo and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Christou, A., Beretsou, V.G., Iakovides, I.C. et al. Sustainable wastewater reuse for agriculture. Nat Rev Earth Environ 5, 504–521 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-024-00560-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-024-00560-y

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene