Table 9.

Summary of Some findings from literature.

Source	Location	Most Preferred WWRS	Unaccepted WWRS	Major Concerns	Findings	Recommendation
Robinson et al. (2005)	USA	Firefighting; car washing; lawn irrigation; agricultural usage	Potable Reuse; Supplementing Groundwater; Laundry		People with lower income, less education, and people over 65 had little knowledge of WWR	Making information readily available
Friedler et al. (2006)	Israel	Sidewalk landscaping; WC flushing; firefighting.	Domestic laundry; Food preparation, potable aquifer recharge	Health concerns	Water saving, savings in infrastructural cost, and environmental improvements were considered to be reasons to support WWR.	Proper treatment and endorsements from experts
Friedler and Lahav (2006)	Israel	Irrigation of parks; sidewalk landscaping; use in the construction industry	Commercial launderettes	Health concerns	Low contact reuse projects were more likely to be accepted.	National authorities are advised to set up public campaigns, discuss health-related concerns, highlight the economic opportunities of WWR
Buyukkamaci and Alkan (2013)	Turkey	Toilet Flushing; Road Washing; Construction; Firefighting; Agricultural Irrigation; Industry Use	Potable Reuse	Public Health Risks	Reuse scheme not involving close human contact were most likely to be accepted	Active policy initiatives and public awareness
Wilson and Pfaff (2008)	South Africa	N/A	Potable Water Reuse	Emotional Concerns (Yuk Factor); Technical competency; Environmental concerns	Religion had no direct impact on WWR; Respondents suggests that the direct beneficiaries must bear project costs; Unplanned reuse was more favored than planned reuse	Wastewater management case for potable reuse may entail a distinct methodology than arguments with immediate water shortage drivers
Adewumi et al. (2010)	South Africa	Landscape Irrigation; Industrial Processes	Potable Water Reuse	Public Health; Tariffs	Parameters such as aridity, tariffs, retrofitting and new installations, guidelines, and reuse regulations, public health, the quantity of reuse were most likely going to affect the decision of the public	The parameters stated in the findings section must be addressed
Maleksaeidi et al. (2018)	Iran	Agricultural activities	N/A	Health concerns; social impacts; environmental impacts	The study explained that the most critical drivers for employing untreated wastewater for irrigation by farmers were water scarcity, increasing crop yield, difficulty to access freshwater, saving freshwater, increasing soil fertility, and decreasing production costs.	The study emphasized the necessity for planning to improve wastewater treatment along with suitable policies and procedures to enhance farmers' commitment to environmental conservation and human health.
Baawain et al. (2020)	Oman	Irrigation of non-edible crops; landscape irrigation; firefighting; cool buildings.	Potable Reuse; Discharge to the marine environment	Health Concerns	outcomes suggested that the residents were optimistic about supporting any possible option that favored human health and the environment	Public concerns will need to be addressed using research outcomes.

∗WWRS: Wastewater Reuse Scheme; ∗WWR: Wastewater Reuse.