The intensifying water scarcity crisis in Iran, coupled with persistent droughts and rising water demand across various sectors, has made the utilization of renewable water resources inevitable. In this context, Rainwater Harvesting Systems (RWHSs) emerge as an efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally sustainable solution that can significantly contribute to meeting water needs, particularly in urban and rural areas. However, the development of this technology in Iran faces numerous legal, institutional, and executive barriers.This paper aims to conduct a comparative analysis of the legal and regulatory frameworks governing rainwater harvesting at the global level and to examine its position within Iran's upstream laws and development programs. This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach utilizing library and documentary research methods. Data were collected through the examination of domestic laws and regulations (including the Law on Equitable Distribution of Water, the Seventh Five-Year Development Plan, and the General Policies on Water Resources) as well as the study of successful experiences of leading countries in rainwater harvesting. The gathered data were analyzed using content analysis and comparative analysis methods.The results indicate that countries adopt four general approaches toward rainwater harvesting: 1) Mandatory approach (e.g., Germany and Turkey), 2) Incentive-based approach (e.g., Brazil and Japan), 3) Facilitation approach (e.g., the United Kingdom and Malaysia), and 4) Restrictive approach (which was previously common in some countries). In Iran, despite clear mandates in upstream documents—such as the requirement to increase water harvesting by 15% in the Seventh Development Plan and the obligation of the Ministry of Energy to provide facilities in regions with rainfall exceeding 250 mm—no significant progress has been made in practice. The most critical barriers identified in the implementation of RWHSs in Iran are: 1) Legal vacuum resulting from the classification of rainwater as public property and the lack of clarity regarding its ownership, 2) Institutional weakness and the absence of a designated coordinating body among executive agencies, 3) Incomplete implementation of existing laws, and 4) Technical and financial obstacles such as high initial costs and the lack of codified national standards.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject: Special Received: 2026/06/24 | Revised: 2026/07/12 | Accepted: 2026/07/12 | ePublished ahead of print: 2026/07/31 | ePublished: 2026/07/31
تکمیل و ارسال فرم تعارض منافع نویسنده گرامی ، پس از ارسال مقاله ، جهت دریافت فرم، لطفا بر روی کلمه فرم تعارض منافع کلیک نمایید و پس از تکمیل، در فایل های پیوست مقاله قرار دهید.