Peruvian Life Cycle Assessment and Industrial Ecology Network (PELCAN), Department of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Avenida Universitaria 1801, San Miguel 15088, Lima, Peru.
Peruvian Life Cycle Assessment and Industrial Ecology Network (PELCAN), Department of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Avenida Universitaria 1801, San Miguel 15088, Lima, Peru.
Sci Total Environ. 2021 Jul 15;778:146227. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146227. Epub 2021 Mar 4.
The centralization-decentralization dichotomy in wastewater treatment management has been a recurrent topic of discussion in the urban context. The escalation of environmental hazards linked to increasing mismanaged wastewater flows in emerging or developing cities has vivified this conundrum. It is argued that there is a wide range of parameters to identify the optimal level of centralization-decentralization that must be implemented. In many cases, this prevents decision-makers from having a clear picture of the most appropriate management choices that must be undertaken. Hence, the main objective of the current discussion consists of an in-depth comparison between centralized wastewater treatment systems and decentralized systems with source separation in urban environments of the Global South. Moreover, a set of actions that should be considered in order to upgrade wastewater treatment systems amidst the existence of numerous economic, social and environmental constraints are analyzed. Considering the constraints of megacentralization as a preferred option, we argue that decision-makers should restrain from entering a centralization-decentralization dichotomy, seeing the process as a gradient between the two concepts. In fact, we advocate combining the benefits of each of the two perspectives to generate an adaptive management, site-specific solution for urban environments. For this, the inclusion of quantitative management tools, such as life-cycle environmental or cost management methodologies, in multi-objective optimization models, constitutes an interesting path forward towards fostering comprehensive policy support.
在城市背景下，污水处理管理的集中-分散二分法一直是一个反复讨论的话题。与新兴或发展中城市日益管理不善的废水流量相关的环境危害的升级加剧了这一困境。有人认为，必须确定要实施的集中-分散的最佳水平，这需要考虑广泛的参数。在许多情况下，这使得决策者无法清楚地了解必须采取的最适当的管理选择。因此，目前讨论的主要目标是在全球南方城市环境中，对集中式污水处理系统和具有源头分离的分散式系统进行深入比较。此外，还分析了在存在众多经济、社会和环境限制的情况下，为升级污水处理系统而应考虑的一系列行动。考虑到作为首选方案的大城市中心化的限制，我们认为决策者不应陷入集中-分散的二分法，而应将这一过程视为两个概念之间的梯度。事实上，我们主张结合这两个观点的优势，为城市环境生成一个适应性管理、特定地点的解决方案。为此，在多目标优化模型中纳入定量管理工具，如生命周期环境或成本管理方法，是促进全面政策支持的一个有趣途径。
