Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Water Use and Conservation Preferences Among Households in an Urbanizing Gradient

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Water Conservation Science and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effectiveness of water policies depends upon the behavioral features of users and factors influencing these processes. Behavioral changes such as a reduction in watering the lawns, reducing water pressure, and taking shorter showers can be used to design policies that can be effective. However, the most impactful changes come from technological modifications, including faucet aerators, water-efficient showerheads and washing machines, dual-flush toilets, and outdoor technology such as automatic sprinkler systems. A survey of households in Amherst, Hadley, and Northampton, of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, USA, is used to measure such behavioral changes as well as technological adoptions along an urbanizing gradient. Objectives of this study are as follows: to assess developments under current and anticipated water conservation strategies in households along an urban gradient, to evaluate the preferences and motivating factors of individuals, and to determine how individuals value their water. Statistical modeling is used to analyze the household survey using several dependent variables, including conservation efforts and willingness to pay. Independent variables included location, economic, and demographic information. Results indicate that those with a higher income are likely to have more water-saving tools indoors and are willing to pay more than those with lower incomes. Age influenced total current conservation adoptions, while metering of water consumption is also significantly related to the indoor adoption of current technology and willingness to pay (WTP) for water infrastructure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kampragou E, Lekkas DF, Assimacopoulos D (2011) Water demand management: implementation principles and indicative case studies. Water Environ J 25:466–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Maxmen A (2018) As Cape Town water crisis deepens, scientists prepare for day zero. Nature 554:13–14

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mann ME, Gleick PH (2015) Climate change and California drought in the 21st century. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(13):3858–3859

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Mello KD, Randhir TO (2017) Diagnosis of water crises in the metropolitan area of São Paulo: Policy opportunities for sustainability. Urban Water J 15(1):53–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2017.1395895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mohamed AS, Savenije HHG (2000) Water demand management: positive incentives, negatives incentives or quota regulation? Phys Chem Earth Part B 25:251–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nieswiadomy ML (1992) Estimating urban residential water demand: effects of price structure, conservation, and education. Water Resour Res 28(3):609–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pullinger M, Anderson B, Browne AL, Medd W (2013) New directions in understanding household water demand: a practices perspective. J Water Supply Res Technol AQUA 62(8):496–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Thobani M (1997) Formal water markets: why, when, and how to introduce tradable water rights. World Bank Res Obs 12:161–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. USEPA (2016) Water use today: water in daily life, WaterSense. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management (4204M), Washington, D.C. URL://https://www3.epa.gov/watersense/our_water/water_use_today.html. Accessed 26 Sept 2016

Download references

Funding

This study is supported in part by the NIFA, Cooperative State Research Extension, Education Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station, under Projects MA500864, MAS00022, MAS00035, MAS000943, NE-1024, and NE-1044, and MA 1014291.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy O. Randhir.

Ethics declarations

The surveys were submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) for approval of research involving humans. Each survey respondent was asked to read and agree to the informed consent document before completing the survey.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Randhir, T.O., Axelson, J.(. Water Use and Conservation Preferences Among Households in an Urbanizing Gradient. Water Conserv Sci Eng 4, 163–173 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41101-019-00074-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41101-019-00074-5

Keywords

Navigation