Author: Declan Conway

Originally published on LSE Grantham Research Institute

Public concern about water quality is growing. Frequent pollution incidents in the UK and poor water quality in the River Seine during the Paris Olympics exemplify long-term problems with our water resources. Declan Conway writes that fresh approaches are needed to accelerate progress in addressing these challenges.

Achieving water security for all is a broad societal objective that is contingent on behaviour change at all levels of social action. Water security is a dynamic concept with multiple definitions that generally include the stability and quality of water supply and acceptable levels of risk in relation to hazards such as pollution incidents, floods and droughts. While the concept integrates the human and physical dimensions of water security, the emphasis given to each varies, and there is bias towards physical science approaches. This commentary explores the insights that behavioural research can offer the subject of water security.

The value of behavioural perspectives

A new review and our ongoing research project BASIN show that behavioural perspectives are under-recognised in the study of water, yet they offer great potential. They can contribute to a deeper understanding of human–water interactions; enable deeper engagement with physical science and other social sciences; and improve the design of policy and interventions in the sector.

Behavioural science is a relatively new field, but together with psychology it has facilitated substantial gains in understanding how to encourage positive social and environmental behaviour. Sub-fields such as environmental psychology have highlighted the importance of, among other things, understanding and overcoming cognitive biases; the need for nuanced information provision to address lack of concern or action; the role of framing to increase personal relevance; and the power of emotion, especially positive emotions, to motivate behaviour change.

Applications of behavioural theories in the water context

Flood protection

Researchers are now applying the concept of Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), first implemented in health studies, to flood risk studies. It is well established that just describing risk, while important, is not sufficient to promote behaviour change. Therefore, this theory concentrates on how threats are perceived and the factors influencing how this affects behaviour. It appears that individuals adopt flood mitigation measures if they perceive that the hazard threat to them is high and if they feel that available measures are effective, easy and affordable to implement.

Water quality

Behavioural factors are important for how we perceive water quality. Perception can be measured through general satisfaction, taste satisfaction and risk perception variables. Problems with acceptability due to disgust, or the ‘yuck factor’, receive a lot attention with researchers trying to understand how to increase acceptance around using or drinking recycled water, for example. Many psychological factors influence the perception of drinking water quality; particularly flavour, but also previous experience; perceptions of the supply system and use of chemicals; trust in water companies; and demographic variables like age and gender.

Sustainability

The exponential rise in bottled water use since the early 1990s shows both the need to promote pro-environmental behaviours and the power of marketing, informed by behavioural insights, to encourage consumption at the expense of sustainability. Consumer surveys highlight the importance of how people perceive water contamination and the quality of water supply when they make decisions about bottled water use – despite incidents with bottled water quality. Other factors include attractive packaging, convenience and consistency with self-image. For low- and middle-income countries, there are clear health reasons for the rise in bottled water consumption, but the high environmental impacts and cost of the product are concerning.

Mental health

While the fundamental connections between water and physiological health are well established, water’s links with mental health are less studied and less direct. Yet if water affects mental health, mental health may in turn influence behaviour.

Studies show that post-flood trauma is most commonly manifested in symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety. The pre-existing state of physical and psychological health influences the onset of problems: exposure does not fully explain outcomes as many individuals do not develop symptoms of mental ill-health. There is also growing evidence that water insecurity is a potential driver of poor mental health. Literature on droughts, notably relating to affected farmers in Australia and India, shows links with feelings of shame, anxiety, depression, hopelessness and suicide.

Such findings have prompted calls for a greater focus on mental health in assessing the psychosocial effects of water insecurity and in the design of disaster risk reduction measures.

Teasing out ‘behavioural determinants’ and their applications

Numerous frameworks and concepts are used in the literature to examine the many factors influencing behaviour – or ‘behavioural determinants’. One such framework groups these into four areas: (i) predispositions, such as personality, values and worldview; (ii) mental models of water systems and risk; (iii) frames and psychological distance, including the effects of individual experience; and (iv) the wider context of social norms and social influence – fitting in with others has a strong bearing on action.

Figure 1 below visualises how these four suites of behavioural determinants mediate, through governance processes and material factors such as the environment and technology, between an individuals’ experience of water security and different facets of water security.

Figure 1. How individuals relate to collective aspects of water security

There is potential to integrate behavioural insights into mainstream water governance research – after all, institutions comprise individuals that are subject to behavioural determinants. As such, there is fertile ground in applying this framework to governance contexts, including policy design and implementation, modelling of human decisions in water systems, fostering organisational change, and even in areas such as ‘hydropolitics’ and water-related conflict. These applications are important given that failures in the governance of water often lie at the heart of water security problems, as longstanding debates over public versus private provision show.

Ways forward

We need to recognise the profound connections between the physical and social aspects of water, and that addressing water insecurity requires significant behaviour change. Behavioural research and other social science disciplines such as geography, politics and sociology can be understood as two levels of analysis that exist on a spectrum covering individual, collective, organisational and system levels, with sub-disciplines lying towards the middle of this spectrum.

Social and political contexts may be scarce in much behavioural research, but they feature heavily in social science-oriented water studies like those examining the power dynamics exerted through political economy influences, which may serve to condition and perpetuate water insecurity. Somewhere in between the disciplinary fields lies potential for cross-fertilisation of ideas to help refresh our approaches to water management, while harnessing public concern about the poor state of our water.