Sustainable Water Management and Infrastructure in Pre-University Education: A Comprehensive Assessment of All Educational Institutions in Cluj County, Romania

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive assessment of water infrastructure, consumption management, and educational practices across all public pre-university educational institutions in Cluj County, Romania. The research addresses the increasingly urgent imperative of sustainable water resource management within educational settings, in alignment with both European and global priorities. This analysis is based on a comprehensive data set collected in June 2025 from all 392 public pre-university educational institutions in Cluj County, encompassing both urban and rural areas, all educational levels, and all types of institutions. Data was gathered using a standardized questionnaire, which was validated with the official support of the Cluj County School Inspectorate. The quantitative analysis highlights significant urban–rural disparities: 95.566% of urban institutions are equipped with modern meters and connected to public water networks, compared to only 68.254% in rural areas. Water consumption monitoring relies predominantly on invoice data (69.388%), while the adoption of advanced monitoring technologies remains limited. Reported water losses are minimal (1.531%), and only 0.765% of educational institutions have indicated non-compliance issues related to water quality in the past three years. Educational measures and water-saving awareness campaigns are present in 65.562% of institutions, yet only about one-third (32.908%) have implemented dedicated projects or partnerships. The financial analysis reveals that 90.487% of annual water and sewerage costs are borne by urban institutions. The study highlights both the progress achieved and the persistent challenges, particularly in rural infrastructure and the expansion of educational interventions. The results provide a robust empirical basis for informing regional and national policies, supporting targeted investments, integrated educational programs, and continuous monitoring to ensure sustainable water resource management in the Romanian educational system.

1. Introduction

Universal access to high-quality drinking water and efficient water resource management are fundamental pillars of sustainable development, as reflected in global priorities and European/national policies on public health, education, and environmental protection [1,2]. Educational institutions are not only centers of intellectual development but also social laboratories where values, attitudes, and behaviors shaping future communities are cultivated [3]. Beyond their traditional mission, pre-university institutions have become key actors in promoting sustainability, including through their water management of and student involvement in ecological responsibility [4,5,6,7].

Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6) emphasizes access to safe water, the need to expand modern infrastructure, and responsible consumption from an early age [8,9]. In Romania, the development of drinking water infrastructure has seen notable progress, yet challenges remain concerning equitable access between urban and rural areas, service quality, and the energy and technological efficiency of existing infrastructures [10,11].

Sustainable water consumption requires a balance between ecological, social, and economic dimensions [12,13], including efficient use, consumption monitoring, loss reduction, and the promotion of responsible practices across all sectors, including education [14,15]. International bodies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) propose sustainability indicators for educational institutions, including per-student consumption, technology efficiency rates, and cost optimization [16,17,18,19].

Education for sustainable development fosters eco-literacy and responsible behavior, with schools playing a key role in both infrastructure provision and awareness programs for rational water use [4,5,6,20,21,22].

Despite increasing literature on sustainable water management, there is a lack of county-level studies based on centralized and validated data that integrate both technical infrastructure and educational measures [12,16,17,18,19,23,24]. Local and regional studies are crucial to identify structural barriers, specific consumption patterns, and transferable models for public policy and institutional strategies [12,25,26,27,28].

This article addresses the challenge of sustainable water management in educational institutions by analyzing comprehensive data collected in June 2025 from all pre-university schools in Cluj County, with the support of the County School Inspectorate. To ensure data accuracy and comparability, respondents reported annual figures for the 2024 calendar year, since data for 2025 were not yet complete at the time of the survey. The research was designed to capture all relevant dimensions of water use and infrastructure at the local level.

Cluj County—with its diverse educational landscape and persistent infrastructure disparities between urban and rural areas—represents an ideal case study for an in-depth investigation. The objectives of this study are to achieve the following: (i) characterize water and sanitation infrastructure according to educational level and area; (ii) analyze water consumption, losses, and costs; (iii) assess the implementation of efficient technologies and educational initiatives for rational water use; and (iv) formulate evidence-based recommendations for improving sustainable water management in pre-university education. The analysis applies internationally validated indicators to the 2024 data set, generating robust insights for policy and institutional practice [29,30,31].

While this study provides a comprehensive assessment of multiple factors impacting the sustainability of water services in pre-university educational institutions, its primary focus is on evaluating and improving water infrastructure, as well as integrating the management of water supply and consumption. Other dimensions, such as human behaviors, water loss, alternative sources, and policy implications, are examined as supporting factors that influence infrastructure performance and service sustainability.

Note on Terminology:

In this article, the term educational institutions refers exclusively to public pre-university institutions—including early childhood (pre-preschool), preschool, primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary schools—in Cluj County. All references to educational institutions throughout the text should be understood within this context, as the study does not include higher education or private institutions.

In addition, the term “losses” is used in this article to encompass both physical losses in the water system (such as leaks or pipe ruptures) and behavioral waste due to excessive or negligent use (such as taps left running), unless otherwise specified. Where relevant, we explicitly distinguish between “physical losses” and “waste”, following distinctions made in the recent technical literature.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area and Setting

The study area is represented by Cluj County, located in northwestern Romania, which holds a strategic geographical and administrative position within the national context. As illustrated in Figure 1, Cluj County stands out due to its complex relief, with elevation values ranging from 215 m in the lowland areas to 1834 m in the mountainous southwest. The figure also delineates the administrative boundaries of the county, highlighting its extensive surface and the spatial distribution of localities.

This diversity in elevation and relief has direct implications for infrastructure development, accessibility, and the spatial distribution of educational services. Cluj County’s network of public educational institutions is distributed across both urban centers and a wide range of rural localities, each characterized by unique accessibility conditions and infrastructural challenges.

From an administrative-territorial perspective, Cluj County comprises a total of 433 localities, reflecting both urban dynamics and the rural character of the region. Of these, six are urban—five municipalities (Cluj-Napoca, Turda, Dej, Câmpia Turzii, Gherla) and one town (Huedin)—while the remaining 427 are rural settlements, each marked as individual points in Figure 1.

The analysis of educational infrastructure reveals that, out of the 433 localities in Cluj County, only 190 have at least one educational institution belonging to the categories analyzed in this study. The distribution of educational institutions in the main urban centers is as follows: the municipality of Cluj-Napoca hosts 131 educational institutions, Turda has 23, Dej has 18, Câmpia Turzii has 11, Gherla has 12, and the town of Huedin has 7 educational institutions. Regarding the rural area, out of the total 427 rural localities, only 184 host educational institutions, totaling 190 institutions. The remaining rural localities do not have, at the time of the analysis, any educational institution included in the categories evaluated in this study.

2.2. Data Sources

The current study uses a quantitative, descriptive, and analytical design, grounded in primary data collected from all 392 educational institutions in Cluj County. The sample encompasses the full spectrum of the educational institutions network, with data collected at all educational levels—early childhood, preschool, primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary—covering both urban and rural environments. Only public institutions are included, while private educational institutions are excluded from this analysis.

Data were collected in June 2025 through a comprehensive questionnaire administered under the coordination of the Cluj County School Inspectorate (ISJ Cluj). Collaboration with ISJ Cluj ensured complete coverage of educational institutions, thereby guaranteeing the representativeness and robustness of the results. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to all educational institutions’ principals, requesting detailed information on the infrastructure, consumption, and management of water resources at the level of each institution.

All financial data were originally collected and reported in Romanian lei (RON). For international comparability, the amounts were converted to Euro (€) using the official exchange rate published by the National Bank of Romania (BNR) on 18 July 2025 (1 € = 5.0736 RON).

2.3. Methods

The structure of the questionnaire was designed to capture the complexity of situations encountered in the field and covered the following main sections:

• General data: type of educational institution, location (urban/rural), educational level, number of children/students;
• Water supply and sewerage infrastructure: existence of connection to the public water network, alternative sources (well, borehole, bottled water), type and condition of the sewerage infrastructure, existence of septic tanks, collection basins, or latrines;
• Water consumption: reporting of minimum, average, and maximum monthly and annual consumption values, by categories of institutions, including the source of data (bill, reading, estimation);
• Monitoring and losses: existence and type of water meters, reporting of losses, identification of causes, and solutions implemented;
• Modern technologies and efficiency: equipment with timer taps, sensors, automatic monitoring technologies, implementation of measures to reduce consumption;
• Water quality: reporting of problems or complaints regarding water quality in the past three years, nature of non-conformities, and remedial actions taken;
• Costs: total annual costs for water supply and sewerage for each institution, highlighting urban/rural differences;
• Educational measures and community involvement: activities, projects, environmental education campaigns, degree of participation of students and staff, existence and effectiveness of internal monitoring and control measures;
• Modernization projects and future initiatives: plans for expanding or upgrading infrastructure, introduction of new technologies, and alternative water sources.

The questionnaire was developed based on international recommendations for monitoring water resources at educational institutions [9,33], adapted to the specific context of the Romanian educational system, and validated through consultation with ISJ Cluj specialists.

2.4. Analytical Techniques

The collected data were carefully centralized and processed, using standard procedures for validating completeness and information consistency. Additional checks were carried out to identify possible reporting errors or omissions, and the results were statistically analyzed, including comparative interpretations by institution category (urban/rural, educational level) and by type of infrastructure.

The indicators analyzed in the study reflect both the technical dimension (access to public network, losses, quality, costs) and the educational and social component (student involvement, educational measures, effectiveness of internal management). This approach allows for the correlation of physical infrastructure with practices and policies implemented at the local level.

The main methodological limitations relate to the declarative nature of some information reported by institutions and the possibility of subjective estimates for certain variables (e.g., water losses or unmetered costs). Through this exhaustive and transparent approach, the study offers a comprehensive and accurate overview of water consumption, infrastructure, and sustainability measures in educational institutions in Cluj County.

The study adheres to ethical research principles: all data were anonymized and used exclusively for scientific purposes. No personal or sensitive data about students or staff was collected, and the participation of institutions was conducted with the agreement of ISJ Cluj and in compliance with national regulations on data processing.

3. Results and Discussion

This section presents a detailed analysis of the data collected in June 2025 from all educational institutions in Cluj County. The results are thematically structured to highlight the characteristics of water and sewerage infrastructure, actual consumption, technical facilities, service quality, associated costs, educational measures, and modernization initiatives identified within the county’s educational institutions network.

The presentation of results follows a comparative approach, both urban–rural and by educational level, emphasizing significant differences, structural challenges, and best practices identified. Each subsection utilizes the centralized primary data, and the interpretation is based exclusively on the reported values, using bibliographic sources strictly when contextualization or reference to national or international standards is required.

3.1. The Dimension of the Educational System in Cluj County: Educational Institutions and Student Population

To understand the local educational context and underpin analyses regarding resource consumption, it is essential to evaluate the dimensions of the educational system in Cluj County. This entails identifying both the number of existing educational institutions and the total number of children/students enrolled in these institutions. The analysis of this data provides a relevant framework for interpreting local particularities and formulating tailored recommendations.

In Cluj County, 392 educational institutions were identified, of which 203 are located in urban areas and 189 in rural areas. These include all structural levels of the educational system, from nurseries and kindergartens to the primary, lower secondary (gymnasium), and upper secondary/professional/technological levels, as shown in

Table 1. Distribution of educational institutions/total number of children/pupils in Cluj County, by level of education and area of location (June 2025).

Level of Education	Educational Institutions			Number of Children/Students
	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural
Pre-preschool (nurseries)	24	21	3	2639	2075	564
Preschool (kindergartens)	132	90	42	17,914	11,627	6287
Primary (preparatory–Grade IV)	51	3	48	32,287	22,613	9674
Lower secondary (grades V–VIII)	121	29	92	23,326	17,121	6205
Upper secondary/vocational/technical (Grades IX–XII/XIII)	64	60	4	20,917	20,545	372
Total	392	203	189	97,083	73,981	23,102

.

The distribution by educational level and location highlights a major concentration of nurseries, kindergartens, and high schools in urban areas, while primary and lower secondary schools are predominantly found in rural areas. This spatial pattern reflects both demographic dynamics and the geographical particularities of Cluj County. Moreover, it emphasizes the need for differentiated strategies to develop educational infrastructure and ensure equity of access to basic resources such as drinking water.

The distribution by educational level confirms the concentration of the school population in urban areas across all levels, with particularly marked differences at the high school and professional levels. The structure of the educational network in Cluj County (Figure 2) highlights a strong urban–rural polarization, which has major implications for the development of basic infrastructure and sustainability policies.

The significant proportion of early childhood (pre-preschool) and high school institutions in urban areas is correlated with the degree of urbanization and the increased demand for complex educational services. In contrast, in rural areas, the emphasis is placed on primary and lower secondary (gymnasium) levels, reflecting the role of educational institutions as pillars of community cohesion. This situation suggests that any intervention aimed at optimizing access to drinking water and sewerage must be differentiated and adapted to local realities, in terms of both investment priorities and educational strategies.

The percentage distribution, illustrated in Figure 3, further clarifies this urban–rural polarization, showing that nearly three-quarters of children and students attend urban educational institutions, particularly at the high school and early childhood levels. In rural areas, the highest share of the school population is found at the primary and lower secondary levels, underlining the importance of these institutions as basic educational centers for communities.

This demographic structure has direct implications for infrastructure planning and resource management. It is essential for the appropriate sizing of water and sewerage infrastructure, as well as for designing educational measures and sustainability strategies adapted to local conditions.

3.2. Water and Sewerage Infrastructure in Educational Institutions in Cluj County

Access to drinking water and an adequate wastewater disposal system are fundamental conditions for conducting the educational process safely and hygienically. This section analyzes the available infrastructure in educational institutions in Cluj County, focusing on water supply sources, the degree of connection to public sewerage networks, and alternative solutions used where centralized infrastructure is lacking.

The distribution of potable water supply sources for educational institutions in Cluj County, presented in

Table 2. Distribution of educational institutions in Cluj County by main source of drinking water supply (June 2025).

Level of Education	Public Water Network			Private Well/Borehole			Other Sources
	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural
Pre-preschool (nurseries)	24	21	3	0	0	0	0	0	0
Preschool (kindergartens)	121	90	31	9	0	9	2	0	2
Primary (preparatory–Grade IV)	42	3	39	7	0	7	2	0	2
Lower secondary (Grades V–VIII)	107	29	78	9	0	9	5	0	5
Upper secondary/vocational/technical (Grades IX–XII/XIII)	64	60	4	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	358	203	155	25	0	25	9	0	9

, reveals an overwhelming dominance of connection to the public network, especially in urban areas. In rural areas, however, a significant number of institutions still use wells, private boreholes, or other alternative water sources, highlighting substantial infrastructure disparities between the two environments. At the early childhood and high school levels, connection to the public network is universal, whereas at the preschool, primary, and lower secondary levels, some institutions still rely on alternative sources.

The percentage distribution of these sources, illustrated in Figure 4, highlights the large proportion of connections to the public network and the significant differences between urban and rural areas.

In rural settings, the reliance on alternative sources persists: At the level of kindergartens, primary, and lower secondary schools, 25 institutions still use wells or private boreholes, and 9 institutions report other sources, most likely bottled water, tankers, or temporary collective solutions. At the high school and early childhood levels, the infrastructure is fully connected to the public network, reflecting both recent investments and the urban prioritization of public service development. These differences emphasize the persistence of infrastructural vulnerabilities in rural areas and among smaller educational institutions, with major implications for public health, educational quality, and long-term sustainability.

A key indicator of basic infrastructure in educational institutions is connection to the public sewerage system, which directly influences the quality of the school environment, hygiene and sanitary safety standards, and compliance with current legal regulations. The analysis of sewerage connections in Cluj County reveals significant differences between urban and rural areas, as well as between educational levels, with a direct impact on investment prioritization and public policies for the modernization of school infrastructure.

Of the 392 educational institutions in Cluj County, according to the data summarized in

Table 3. Distribution of educational institutions in Cluj County, by connection to the public sewerage system (June 2025).

Level of Education	Connected to Sewerage System			Not Connected to Sewerage System
	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural
Pre-preschool (nurseries)	23	21	2	1	0	1
Preschool (kindergartens)	106	88	18	26	2	24
Primary (preparatory–Grade IV)	17	3	14	34	0	34
Lower secondary (Grades V–VIII)	81	29	52	40	0	40
Upper secondary/vocational/technical (Grades IX–XII/XIII)	64	60	4	0	0	0
Total	291	201	90	101	2	99

, 291 institutions are connected to the public sewerage system, while 101 institutions do not benefit from this facility and rely on other means of wastewater collection and disposal. Connection is nearly universal in urban areas (201 out of 203 institutions), but a structural vulnerability persists in rural areas: only 90 out of 189 institutions are connected to the sewerage system, while 99 institutions remain outside the public system, using alternative solutions.

All high schools are connected to sewerage, and almost all early childhood institutions have access, with only one using alternative solutions. In contrast, many preschools, primary, and lower secondary schools—particularly in rural areas—still face major infrastructure gaps, requiring urgent interventions to ensure proper hygiene and environmental protection.

The percentage distribution corresponding to these data is presented in Figure 5, providing a clear picture of the urban–rural gap in access to the public sewerage network in educational institutions in Cluj County. As shown, urban nurseries (pre-preschools) have a connection rate of 87.5%, compared to only 8.33% in rural areas. For kindergartens, 66.67% are connected in urban areas and 13.64% in rural settings. The situation is particularly poor for primary schools: just 5.88% in urban areas and 27.45% in rural areas are connected to the sewerage system, leaving two-thirds of rural primary schools (66.67%) without access. In lower secondary schools, 23.97% are connected in urban areas and 42.98% in rural areas, with a third of rural lower secondary institutions (33.06%) unconnected. The coverage is highest among urban upper secondary/vocational schools (93.75%), but it falls dramatically to 6.25% in rural areas. These figures highlight substantial infrastructural disparities that persist, especially in rural communities and at the primary education level.

A critical aspect for environmental protection and public health is how educational institutions that are not connected to the public sewerage system collect and dispose of wastewater. The lack of connection to modern networks necessitates alternative solutions, ranging from septic tanks and emptiable holding tanks to dry latrines, each with varying levels of safety and sustainability, as shown with the data presented in

Table 4. Methods of wastewater collection/disposal for educational institutions not connected to the public sewerage system in Cluj County (June 2025).

Level of Education	Septic Tank			Emptiable Holding Tank			Dry Latrine
	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural
Pre-preschool (nurseries)	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0
Preschool (kindergartens)	19	2	17	5	0	5	2	0	2
Primary (preparatory–Grade IV)	25	0	25	9	0	9	0	0	0
Lower secondary (Grades V–VIII)	31	0	31	9	0	9	0	0	0
Upper secondary/vocational/technical (Grades IX–XII/XIII)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	75	2	73	24	0	24	2	0	2

. A detailed analysis by educational level and area of residence highlights infrastructural vulnerabilities and the need for priority investments in rural areas.

The percentage distribution of these methods is illustrated in Figure 6, which highlights the predominance of septic tanks and emptiable holding tanks, as well as the persistence of isolated cases of dry latrines in rural areas. Of the 101 educational institutions not connected to the public sewerage system, the vast majority use septic tanks (75 institutions) or emptiable holding tanks (24 institutions), while two rural kindergartens still operate with dry latrines—raising serious concerns regarding hygiene standards and sanitary safety.

Most of these institutions are in rural areas, underscoring the significant urban–rural gap in the basic infrastructure of the educational system. In nurseries, only one institution is not connected to sewage and uses an emptiable holding tank, whereas at the high school level, no institution faces this issue. These data reveal an acute need for targeted investments to eliminate the use of dry latrines and to expand connections to the public sewerage system as part of equity and public health protection policies in education. These data reveal an acute need for targeted investments to eliminate the use of dry latrines and to expand connection to the public sewerage system as part of equity and public health protection policies in education.

3.3. Sanitary Compliance and Sanitary Facility Infrastructure

Obtaining the sanitary operating authorization is an essential requirement for conducting educational activities in safe and healthy conditions for children, students, and staff. The status of authorizations reflects not only compliance with legal requirements but also the level of infrastructure, hygiene, and access to basic facilities. The analysis at the level of Cluj County, as shown in

Table 5. Status of sanitary authorization for educational institutions in Cluj County (June 2025).

Level of Education	Permanent			Temporary			In Progress			None
	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural
Pre-preschool (nurseries)	24	21	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Preschool (kindergartens)	114	87	27	3	2	1	6	1	5	9	0	9
Primary (Preparatory–Grade IV)	38	3	35	4	0	4	6	0	6	3	0	3
Lower secondary (Grades V–VIII)	99	28	71	5	1	4	10	0	10	7	0	7
Upper secondary/vocational/technical (Grades IX–XII/XIII)	62	58	4	1	1	0	1	1	0	0	0	0
Total	337	197	140	13	4	9	23	2	21	19	0	19

, highlights disparities between urban and rural areas, as well as differences between educational levels, with direct implications for the prioritization of investments and remedial measures.

The percentage distribution of educational institutions by the status of sanitary authorization for operation, differentiated by urban and rural areas (Figure 7). The proportion of institutions with permanent sanitary authorization is high in Cluj County, totaling 337 institutions (85.969%). However, clear differences exist between urban areas (197 out of 203) and rural areas (140 out of 189), indicating a need to accelerate the compliance process in rural settings.

Although the number of institutions without authorization or with provisional or pending authorization is low in urban areas, it remains significant in rural areas, especially at the level of kindergartens, primary, and lower secondary schools. This situation reflects infrastructural and resource gaps, as well as the complexity of administrative procedures for obtaining authorizations, highlighting clear priorities for modernization policies and institutional support.

The implementation of smart technologies and automated systems in the sanitary facilities of educational institutions is an important direction for improving water consumption efficiency, increasing hygiene standards, and modernizing school infrastructure. Data collected at the county level, as shown in

Table 6. Smart/automated systems implemented at the sanitary facilities of educational institutions in Cluj County (June 2025).

Level of Education	Time-Controlled Taps			Presence Detection Sensors			Flow Control Devices
	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural	Total	Urban	Rural
Pre-preschool (nurseries)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Preschool (kindergartens)	3	2	1	0	0	0	7	3	4
Primary (preparatory–Grade IV)	1	0	1	1	0	1	12	0	12
Lower secondary (Grades V–VIII)	15	6	9	5	3	2	14	1	13
Upper secondary/vocational/technical (Grades IX–XII/XIII)	7	6	1	5	5	0	7	7	0
Total	26	14	12	11	8	3	40	11	29

, reveals a limited penetration of these technologies, with significant differences between urban and rural areas and between educational levels. This disparity reflects both the degree of modernization of the institutions and recent investment priorities.

The presence of smart technologies and automated systems at the sanitary facilities of Cluj County’s school network remains limited. Only 26 institutions (representing 6.633% of the total) are equipped with timer taps, 11 institutions (2.806%) have presence sensors, and 40 institutions (10.204%) use controlled flow systems. Implementation is slightly higher in urban areas, with 14 institutions (6.899% of the urban total) having timer taps, while rural areas show notable initiatives, particularly in controlled flow systems, with 29 institutions (15.340% of the rural total) equipped.

The absence of these modern solutions in nurseries is noteworthy and signals a critical area for future investment, given the vulnerability of this segment. The results indicate significant potential for increasing water consumption efficiency and improving hygiene by expanding these systems at the county level.

3.4. Water Consumption Management

The efficient management of water consumption in educational institutions is a central component of school infrastructure sustainability. The level of consumption, the degree of meter installation, reported losses, and the mode of data monitoring all reflect the maturity of the management system and the degree of institutional responsibility. The analysis presents a comprehensive comparison of minimum, average, and maximum water consumption values across urban and rural areas, as well as the status of monitoring and loss control at the county level (

Table 7. Potable water consumption (monthly and annual) in educational institutions in Cluj County.

Location Area Quantity	Quantity [m3]	Total	Minimum	Average	Maximum
Urban	month	27,454.84	0	134.580	1450
	year	459,991.24	0	2254.860	108,000
Rural	month	6554.38	0	34.860	1000
	year	75,172.50	0	399.850	12,000

).

Monthly potable water consumption in educational institutions in Cluj County varies significantly, ranging from 0 to 1450 m³/month in urban areas and from 0 to 1000 m³/month in rural areas, with average values of 134.580 m³/month (urban) and 34.860 m³/month (rural). Annual consumption reaches a maximum of 108,000 m³/year in urban areas and 12,000 m³/year in rural areas, indicating major dispersion related to the size of the institution, available facilities, and educational profile. The level of water meter installation is high at the county level, with 82.398% of institutions (323 out of 392) equipped with meters (Figure 8). However, notable disparities persist between urban and rural areas: 95.566% of urban educational institutions (194 out of 203) are equipped with meters, compared to only 68.254% of rural institutions (129 out of 189). This gap affects both the accuracy of consumption monitoring and the capacity for effective resource optimization.

Reported water losses are detailed in

Table 8. Incidence of reported water losses and annual loss volumes by area type at educational institutions of Cluj County (June 2025).

Area Type	Educational Institutions with Water Losses	Educational Institutions Without Water Losses	Total Educational Institutions	Minimum Annual Loss [m3]	Average Annual Loss [m3]	Maximum Annual Loss [m3]
Urban	3	200	203 (51.79%)	200	214.66	244
Rural	3	186	189 (48.21%)	4	34.66	50
Total	6 (1.531%)	386 (98.47%)	392 (100%)

, together with the distribution of Educational Institutions in Cluj County. Water losses are reported only occasionally, by just 6 institutions (1.531% of the total), equally divided between urban and rural areas, with average values of 214.66 m³ (urban) and 34.66 m³ (rural), but with maxima of 244 m³ and 50 m³, respectively. The distribution of educational institutions according to the primary source of water consumption data is utilized for official reporting, disaggregated by urban and rural locations. This classification highlights the relative reliance on billing records, meter readings, and estimations in the reporting process.

Table 9. Distribution of educational institutions in Cluj County, by source of water consumption data used in reporting (urban/rural).

Data Source	Total	Urban	Rural
Bills	272 (69.388%)	177	95
Meter reading	29 (7.398%)	18	11
Estimation	79 (20.153%)	7	72
Not applicable *	12 (3.061%)	2 *	10
Total	392 (100%)	204 (52.041%)	188 (47.959%)

* Note: For “Not applicable,” two institutions in urban areas are included on the invoices of other coordinating educational institutions.

presents the distribution of educational institutions according to the primary source of water consumption data utilized for official reporting, disaggregated by urban and rural locations. This classification highlights the relative reliance on billing records, meter readings, and estimations in the reporting process.

The predominant source of consumption data is the invoice issued by the regional operator (69.388%, or 272 institutions), followed by estimates (20.153%, 79 institutions) and meter readings (7.398%, 29 institutions), reflecting the level of formalization of monitoring at the county level. In 2024, the total annual water and sewerage costs for educational institutions in Cluj County reached €977,823, with 90.5% (€884,805) generated via urban institutions and only 9.5% (€93,018) via rural ones. This difference reflects the concentration of infrastructure and larger institutions in urban areas, differences in tariffs, and limited network access in rural areas. Despite the high overall cost, the low rural share indicates smaller school sizes and partial utility coverage. Reducing losses, improving efficiency, and expanding modern infrastructure remain priorities for ensuring the financial sustainability of the educational system.

Water consumption management practices vary widely, reflecting differences in professionalization and access to technology. Most urban institutions rely on invoicing and direct meter readings, ensuring accurate reporting and better control, while rural schools often depend on estimations and declarative reporting, which limit data accuracy and quick intervention. The limited use of smart technologies—such as smart meters, timer taps, and presence sensors—shows significant potential for improvement through digitalization and targeted investment, aligning with international recommendations to enhance efficiency and reduce wastage, particularly in disadvantaged areas [34].

3.5. Water Quality—Complaints and Nonconformities in the Last 3 Years

Ensuring the quality of drinking water is an essential indicator of safety and health within the school environment. Monitoring complaints and nonconformities regarding water quality allows for the assessment of real risks to which students and staff are exposed, as well as the effectiveness of remediation mechanisms.

Over the past three years (2022–2024), a total of 392 educational institutions in Cluj County were monitored. Out of these, only three institutions (representing 0.765%) reported complaints or nonconformities regarding drinking water quality, while 389 institutions (99.235%) did not register any such issues, indicating a high level of safety in the county’s supply networks.

Of the institutions that reported issues, one was located in an urban area, but the nature of the problem and the remediation measures were not specified in the report. In rural areas, two kindergartens or schools registered non-compliant physico-chemical and/or bacteriological water test results. In both rural cases, the remedial action consisted of providing bottled or externally sourced drinking water for consumption.

The very low rate of complaints confirms the effectiveness of system monitoring and maintenance. Nevertheless, the persistence of even isolated cases highlights the need to maintain strict control standards and ensure rapid intervention when necessary. The purchase of drinking water in risk situations highlights the existence of rapid reaction mechanisms, but in the long term, the optimal solution remains infrastructure development and the strengthening of quality standards. Similar situations are reported at the European level, where adapting measures to local specificities and community involvement play an essential role in maintaining sanitary safety [35].

3.6. Strategies and Initiatives for Reducing Consumption and Education on Responsible Water Use

Ensuring the sustainability of water use in educational institutions requires the implementation of concrete measures to reduce consumption, alongside the development and expansion of educational programs that promote responsibility among students and staff. At the same time, modernization projects and long-term development plans substantially contribute to the continuous improvement of infrastructure and the optimization of consumption practices in the school environment. One of our latest studies [36] highlights the economic, social, and environmental benefits of using optimal household water filters as a sustainable alternative to bottled water by ensuring high-quality drinking water from the public supply through improved mechanical and chemical parameters. In Cluj County, schools have reported a wide range of strategies, including the following:

• Educational and awareness measures (dedicated lessons, campaigns, thematic projects, integration of water issues into the school curriculum);
• Technical and infrastructural measures (periodic inspection of installations, modernization, installation of timer taps, collection of rainwater for various uses);
• Feasibility assessment and, where possible, pilot implementation of graywater reuse systems for non-potable applications, in accordance with recent comparative research on water efficiency in educational buildings;
• Monitoring, control, and supervision (frequent meter readings, close monitoring of consumption, implementation of efficient use programs);
• Responsible practice and collective involvement (practical activities with students, encouraging responsible behavior through rules and best practices at the collective level);
• Communication, information, and visual signaling (informative posters, announcements, internal campaigns to encourage responsible behavior).

Of the 392 educational institutions analyzed, 257 (65.56%) have implemented at least one concrete measure to reduce water consumption, while 135 (34.44%) have not yet adopted such initiatives. Additionally, 129 institutions (32.91%) have initiated or are conducting projects dedicated to responsible water use education, such as thematic lessons, extracurricular activities (“Green Week,” “Water Days”), partnerships with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), technical system installations, user responsibility campaigns, and participation in national or European environmental projects.

Future plans formulated by schools include rehabilitation and modernization projects (including through the National Recovery and Resilience Plan-PNRR), upgrading sanitary facilities, expanding connections to public water and sewerage systems, installing water-saving devices, and developing partnerships with local authorities, NGOs, and universities to adopt modern, efficient solutions.

3.7. Sustainability, Limitations, and Relevance

These findings align with the international literature emphasizing that achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in education requires an integrated approach to infrastructure, governance, and pedagogy [34,37]. Many institutions have demonstrated a growing commitment through awareness campaigns, collaborative projects, and curriculum integration, reflecting European green education priorities and best practices from higher education. Adapting such approaches to the pre-university level can strengthen a long-term culture of sustainability.

The analysis also highlights disparities between urban and rural areas in terms of water and sewerage infrastructure costs, underscoring the need to prioritize investments, expand network connections, and adopt energy- and water-efficient technologies [38]. While this study is based on validated primary data and covers an entire county’s school network, limitations remain due to self-reported information and the absence of interregional comparisons [39]. Nevertheless, the proposed methodology is replicable at regional or national scales, and it offers a robust foundation for public policies aimed at reducing inequalities and enhancing sustainability [35,39], reinforcing the role of education as a driver of equity and sustainable development.

4. Conclusions

This study delivers a comprehensive and empirical assessment of water infrastructure and sustainability practices across the full spectrum of public pre-university educational institutions in Cluj County, Romania. The results reveal a pronounced urban–rural divide: urban schools demonstrate significant advancements in modernization, access to safe drinking water, and efficient management, while numerous rural schools continue to face infrastructural deficiencies and limited sanitation, perpetuating inequities in educational environments.

The analysis highlights that technical improvements yield the most substantial impact when synergistically combined with environmental education and robust community involvement. Case studies within the data set—such as the implementation of smart metering, water-saving technologies, and partnerships with NGOs—underscore the potential for meaningful progress, even within resource-constrained contexts, when local engagement is prioritized.

In summary, the results emphasize that water infrastructure and its integrated management represent the central pillars for advancing sustainability in the educational context, while factors such as human behavior, community participation, and educational initiatives play complementary and supportive roles in strengthening service quality and resilience.

5. Practical Recommendations and Policy Implications

5.1. Policy Relevance and Actionable Insights

The set of indicators and recommendations presented in this chapter provides a direct operational basis for regional and national policy-makers. The comprehensive mapping of infrastructure and water sources highlights priority areas for targeted investments, especially in rural regions and institutions with compliance gaps. The key objectives and measurable performance indicators (KPIs) can be immediately adopted in water management strategies at multiple levels. Moreover, the phased recommendations are detailed below, including technical modernization, the implementation of water-saving technologies, and the integration of water education into curricula formulated to align with evolving policy frameworks. The monitoring and evaluation tools proposed here further enable systematic assessment and adjustment of interventions, supporting transparent, evidence-based public management.

The anticipated effectiveness of these recommendations is grounded in both international research and our empirical results. Studies and technical reports demonstrate that implementing sensor faucets, timer taps, and smart meters in schools can reduce water consumption by 20–40%, primarily by preventing wastage and enabling rapid detection of leaks [40,41,42,43,44,45,46]. Educational programs and systematic monitoring further contribute to an 8–15% reduction through increased awareness and improved practices [5,20]. These outcomes are confirmed by our local pilot projects, where technical and educational interventions together led to average savings of 30% in six months. Consequently, the measures proposed here are robustly evidence-based, and their anticipated benefits are both quantifiable and realistic.

5.2. Practical Recommendations for Reducing and Managing Water Consumption in Educational Institutions

Figure 9 provides a visual summary of the recommended roadmap for sustainable water management at educational institutions for the period of 2025–2028. The diagram integrates the five core pillars of intervention—ranging from infrastructure optimization and monitoring to institutional culture, partnerships, and phased implementation—together with key performance targets and implementation timelines. This strategic overview supports the operational recommendations detailed in the following section.

All indicators are referenced to the 2025 baseline, enabling a transparent evaluation of progress towards future targets. Building on a rigorous empirical analysis of water consumption at educational institutions across Cluj County, this chapter presents a coherent set of operational recommendations, structured around five pillars, each aligned with the latest scientific and technical standards:

• Infrastructure optimization;
• Monitoring and control;
• Institutional culture and education;
• Partnerships and funding;
• Phased implementation.

5.2.1. Infrastructure Optimization

The modernization and technical optimization of water infrastructure constitute the foundation for reducing total consumption and preventing losses.

Table 10. Priority actions for water infrastructure optimization at educational institutions.

Implementation Horizon	Action	Local Example/Benefit	Estimated Cost
Immediate (0–6 months)	Repairing leaking faucets and replacing gaskets; visual inspection routines; awareness signage	Reduces consumption by ~5%; loss cases <1.6% at county level	0–99.549 €/internal resources
Short-term (6–18 months)	Installing timer faucets, low-flow showers, dual-flush retrofits	26 educational institutions equipped: 30–40% reduction in toilet water use	197.099–591.296 €/unit
Medium-term (18–36 months)	Smart meters with remote transmission; rainwater harvesting systems	Urban high schools: 12–15% reduction; rural: rainwater tanks, 20% savings	1576.790–4927.468 €/unit
Strategic (3–5 years)	Public network connection/upgrading septic systems to micro-stations	Priority for rural preschools/primary schools	≥15,767.897 €

details the recommended actions, implementation timeline, and estimated costs, along with illustrative local examples.

5.2.2. Monitoring and Operational Control

The effective reduction in water consumption requires systematic and transparent monitoring. The following are recommended:

• Annual monitoring plan: each institution should designate a person responsible for monthly meter readings and the completion of a water journal;
• Benchmarking: monthly consumption should be compared to targets (urban: 17.0 L/student/day, rural: 8.9 L/student/day—2025 annual values);
• Transparency: Monthly publication of data on a display board and online increases motivation and collective awareness;
• Rapid alert: any deviation greater than 15% triggers an immediate technical inspection.
• Periodic water efficiency audit: Each institution should conduct, at least once every 3–5 years, a systematic water efficiency audit—either internally or with the support of specialized services. This audit enables the identification of hidden losses and inefficiencies that may not be evident from regular monitoring, and it provides a foundation for targeted technical interventions and investment planning [45].

Currently, only 7% of educational institutions use direct readings from smart meters. Increasing this percentage to 50% by 2028 is a key target to enhance monitoring effectiveness.

5.2.3. Institutional Culture and Education

Developing an organizational culture focused on sustainability and promoting responsible behavior among students and teaching staff are essential steps toward achieving long-term efficiency in water management. One recommended approach is the integration of interdisciplinary modules, such as Water in Our Lives, into Science and Civic Education curricula. These modules can be complemented by thematic initiatives such as Water Days or Green Week, which foster ecological awareness through experiential learning.

Additional engagement strategies, including monthly contests like Water Detectives with public displays of results, have demonstrated strong potential to motivate students and encourage responsible water use. Pilot programs implemented at rural schools have already reported up to 18% reductions in water consumption within six months. Another effective method is the participatory audit, which actively involves pupils, parents, and teaching staff in evaluating institutional practices through structured checklists. This collaborative approach has been shown to increase both community involvement and awareness of sustainability goals.

Together, these educational measures—tailored to local contexts and supported via active community participation—represent key recommendations for embedding sustainability principles into the daily culture of educational institutions.

5.2.4. Partnerships and Funding

Progress is significantly accelerated through collaboration with institutional partners and the mobilization of external resources:

• Regional water operators: sponsorships/partnerships for piloting smart meters;
• Municipalities and local councils: co-financing for connections and upgrades (PNRR), Component C10–Local Fund (PNRR–C10);
• NGOs and universities: facilitators for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) workshops and Erasmus+ projects.

5.3. Phased Implementation

Table 11. Main implementation stages.

Timeline	Key Actions
Quarter I	Inventory of installations, setting targets, and appointing a water manager
Quarter II	“Zero–cost” actions, launching an education campaign
Year 1	Timer faucet installation, updating the monthly monitoring procedure
Year 2	Piloting smart meters in at least one building, impact evaluation
Years 3–4	Expanding smart systems, rainwater harvesting, and network connections
Year 5	External audit, recalibration based on new technologies (e.g., IoT valves)

presents the essential steps for implementing the proposed measures.

5.4. Key Performance Indicators (2025, Calculated)

The evaluation of water management progress in educational institutions was based on a set of key KPIs, aligned with national policy goals and sustainability objectives.

Table 12. Key indicators and 2028 targets.

Indicator	Target 2028	Baseline 2025 (Calculated)
Educational institutions with digital monitoring	50%	7%
Institutions with at least one water-saving system	40%	19.64%
Average urban water consumption (L/pupil/day)	≤12 L	17 L
Average rural water consumption (L/pupil/day)	≤15 L	8.9 L
Reported losses	<1%	1.53%

presents the selected KPIs, the calculated baseline values for 2025 derived from the centralized data set, and the established targets for 2028. These indicators include the proportion of educational institutions equipped with digital monitoring systems, the share of institutions implementing at least one water-saving solution, the average daily water consumption per pupil in both urban and rural contexts, and the percentage of reported water losses.

Most of the objectives and targets presented in Table 12 are designed to reduce the use of potable water from the public supply for non-drinking purposes in educational buildings by promoting alternative sources such as rainwater harvesting (e.g., for toilet flushing and irrigation). Recent comparative studies show that, while rainwater harvesting systems are increasingly feasible and accepted in schools, the reuse of graywater (e.g., water from sinks or showers reused for toilet flushing) raises technical and sanitary challenges that currently limit its widespread implementation in educational settings. Nevertheless, a combination of both solutions can further improve water efficiency if local regulations and maintenance capacities allow it. The stepwise and context-sensitive implementation of both rainwater harvesting and graywater reuse, as demonstrated in recent comparative studies [31], is recommended to maximize the water use efficiency at educational institutions.

Recent comparative research strongly supports the inclusion of both rainwater harvesting and graywater reuse in educational infrastructure as complementary strategies. Rodrigues et al. (2023) present a systematic review showing that integrating systems for harvesting rainwater with systems for reusing graywater can enhance urban water security, mitigate flood risk during periods of heavy rainfall, and improve resilience during drought [47]. A 2024 review in Environmental Chemistry Letters further notes that water recycling systems—whether based on rainwater or graywater—can substantially reduce potable water demand, utility costs, and wastewater discharge while also highlighting technological, regulatory, and microbiological safety challenges that require context-specific solutions [48]. A life cycle sustainability assessment conducted in Brazil and Germany (Resources, 2024) shows that rainwater harvesting tends to be more advantageous in regions with abundant rainfall, whereas graywater reuse offers greater benefits in densely populated urban areas with high indoor water consumption; integrating both approaches provides the most balanced outcome in terms of environmental, economic, and social performance [49]. Similarly, a study published by IWA Publishing in 2023 reports that combined systems can reduce potable water consumption by up to 60% in buildings, with investment payback periods between four and eight years, alongside reduced stress on public water infrastructure and enhanced resilience to drought [50]. Complementing these findings, a spatial life cycle cost comparison of residential systems published in Environmental Engineering Science (2020) confirms that, while both rainwater harvesting and graywater reuse require significant initial investment, their long-term resource savings and environmental benefits significantly outweigh the costs, especially when they are implemented together [51]. These insights strengthen the justification for the proposed measures and align with current European priorities for sustainable water management in public facilities.

5.5. Smart Equipment for Educational Institutions Sanitary Facilities

The adoption of modern smart equipment at sanitary facilities can lead to additional reductions of 30–40% in water consumption, as well as improvements in hygiene and control.

Table 13. Recommended smart sanitary equipment for educational institutions.

Equipment Category	Technical Specification/Benefit	Estimated Cost (€/unit)	Estimated Savings	Main Source(s)
Sensor faucets (touch-free)	<5 L/min, 3 bar, stainless, 6V DC	78.839–177.389	32–40% vs. manual	[38,39,40]
Timer faucets (metering)	8–15 sec preset flow, ceramic cartridge	49.275–88.694	25–30%	[40,41,42]
Dual-flush and electronic flaps	3/6 L, optical trigger, ≥200,000 cycles	118.259–216.809	30% per toilet	[42,43]
IoT leak detectors and shut-off	NB-IoT/LTE-M, 5–7 yr battery	147.824–275.938	Eliminates >5 m3/month	[43]
Smart meters RF/LoRa	MID-R80, 15 min reading, alarms	177.389–295.648	12–15% (monitoring)	[40,43]
Smart autonomous toilet cabins	<1.2 L/cycle, vandal–proof, <60 s cycle	10,840.429–14,782.403	40% vs. conventional	[42,43]

Note: Prices based on 2024–2025 market offers (Romania). Savings are typical ranges reported in published studies and pilot projects. Values may vary with local conditions and usage.

summarizes the main categories of recommended equipment, technical specifications, and estimated savings, with reference to recent standards and products.

It is important to note, however, that the effectiveness of timer faucets (metering taps) depends significantly on correct calibration, user behavior, and the specific operational context. Some recent studies, particularly in the U.S., report that, if timers are set too long or if repeated activation is needed, overall water consumption can even increase. As a result, the international best practice recommends that, before replacing existing faucets, institutions should first adjust the flow rates using simple flow restrictors or aerators, which are often more cost-effective and can yield substantial savings without major equipment changes (as highlighted in [43,44,45]). The installation of timer faucets should be combined with proper flow rate adjustments and regular maintenance to maximize water-saving potential and avoid unintended outcomes.

Recommended steps for procurement:

• Needs analysis: inventory current equipment and prioritize facilities with high traffic or outdated installations;
• Specifications: require durability (≥200,000 cycles), low flow rate, battery life >3 years, open data protocol;
• Budget and funding: access PNRR (C10), sponsorships, local budget;
• Procurement procedure: for amounts under 53,216.651 € (excluding VAT)–direct purchase; above this threshold—simplified tender; evaluate based on life cycle cost;
• Pilot and scale-up: start with a representative sanitary group, monitor for 3–6 months, and expand where ROI (Return on Investment) < 4 years (e.g., 500 students–annual savings of ~100 m³, payback in 12–18 months);
• Maintenance and training: contract including spare parts for 3 years and training sessions.

Integration with other pillars:

• These systems are compatible with previous optimizations and rainwater harvesting;
• Data from meters can be integrated into the monthly log and can generate real-time alerts;
• Displaying consumption encourages involvement in educational competitions (e.g., “Water Detectives”).

The gradual and integrated adoption of technical measures, systematic monitoring, and a pro-sustainability institutional culture can ensure reductions of 20–30% in specific consumption within five years, without exceeding an educational institution’s usual budget. The key to success lies in phased planning, community involvement, and access to dedicated funding. Pilot models already implemented in Cluj County can be replicated nationwide to achieve SDG 6—Clean Water and Sanitation for All.