Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-021-00503-1

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Using groundwater quality index and concentration duration curves

for classification and protection of groundwater resources: relevance
of groundwater quality of reserve determination, South Africa
S. M. Nzama1  · T. O. B. Kanyerere2 · H. W. T. Mapoma3

Received: 31 October 2020 / Accepted: 26 March 2021

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Abstract
Water quality assessment for water resource protection and management is key towards sustainable provision of potable water
supply and in meeting sustainable development goals (SDGs) linked to clean water and sanitation. The spatial and temporal
aspects of groundwater quality in the Nseleni catchment, South Africa (SA) was investigated, its suitability for domestic
use was considered, and required protection measures were established. Using a hybrid approach methodology based on
multiple water quality resource assessment techniques such as groundwater quality index (GQI) and concentration duration
curves (CDCs), 72 groundwater samples collected from 1994 to 2017 were analysed for physico-chemical (Na+, Ca2+, Mg2+,
Cl−, SO42−, NO3−, F−, EC, pH) parameters. Approximately, 33.3% of groundwater samples in the Nseleni catchment were
found suitable for drinking when compared to South African water quality guidelines. The use of a hybrid approach method
showed that overall groundwater quality in the study catchment was classified as excellent for domestic water use when
the groundwater quality index was calculated to be 39.11. Groundwater quality reserve limits for groundwater resources
protection were determined for the nine water quality parameters using CDCs. The study concluded that using groundwater
quality index and concentration duration curves, it was feasible to classify groundwater resources for improved groundwater
quality of reserve determination in the South African context. The study recommends the application of the hybrid method
in various catchments of similar characteristics to the studied catchment for setting groundwater quality limits that would
contribute towards achieving the goal of groundwater resources protection in other catchments.

Keywords Concentration duration curve · Groundwater quality index · Groundwater resource protection · Hybrid
methodology · Sustainable development goals · Water quality class

Introduction growth, land-use changes, and anthropogenic activities

Global availability of sufficient good quality water is impor-
tant in meeting agricultural, domestic, industrial develop-
ments and environmental requirements to ensure sustainable
food security for all (Cole et al. 2018; Masindi and Abiye
2018; Gomez et al. 2019). However, recurring population
* S. M. Nzama
nzamas@dwa.gov.za
1
Reserve Determination, Department of Water and Sanitation,
Pretoria, South Africa
2
Department of Earth Sciences, University of the Western
Cape, Bellville, South Africa
3
Department of Physics and Biochemical Sciences, The
Polytechnic, University of Malawi, Zomba, Malawi
threatens the water resource systems reliability and resil-
ience (Elmhagen et al. 2015; Dlamini et al. 2019; Morris
2019). Achievement of societal driven sustainability pros-
perity such as sustainable development goals (SDGs), espe-
cially targets 6.1 on achieving universal and equitable access
to safe and affordable drinking water for all, depends on the
availability of adequate water of acceptable quality to protect
public health. Given that water is a crosscutting indicator
required for the realization of the SDGs as well as fulfilment
for basic human rights, and therefore, the need to institute
water resources protection measures and not pollute valuable
freshwater resources is vital.
Groundwater is an increasingly important source of
water supply for agriculture, households, industry and it
has been used for centuries to sustain not only human life
but also aquatic environment (Ahring and Steward 2012),

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 31 Page 2 of 11
as a result, groundwater has been used to augment munici-
pal water supplies worldwide. Safe drinking water is vital
for public welfare and is an essential driver of a healthy
economy (Glavan et al. 2019). However, groundwater pol-
lution remains a threat to sustainable water supply, globally
(Masoud et al. 2016; Brouwer et al. 2018; Bodrud-Doza
et al. 2020; Singh et al. 2020). Studies agree that ground-
water contamination induced by anthropogenic activities
will reduce its availability, and aggravate water crisis in
the arid and semi-arid regions, hence several concerns have
been raised with regards to the quality and sustainability of
drinking water supplies (He and Li 2019; Wu et al. 2020).
Therefore, groundwater quality and use is a pressing issue
in global water management with many analysts emphasiz-
ing the role of the state in groundwater resource protection
(Meinzen-Dick et al. 2016). It has been argued that continu-
ous increase in groundwater dependence without proper pro-
tection measures put in place, may lead to overexploitation
and degradation of the resource (Vainu and Terasmaa 2016;
Fig. 1 Locality map of the study area
13
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31
Nelson et al. 2016). There is a pressing need for protection
and monitoring of groundwater systems to establish whether
they are excessively depleted or progressively polluted due
to current regimes of withdrawal for municipal water supply
and other various land use impacts on their quality (Bhaduri
et al. 2016; Gupta and Misra 2018).
The South African legislation mandates the protection of
the nation’s scarce water resources by prescribing a series
of measures such as determination of water resource reserve
to achieve its protection while at the same time acknowl-
edging the important role of water resources in supporting
local social and economic development (Seward 2010).
Determination of water resource reserve involves setting
of water quality reserve limits that can be used as baseline
water quality conditions to prevent water resources quality
deterioration for the continued provision of clean water and
sanitation. Groundwater resource quality reserve limits are
established using the South African water quality guidelines
and national standards such as the quality of domestic water
supplies: assessment guide (WRC 1998) and the South Afri-
can National Standard for drinking water (SANS 241:2015).
The guidelines are comparable to the World Health Organi-
sation (WHO) guidelines for drinking water quality. The
guidelines are most appropriate in the establishment of water
quality status and water quality classification of groundwater
resources ranging from class 0 to class III depending on the
degree of water quality deterioration at the point source.
Such assessment provides insight on whether water from
such groundwater resources is suitable for basic human
needs such as suitability for drinking purpose, and in cases
of unsuitability treatments processes are recommended
before consumption (WRC 1998).
Despite the applicability and extensive use of the national
water quality guidelines and standards for water quality
classification assessment, the results from such processes
are benchmarked against a point source of assessment
(site specific). Outcomes of such assessment differentiate
between acceptable and unacceptable water concentrations
for individual chemicals, and the worst water quality class
of individual chemical concentrations is considered for the
establishment of a point source water quality class. Although
actions at the local scale to meet basic human water needs
may trigger influence at a larger scale (Bhaduri et al. 2016),
which is relevant to water quality management interventions.
However, when spatial aspect of chemical constituents from
groundwater resources within a catchment is considered for
water quality assessment, the up-scaling of the current water
quality classification approach to capture for many point
sources within a larger catchment to derive an overall catch-
ment water quality class becomes a limitation. Such limita-
tion of the approach becomes a challenge in water resources
protection when considering an entire catchment instead of
a point source. Furthermore, the traditional approaches of
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31
using only one technique in assessing water quality is chal-
lenging because such approaches only provide information
on the water quality status of a water resource without fur-
ther recommending and providing insight on intervention
measures required to either maintain or improve established
water quality status of a water resource.
Several models such as Water Quality Index (WQI) and
Flow Duration Curve (FDC) have been used for overall
water quality assessment and for setting water quality limits
in several countries such as Canada, United States, and India
(Varshney and Jamal 2018; Dlamini et al. 2019; Nguyen
and Sevando 2019; Pham 2020). Although FDC has been
extensively used mainly for river management operations
(Requena et al. 2018; Fouad and Loáiciga 2020), however,
such method has not been tested in groundwater manage-
ment, simple because the method was conceptualised for
riverine operations. In terms of groundwater quality assess-
ment, WQI is complementary to other water quality manage-
ment approaches such as health risk assessment and it has
also been used as a cost-effective tool for assessing ground-
water quality and its variability at a larger scale (Su et al.
2016; Jha et al. 2020; Wu et al. 2020). In South Africa, the
use of WQI is to present a summary of information about
the water quality status of a catchment’s water resources.
For example, Dzwairo et al. (2015) reviewed methods and
aspects to consider when developing ecosystem-specific
WQI for basin management. Namugize and Jewitt (2018)
assessed sensitivity for water quality monitoring frequency
in the application of a WQI for the UMngeni River and its
tributaries in the KwaZulu-Natal Province. The study con-
cluded that although WQI is a useful tool for water quality
management, its use should not be a substitute, but rather
complement other water quality management approaches
(Namugize and Jewitt 2018). Using the concept of FDC,
concentration duration curve (CDC) was developed for
groundwater quality assessment in the current study. There-
fore, in the present study a hybrid methodology of the
national water quality guidelines, WQI, and developed CDC
was used for groundwater quality classification, assessment,
and setting of water quality reserve limits within the Nseleni
catchment in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal, SA.
The present study was done to understand groundwater
quality status within the study area, establish water quality
class for the entire Nseleni catchment, and to set ground-
water quality reserve limits and baseline conditions for the
purpose of groundwater resources protection and sustainable
water utilization for various purposes such as clean water
supply and sanitation. Therefore, the objectives of the study
were (i) to use the national water quality guidelines for site-
specific groundwater quality assessment, (ii) to evaluate
and classify groundwater quality for the entire study area
using WQI, and (iii) to apply CDC to better quantify and
Page 3 of 11 31
determine groundwater quality reserve limits for individu-
ally selected water quality parameters.
Materials and methods
Site description
The study area which is the Nseleni catchment is located
in the Sub-Saharan Africa on the southernmost part of the
African continent within the borders of SA in the KwaZulu-
Natal Province (Fig. 1). The catchment forms part of the
fourth-order catchments of SA and it covers an average sur-
face area of about 485  km2. Prominent settlements include
Aquadene, Hillview, KwaMbonambi, Macekane, Matshana,
Makhwela, Ntseleni, Ntwezi, and other smaller settlements.
The catchment receives an estimated 1038.5 mm of Mean
Annual Precipitation (MAP), which serves as a major source
of groundwater recharge estimated at 36.35 Mm3 a−1 (DWAF
2006). The aquifer types found in the study area are inter-
granular and fractured (weathered and fractured), Fractured
and Intergranular. Secondary fractured and weathered aqui-
fers are found in a major part of the study area. Weathering
gives rise from low to moderately yielding aquifers where
groundwater is stored in the interstices in the weathered sat-
urated zone and in joints and fractures of competent rocks.
Intergranular aquifers covers a major portion of the catch-
ment and they are characterised by borehole yields rang-
ing from 0.5 to 2.0 L s−1. Fractured aquifers with potential
borehole yields of between 0.1 and 0.5 L s−1 covers a very
small portion of the study area. The water supply sectors in
the study area consists mainly of bulk industrial, urban (resi-
dential and light industrial), and irrigated agriculture where
human settlement areas such as Macekane and Ningizimu
are primarily dependent on groundwater for water supply.
Should anticipated growth, potential mining and industrial
development materialise in the vicinity of the study area,
the current water sources are likely to come under stress in
the future (DWS 2014). Such economic activities constitute
potential sources of contamination for both groundwater and
surface water bodies.
Data collection
The study used both primary and secondary data sourced
from field investigations and national databases. Field data
collection was conducted between February and Novem-
ber 2017. The study used standard methods as outlined in
Weaver et al. (2007) to collect data directly from the field
experiments.
Briefly, groundwater samples for physico-chemical analy-
sis were collected from groundwater sites (boreholes) using
a bailer after boreholes had been purged and water quality
13
 31 Page 4 of 11 Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31

Table 1 Target water quality Parameters Units Class 0 Class I Class II Class III
ranges per water quality class
for domestic water use (WRC 1
pH pH units 6–9 5–6 & 9–9.5 4–5 & > 9.5–10 < 4 & > 10
1998) 1
Electrical conductivity ms m−1 < 70 70–150 150–370 > 370
2
Calcium as Ca mg L−1 < 80 80–150 150–300 > 300
2
Magnesium as Mg mg L−1 < 70 70–100 100–200 > 200
2
Sodium as Na mg L−1 < 100 100–200 200–400 > 400
3
Chloride as Cl mg L−1 < 100 100–200 200–600 > 600
3
Sulphate as SO4 mg L−1 < 200 200–400 400–600 > 600
3
Nitrate as NOx-N mg L−1 <6 6–10 10–20 > 20
3c
Fluoride as F mg L−1 < 0.7 0.7–1.0 1.0–1.5 > 1.5
1
Parameters are considered as general indicators of water quality in domestic water use as per the South
African water quality guideline (WRC 1998)
2
Parameters may commonly be present at concentrations of aesthetic or economic concern in domestic
water use as per the South African water quality guideline (WRC 1998)
3
Parameters are commonly present at concentrations which may lead to health problems in domestic water
use as per the South African water quality guideline (WRC 1998)

field parameters [temperature, pH, electrical conductivity
(EC)] had stabilized. Water samples were then transferred
into full capacity sterile 250 mL polyethylene sampling bot-
tles to minimise headspace volume (to avoid loss of target
compounds) and labelled accordingly. One ampoule of mer-
cury chloride (HgCl) was added into each sample bottle to
preserve samples from microbiological activities that could
result in changes in chemical constituencies and concentra-
tions within a water sample. Samples were placed into a
cooler box filled with ice packs (to maintain low tempera-
tures) and transported to the laboratory for analysis. All the
sampling bailers used were intensively rinsed with de-ion-
ised water, and the use of powder-free nitrile gloves during
the sampling period was ensured to prevent contamination.
Samples were taken to the Resource Quality Information
Services (RQIS) National Laboratory of the Department of
Water and Sanitation (DWS) where they were stored in a
dark cooler room at a temperature below 4 °C until further
analysis by the laboratory. The chemical analyses were done
by following approved standard laboratory methods using
techniques namely Flammable Atomic Absorption Spec-
trophotometry (FAAS) and Inductively Coupled Plasma-
Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES). Thereafter, the
results from the chemical analysis were captured into the
national Water Management Systems (WMS) database for
further use.
Data analysis
Water quality data were populated and analysed on Micro-
soft Excel 2013 spreadsheet using descriptive statistics. Ana-
lytical precision, as per the principle of electro-neutrality
(Younger 2007), ensured the reliability of the analysis. This
was achieved by calculating the percentage of charge bal-
ance error (% CBE) using the following formula in Eq. 1.
�∑ ∑ �
cations − anions
%CBE = �∑ (1)
∑ �
cations + anions
In this study, only samples with % CBE falling within
± 5% were considered for analysis. In this case, 72 sam-
ples complied with the criteria, while 8 samples that did not
meet the prescribed criteria were excluded from the analysis.
Water quality parameters considered for analysis includes
common major cations (Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+), anions (NO3−,
Cl−, SO42−, F−), and system water quality parameters such

Table 2 Water quality Classification according to Water Quality Classification according to the South African guidelines
classification using Water Index
Quality Index and South
African water quality guidelines WQI level Definition Water quality class Definition
(SANS 241:2015 and WRC
1998) < 50 Excellent water Class 0 Ideal water
50–100 Good water Class I Acceptable water
100–200 Bad water Class II Tolerable water
200–300 Too bad water Class III Unacceptable water
> 300 Inadequate water for Class IV Completely unacceptable water
drinking

13
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31 Page 5 of 11 31

Table 3 Summary of EC (mS m−1) pH Ca Cl F Mg NO3 Na SO4

descriptive statistics for
studied groundwater chemistry Maximum 582.00 9.58 231.50 1784.10 1.03 162.90 20.73 1006.70 336.00
in the study area compared
Median 108.00 8.12 37.65 200.05 0.30 20.56 32.74 175.25 28.25
with SANS 241:2015/WRC
1998 standards (all values for Minimum 31.20 7.01 3.300 33.80 0.11 0.50 0.02 25.70 5.00
chemical parameters are in SD 82.61 0.41 38.88 261.32 0.21 22.70 5.00 136.98 46.18
mg L−1) SANS 241:2015/ 170 5–9.7 150 300 1.5 100 11 200 250
WRC 1998
Compliance (%) 87.50 100 97.2 69.4 100 98.6 90.3 68.1 100

as electrical conductivity (EC) and pH. The selected water
quality parameters are important in drinking water quality
assessment as prescribed by the national standard (WRC
1998). Inclusion of less important water quality parameters
increases uncertainty (Jha et al. 2020).
Site‑specific groundwater quality assessment
In assessing groundwater quality at the point source level,
median values determined from all datasets obtained from
a borehole were compared to the water quality guideline
(WRC 1998). Water was then classified per substance based
on the water quality classes from the guideline (Table 1).
The overall water quality class for a point source was deter-
mined by considering the worst class of all water quality
parameters included in the assessment.
Groundwater quality index
WQI is a tool aimed at simplifying and reporting scien-
tific water quality information that reflects on the com-
posite influence of different water quality parameters into
a single-digit score that describes overall water quality in
Fig. 2 Location of groundwater sampling sites and site-specific water
quality classes within the study area
a catchment, thus providing policymakers and the public
with water quality relevant information that is usable and
easy to understand (Banda and Kumarasamy 2019). To get a
comprehensive picture of the overall groundwater quality in
the study area, the WQI methodology was used to calculate
the groundwater quality index (GQI) of the study area. In
calculating GQI and setting of groundwater quality reserve
limits in the present study, the South African water quality
guidelines WRC (1998) and SANS 241(2015) for domestic
use were taken into consideration. A five-step procedure was
followed in undertaking the process of determining GQI.
The first step involved assigning weight (wi) to the selected
water quality parameters such as pH, electrical conductivity,
calcium, magnesium, sodium, chloride, sulphate, nitrate, and
fluoride according to their relative importance for domestic
water use. In the second step, a relative weight (Wi) for each
of the selected water quality parameter was calculated using
Eq. (2).
n
∑
Wi = wi∕ wi (2)
i=1
The third step involved calculating and assigning a quality
rating scale (qi) for each parameter by dividing the concen-
tration of each water quality parameter (Ci) by its respective
South African water quality standard for domestic use (Si).
In the case where WRC (1998) guideline was used, numeri-
cal limits for class I were considered, and in the case where
SANS 241(2015) standard was used, numerical limits as
specified in the standard were considered. The results were
converted to percentage using Eq. (3).
qi = (Ci∕Si) × 100 (3)
Sub-index (SIi) for each water quality parameter was cal-
culated in the fourth step using the formula in Eq. (4).
SIi = Wi ⋅ qi (4)
In the fifth step, GQI for the entire study area was calcu-
lated using Eq. (5).
∑
GQI = SIi (5)

13
 31 Page 6 of 11 Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31

The calculated GQI values for the study area were clas- where P = the probability that a concentration will be
sified into five types of water quality ratings (Srinivas et al. equalled or exceeded (% of time); M = assigned a rank num-
2017; Alhadithi 2018; Karakus 2018) related to water qual- ber; n = the total number of data set recorded on each water
ity classes (WRC 1998) as indicated in Table 2. quality parameter for a period of record.
The CDC was plotted with calculated P values on the
Concentration duration curves X-axis (% equalled or exceeded) and corresponding concen-
tration values on the Y-axis (mg L−1), and mS m−1 in case of
Using the concept applied in FDC analysis, CDC analy- electrical conductivity.
sis was employed on the collected groundwater quality
data which was used to establish water quality trend in the
Nseleni Catchment, and data were analysed based on the
Results and discussions
temporal variation. FDC is known as a graphical illustration
of the percentage of time (duration) a particular stream flow
Groundwater quality suitability for domestic use
equals or exceeds a given value over a historical period for
a particular river basin. Such illustration uses time-series
The results from the analysis of 72 samples for physico-
data recorded at a selected gauged site (Chouaib et al. 2018;
chemical parameters of groundwater in the study catch-
Requena et al. 2018). In the present study, a method by
ment compared with SANS 241:2015/WRC 1998 standards
CDFW (2013) was followed to create CDCs and establish
are provided in Table 3. Site-specific water quality classes
percentage of time a concentration level of a particular water
within the study area are in Fig. 2. As shown in Table 3,
quality parameter is met and sustained in the study area.
the relative abundance of the major cations in ground-
The CDCs for each water quality parameter (Ca, Mg, Na,
water samples follows the order: Na + > Ca 2+ > Mg 2+,
NO3, Cl, SO4, F, EC), were generated using the recorded
and the relative abundance of major anions is as follows:
historic groundwater quality data, which was ranked in an
Cl− > SO42− > NO3−. The concentrations of Ca2+ and Mg2+
ascending order for the total of n values in Microsoft Excel.
are relatively low as they range between 3.30 and 231.50 mg
However, ranking recorded historic data generated CDCs for
L−1 with a median of 37.65 mg L−1 for Ca2+, and between
pH in a descending order for the total of n values for lower
0.5 and 162.90 mg L−1 with a median of 20.56 mg L−1 for
limits, and in an ascending order for the total of n values for
Mg2+ (Table 3). The concentrations of the two cations fall
upper limits. Each concentration value for each of the water
within the target limits for acceptable water suitable for
quality parameters was given a rank (M) starting with 1 for
domestic use, with 97.2% of samples falling within the target
the lowest value of concentration. Exception for pH, where
limits for Ca2+ and 98.6% of samples being within the target
concentration value was given a rank (M) starting with 1
limits for Mg2+. Na+ in the study area ranges between 25.70
for the lowest value for upper limits and starting with 1 for
and 1006.70 mg L−1 with a median of 175.25 mg L−1. Only
the highest value for lower limits. The equal or exceedance
68.1% of samples falling within the target limits. In terms
probability for each concentration of water quality parameter
of anions, concentrations of Cl− ranged between 33.80 and
considered was determined using the formula in Eq. (6).
1784.10 mg L−1 with a median value of 200.05 mg L−1, and
(
M
) only 69.4% of samples being within the target limits. Con-
P= × 100 (6) centrations of F− range between 0.11 and 1.03 mg L−1 with
n+1

Table 4 Calculated groundwater WQ parameter Standard Weight (wi) Relative Parameter Quality Sub-index (SIi) GQI
quality index for the study area limit (Si) weight concentration rating scale
(Wi) (Ci) (qi)

pH 7.35 2 0.063 8.12 110.48 6.960 39.11

EC 170 2 0.063 108.00 63.53 4.002
Ca 150 3 0.094 37.65 25.10 2.359
Mg 100 3 0.094 15.05 15.05 1.415
Na 200 3 0.094 175.25 87.63 8.237
Cl 300 4 0.125 200.05 66.68 8.335
SO4 250 4 0.125 28.25 11.30 1.413
NO3 11 5 0.156 2.74 24.91 3.886
F 1.5 4 0.125 0.30 20.00 2.500

13
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31
Fig. 3 a–f Concentration duration curve used to establish groundwater reserve a upper limit for pH, b lower limit for pH, c electrical conductiv-
ity, d calcium, e sodium, and f magnesium
a median of 0.30 mg  L−1, and 100% of samples are within
the target limits.
SO 4 2− concentrations range between 5.00 and
336.00 mg L−1 with a median value of 28.25, and 100% of
samples falling within the target limits. Although NO3− con-
centrations ranged between 0.02 and 20.73 mg  L−1 with a
median of 2.74 mg  L−1, however, only 90.3% of samples
falling within the target limits. EC ranged between 31.20 and
582 mS m−1 with a median value of 108.00 mS m−1, while
Page 7 of 11 31
only 87.5% of samples complying with the target limits. The
median values for F− are 0.30 mg L−1 with 100% of samples
falling within the target limits. The pH of the water in the
study area ranged between 7.01 and 9.58 with a median of
8.12, with all of the samples fall within the target range. The
pH of the water in the study area can be classified as ideal
water for domestic use with 100% of samples being within
the target limits.
13
 31 Page 8 of 11 Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31

Fig. 4 a–d Concentration duration curve used to establish groundwater reserve limit for a fluoride, b nitrate, c sulphate, and d chloride

Table 5 Summary of groundwater quality reserve limits established for the study area
WQ parameter Recommended Required compli- Key note
reserve limits ance per period
(%)

pH (upper limit) 8.2 95 The parameters are considered as a general indicator of water quality in
pH (lower limit) 7.5 95 domestic water use
Electrical conductivity (EC) 250 ms m−1 95
Calcium (Ca) 70 mg L−1 85 The parameters may commonly be present at concentrations of aesthetic or
Magnesium (Mg) 35 mg L−1 85 economic concern in domestic water use
Sodium (Na) 280 mg L−1 85
Chloride (Cl) 350 mg L−1 75 The parameters are commonly present at concentrations which may lead to
Sulphate (SO4) 50 mg L−1 75 health problems in domestic water use
Nitrate (NO3) 8 mg L−1 75
Fluoride (F) 0.42 mg L−1 75

13
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31
It is recommended that water resources assessment and
protection must be ensured at the point where the water is
supplied to the consumers (Jiménez-Madrid et al. 2017).
However, safer drinking water protection by considering a
larger area for protection than identified from a single unit
is critical for policy implementation and stability of man-
agement plans over time (Bjerre et al. 2020). Groundwater
quality index (GQI) of the study area was calculated and
analysed using Srinivas et al. (2017), Alhadithi (2018), and
Karakus (2018) techniques from nine water quality parame-
ters sub-index (Table 4). The GQI was calculated to be 39.11
in the study area indicating that water is excellent according
to Water Quality Index classification (Table 2). Accordingly,
the overall water quality class of the study area fall in class 0
based on the South African water quality guidelines (WRC
1998), which is ideal water suitable for domestic use.
Establishment of groundwater quality reserve limits
CDCs for each of the nine water quality parameters were
established using groundwater quality data from 1994 to
2017 (Figs. 3a–f, 4a–d).
The CDCs provided insight on the % of the time a specific
concentration level for each of the water quality parameters
considered in the assessment were equalled or exceeded.
Such revelation is key in establishing levels of water quality
baseline for groundwater resources protection and expected
percentage of compliance over a specific period as provided
in Table 5. The South African water quality guideline (WRC
1998) considers electrical conductivity and pH as general
indicators of water quality in domestic water use. There-
fore, these parameters are deemed as not requiring stringent
conditions for compliance, and thus were assigned a much
more relaxed target level of management requiring a 95%
compliance over a period (Fig. 3a–c). Calcium, magnesium,
and sodium may commonly be present at concentrations of
aesthetic or economic concern in domestic water use. Thus
these parameters have much more stringent target levels of
management requiring at least 85% compliance over a period
(Fig. 3d–f). Furthermore, the guidelines (WRC 1998) con-
sider chloride, sulphate, nitrate, and fluoride as parameters
that are commonly present at concentrations that may lead
to health problems in domestic water use. Therefore, these
water quality parameters were assigned much more stringent
levels of management requiring at least 75% compliance
over a period (Fig. 4a–d).
Conclusions
In this paper, a novel hybrid methodology that considers the
use of water quality standards, groundwater quality index
(GQI), and concentration duration curves (CDC) concept is
Page 9 of 11 31
proposed to analyse, evaluate, and recommend target levels
of groundwater quality protection. The study shows that the
concentrations of the water quality parameters for the major-
ity of groundwater sites assessed in the study area do not
fall within the target limits stipulated in the South African
water quality guidelines. Such findings suggest that ground-
water in the study area is impacted in terms of water quality.
However, when the GQI was established for the catchment,
the assessment showed that the overall groundwater quality
in the study area is excellent for drinking purpose which
translates to water that is ideal for domestic use. When the
concept of CDC analysis was applied to set groundwater
quality reserve limits for selected water quality parameters,
the baseline conditions linked to groundwater quality man-
agement in the study area were successfully established.
Such revelation implies that the CDC analysis technique is
suitable for use in groundwater resources management and
protection activities. The study concluded that the hybrid
methodology which incorporates complementary strategies
for comprehensive water quality assessment at catchment
scale provides a better groundwater resources assessment
and management approach. The approach is therefore rec-
ommended for use in other settings to improve groundwater
resources protection practices, especially in areas where
groundwater quality for domestic water supply remains a
challenge.
Authors’ contributions All authors contributed to the study conception,
design, and approval of the article. Material preparation, data collection
and analysis were performed by SMN. The first draft of the manuscript
was written by SMN and all authors commented on previous versions
of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding Not applicable.
Availability of data and materials The data that support the findings of
this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reason-
able request.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
Ahring TS, Steward DR (2012) Groundwater surface water interac-
tions and the role of phreatophytes in identifying recharge zones.
Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 16:4133–4142. https://doi.org/10.5194/
hess-16-4133-201
Alhadithi M (2018) Evaluation of groundwater quality using water
quality index (WQI) and GIS techniques. Iraqi J Agric Sci
49(2):313–326. http://jcoagri.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/intro/
article/view/236. Accessed 10 Sept 2020.
13
 31 Page 10 of 11
Banda TD, Kumarasamy MV (2019) Development of water quality
indices (WQIs): a review. Pol J Environ Stud 29(3):2011–2021.
https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/110526
Bhaduri A, Bogardi J, Siddiqi A, Voigt H, Vörösmarty C, Pahl-Wostl C,
Bunn SE, Shrivastava P, Lawford R, Foster S, Kremer H, Renaud
FG, Bruns A, Osuna VR (2016) Achieving sustainable develop-
ment goals from a water perspective. Front Environ Sci 4:64.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00064
Bjerre E, Kristensen LS, Engesgaard P, Højberg AL (2020) Driv-
ers and barriers for taking account of geological uncertainty in
decision making for groundwater protection. Sci Total Environ
746:141045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141045
Bodrud-Doza MD, Didar-Ul Islam SM, Rume T, Quraishi SB, Rahman
MS, Bhuiyan MAH (2020) Groundwater quality and human health
risk assessment for safe and sustainable water supply of Dhaka
City dwellers in Bangladesh. J Groundw Sustain Dev 10:100374.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2020.100374
Brouwer R, Ordens CM, Pinto R, de Melo MTC (2018) Economic
valuation of groundwater protection using a groundwater quality
ladder based on chemical threshold levels. J Ecol Indic 88:292–
304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.01.041
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (2013) Stand-
ard operating procedure for flow duration analysis in California.
Department of Fish and Wildlife Instream Flow. Sacramento.
http://www.dfw.ca.gov/water/instream_flow.html
Chouaib W, Caldwell PV, Alila Y (2018) Regional variation of flow
duration curves in the eastern United States: process-based analy-
ses of the interaction between climate and landscape properties. J
Hydrol 559:327–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.01.
037
Cole MJ, Bailey RM, Cullis JDS, Mark G (2018) Water for sustainable
development in the Berg Water Management Area, South Africa.
S Afr J Sci 114(3/4):2017–20134. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.
2018/20170134
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) (2006) ground-
water resource assessment phase II. Final report, National Water
Resources Planning, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry,
Private Bag X313, Pretoria 0001, Republic of South Africa
Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) (2014) Water reconcili-
ation strategy for Richards Bay and surrounding towns. Water
requirements report. National Water Resources Planning, Depart-
ment of Water and Sanitation, Private Bag X 313, Pretoria 0001,
Republic of South Africa
Dlamini S, Gyedu-Ababio TK, Slaughter A (2019) The loading capac-
ity of the Elands River: a case study of the waterval boven waste-
water treatment works, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa.
Water Resour Prot 11:1049–1063. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.
2019.118062
Dzwairo B, Rangeti I, Barratt GJ, Otieno FAO (2015) Ecosystem-
specific water quality indices. Afr J Aquat Sci 40(3):227–234.
https://doi.org/10.2989/16085914.2015.1054341
Elmhagen B, Destouni G, Angerbjörn A, Borgström S, Boyd E, Cous-
ins SAO, Dalén L, Ehrlén J, Ermold M, Hambäck PA, Hedlund
J, Hylander K, Jaramillo F, Lagerholm VKW, Lyon SW, Moor H,
Nykvist B, Pasanen-Mortensen M, Plue J, Prieto C, Van der Velde
Y, Lindborg R (2015) Interacting effects of change in climate,
human population, land use, and water use on biodiversity and
ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 20(1):23. https://doi.org/10.5751/
ES-07145-200123
Fouad G, Loáiciga HA (2020) Independent variable selection for
regression modelling of the flow duration curve for ungauged
basins in the United States. J Hydrol 587:124975. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124975
Glavan M, Železnikar S, Velthof G, Boekhold S, Langaas S, Pintar M
(2019) How to enhance the role of science in European Union
13
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31
Policy making and implementation: the case of agricultural
impacts on drinking water quality. Water 11(3):492. https://doi.
org/10.3390/w11030492
Gomez M, Perdiguero J, Sanz A (2019) Socioeconomic factors affect-
ing water access in rural areas of low and middle income coun-
tries. Water 11(2):202. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020202
Gupta R, Misra K (2018) Groundwater quality analysis of quaternary
aquifers in Jhajjar District, Haryana, India: focus on groundwater
fluoride and health implications. Alex Eng J 57:375–381. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.08.031
He S, Li P (2019) A MATLAB based graphical user interface (GUI)
for quickly producing widely used hydrogeochemical diagrams.
Geochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemer.2019.125550 (In
press)
Jha MK, Shekhar A, Jenifer MA (2020) Assessing groundwater quality
for drinking water supply using hybrid fuzzy-GIS-based water
quality index. J Water Res 179:115867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
watres.2020.115867
Jiménez-Madrid A, Martínez-Navarrete C, Jiménez-Fernández P
(2017) The integration of groundwater protection into land-use
planning, certification and standardization of quality of urban sup-
ply systems. Procedia Eng 209:148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeng.2017.11.141
Karakus CB (2018) Evaluation of groundwater quality in Sivas prov-
ince (Turkey) using water quality index and GIS-based analytic
hierarchy process. Int J Environ Health Res 29(5):500–519.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2018.1551521
Masindi K, Abiye T (2018) Assessment of natural and anthropogenic
influences on regional groundwater chemistry in a highly industri-
alized and urbanized region: a case study of the Vaal River Basin,
South Africa. Environ Earth Sci 77(20):722–736. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12665-018-7907-3
Masoud AA, Koike K, Mashaly HA, Gergis F (2016) Spatio-temporal
trends and change factors of groundwater quality in an arid area
with peat rich aquifers: Emergence of water environmental prob-
lems in Tanta District. Egypt J Arid Environ 124:360–376. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2015.08.018
Meinzen-dick R, Chaturvedi R, Domènech L, Ghate R, Janssen MA,
Rollins ND, Sandeep K (2016) Games for groundwater gov-
ernance: field experiments in Andhra Pradesh. India Ecol Soc
21(3):38. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08416-210338
Morris D (2019) Developing and exploring indicators of water sustain-
able development. Heliyon 5:e01778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
heliyon.2019.e01778
Namugize JN, Jewitt GPW (2018) Sensitivity analysis for water quality
monitoring frequency in the application of a water quality index
for the uMngeni River and its tributaries, KwaZulu-Natal, South
Africa. Water SA 44(4):516–527. https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.
v44i4.01
Nelson T, Chou H, Zikalala P, Lund J, Hui R, Medellin-Azuara J (2016)
Economic and water supply effects of ending groundwater over-
draft in California’s Central Valley. San Franc Estuary Watershed
Sci 14(1):7. https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2016v14iss1art7
Nguyen NTT, Sevando M (2019) Assessing coastal water quality
through an overall index. Pol J Environ Stud 28(4):2321–2330.
https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/90836
Pham HN (2020) Relative water quality index (ReWQI)-a new method
for aggregate water quality assessment. Water Environ. https://doi.
org/10.1111/wej.12586
Requena AI, Chebana F, Ouarda TBMJ (2018) A functional frame-
work for flow-duration-curve and daily stream flow estimation at
ungauged sites. J Adv Water Resour 113:328–340. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.advwatres.2018.01.019
Sustainable Water Resources Management (2021) 7:31 Page 11 of 11 31

Seward P (2010) Challenges facing environmental sustainable ground-

Varshney R, Jamal A (2018) Evaluation of reservoir water quality using
water use in South Africa. J Groundw Assoc 48(2):239–245.
water quality index in govind ballabh pant sagar reservoir. India
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2008.00518.x
Rasayan J Chem 11(3):1177–1182
Singh S, Hariteja N, Prasad TJR, Raju NJ, Ramakrishna CH (2020)
Water Research Commission (WRC) (1998) Quality of domestic water
Impact assessment of faecal sludge on groundwater and river
supplies-volume 1: assessment guide, 2nd edn, Water Research
water quality in Lucknow environs, Uttar Pradesh, India. J
Commission Report No: TT 101/98. Water Research Commission,
Groundw Sustain Dev 11:100461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.
Private Bag x 03, Gezina, 0031, Republic of South Africa
2020.100461
Weaver JMC, Cavé L, Talma AS (2007) Groundwater sampling, 2nd
South African National Standard 241 (SANS 24) (2015) Drinking
edn. A comprehensive guide for sampling methods. Prepared for
water. Part 1: microbiological, physical, aesthetic and chemi-
the Water Research Commission by Groundwater Sciences, Coun-
cal determinands, 2nd edn, South African Bauru of Standards
cil for Scientific Industrial Research, South Africa. WRC Report
(SABS), Private Bag x 191, Pretoria 0001, Republic of South
No TT 303/07. Water Research Commission, Private Bag x 03,
Africa
Gezina, 0031, Republic of South Africa
Srinivas L, Seeta Y, Reddy PM (2017) Assessment of Water Quality
Wu J, Zhang Y, Zhou H (2020) Groundwater chemistry and groundwa-
Index in Lower Manair Dam, Karimnagar district, Telangana. Int J
ter quality index incorporating health risk weighting in Dingbian
Rec Res Asp 4(4):6–10. https://www.ijrra.net/Vol4issue4/IJRRA-
County, Ordos basin of northwest China. Geochemistry. https://
04-04-02.pdf. Accessed 21 Sept 2020
doi.org/10.1016/j.chemer.2020.125607 (In press)
Su H, Kang WD, Xu YJ, Wang JD (2016) Assessment of groundwater
Younger PL (2007) Groundwater in the environment: an introduction.
quality and health risk in the oil and gas field of Dingbian County,
Blackwell, London
Northwest China. Exposure Health 9(4):227–242. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12403-016-0234-6
Vainu M, Terasmaa J (2016) The consequences of increased ground- Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
water abstraction for groundwater dependent closed-basin lakes jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
in glacial terrain. Environ Earth Sci 75(92):173. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12665-015-4967-5

13