Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Implementing Pollution Source Control—Learning from the Innovation Process in English and Welsh Water Companies

Abstract

Improving the stimulation and management of innovation by water utilities is a key mechanism through which the challenges of securing sustainable water and wastewater services will be achieved. This paper describes the process of adopting source control interventions (SCIs) by water and sewerage companies (WaSCs) in England and Wales. SCIs can be defined as efforts by water suppliers to control agricultural pollution where it arises. To investigate differences in the extent to which SCIs have and are being adopted across all ten WaSCs in England and Wales, Rogers’ five stage innovation model is used to structure and interpret results from a series of semi-structured interviews with raw water quality and catchment management personnel. Results suggest that to promote SCI innovation by WaSCs, regulation should be designed in two interdependent ways. First, regulation must generate awareness of a performance gap so as to set an agenda for change and initiate innovation. This can be achieved either through direct regulation or regulation which raises the awareness of an organisations performance gap, for example through additional monitoring. Simultaneously, regulation needs to create possibilities for implementation of innovation through enabling WaSCs to utilise SCIs where appropriate. Evidence from the research suggests that appropriate intermediary organisations can assist in this process by providing a resource of relevant and local knowledge and data. Future research should seek to characterise the factors affecting each stage in the WaSC innovation process both to confirm the conclusions of this study and to reveal more detail about various influences on innovation outcomes.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Abbreviations

CSFI:

England catchment sensitive farming delivery initiative

Defra:

Department for food and rural affairs

DOC:

Dissolved organic carbon

DWI:

Drinking water inspectorate

EU:

European Union

EA:

Environment agency

NGO:

Non Governmental Organisation

Ofwat:

Office for water sciences

RWQ:

Raw water quality

SCI:

Source control Intervention

WaSC:

Water and sewerage companies

WFD:

Water framework directive

References

  1. Allan G (2006) Assessing capital efficiency in the water and sewerage industry in England and Wales: Ofwat’s approach. Util Pol 14(4):224–233

  2. Bach M, Hoch AS, Friedrich C, Frede HG, Berthold G (2007) Effectiveness and costs of co-operative agreements with agriculture for groundwater protection in State Hessen. Wirksamkeit und Kosten von Kooperationen zur grundwasserschonenden Landbewirtschaftung in Hessen. GWF Wasser Abwasser 148 (5):358–363

  3. Berkhout F, Green K (2002) Editorial. Managing innovation for sustainability: the challenge of integration and scale. Int J Innovat Manag 6(3):227–232

  4. Blaikie N (2000) Designing social research: the logic of anticipation. Polity Press, Cambridge

  5. Brouwer F, Heinz I, Zabel T (2003a) Governance of water-related conficts in agriculture, vol 37. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London

  6. Brouwer F, Heinz I, Zabel T (2003b) Occurrence of co-operative agreements. In: Brouwer F, Heinz I, Zabel T (eds) Governance of Water-related Conflicts in Agriculture. New Directions in Agri-environmental and Water Policies in the EU, vol 37. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, pp 23–44

  7. Brown R, Farrelly M (2009) Delivering sustainable urban water management: a review of the hurdles we face. Water Sci Technol J Int Assoc Water Pollut Res 59(5):839

  8. Brown R, Clarke JM (2006) Understanding the factors that influence domestic water consumption within Melbourne. In. Monash University, p 143

  9. Brugge R, Rotmans J (2007) Towards transition management of European water resources. Water Resour Manag 21(1):249–267

  10. Busch C, De Maret PS, Flynn T, Kellum R, Le S, Meyers B, Saunders M, White R, Palmquist M (2005) Content Analysis. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University Department of English. http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/content/. Accessed 20 January 2010

  11. Cave M (2009) Independent review of competition and innovation in water markets: Final report. DEFRA. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/water/industry/cavereview/. Accessed 01 Oct 2012

  12. Chang CL, Hsu TH, Wang YJ, Lin JY, Yu SL (2010) Planning for implementation of riparian buffers in the Feitsui reservoir watershed. Water Resour Manag 24(10):2339–2352

  13. Christensen CM (1997) The innovation dilemma. When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Buisness School Press, Boston

  14. Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin Sci Q 35(1):128–152.

  15. Daigger G (2007) Wastewater management in the 21st century. J Environ Eng 133(7):671–680

  16. Defra (2009) The England Catchment Sensitive Farming Delivery Initiative. Department for Food and Rural Affairs. http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/landmanage/water/csf/delivery-initiative.htm. Accessed 17 Mar 2010

  17. EC (1991) Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment. Official Journal of the European Communities. European Commission, Brussels

  18. EC (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal of the European Communities. European Commission, Brussels

  19. EC (2000) Council Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities. European Commission, Brussels

  20. EC (2007) Communication form the commission to th European parliament and the council ‘Towards Sustainable Water Management in the European Union’ First stage in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC 4th Commission Report (Executive Summary) on Implementation of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive [COM(2007) 128 final] [SEC(2007) 362]. European Commission, Brussels

  21. ECSFDI (2008) England Catchment Sensitive Farming Delivery Initiative. Phase I report April 2006- March 2008. ECSFDI. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/landmanage/water/csf/documents/ecsfdi-phase1-report.pdf. Accessed 02 July 2010

  22. ECSFDI (2010) England Catchment Sensistive Farming Delivery Initiative farmer impact survey. Synovate Ltd. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/landmanage/water/csf/documents/ecsfdi-farmer-survey2009.pdf. Accessed 02 July 2012

  23. ECSFDI (2011) Catchment sensitive farming ECSFDI Phase 1 & 2 Full Evaluation Report. Environment Agency. http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/csf-evaluationreport_tcm6-27149.pdf. Accessed 01 Oct 2012

  24. Gallouj F, Sundbo J, Fuglsang L (2002) Interactional innovation. A neo-Schumpeterian model. In: Sundbo F (ed) Innovation as a strategic reflexivity. Routledge, London, pp 29–56

  25. Geels F (2006) The hygienic transition from cesspools to sewer systems (1840–1930): the dynamics of regime transformation. Res Pol 35(7):1069–1082

  26. Guy S, Marvin S, Medd W, Moss T (2011) Shaping urban infrastructures: intermediaries and the governance of socio-technical networks. Earthscan, London

  27. Heinz I (2004) Sustainable farming as a result of negotiations: an analysis at European level. In: CIGR international Conference, Beijing, 11–14 October 2004

  28. Heinz I (2008) Co-operative agreements and the EU Water Framework Directive in conjunction with the Common Agricultural Policy. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 12(3):715–726

  29. Jeffrey P, Jefferson B (2003) Public receptivity regarding in-house water recycling: results from a UK survey. Water Sci Technol Water Supply 109–116

  30. Jeffrey P, Seaton RAF (2004) A conceptual model of ‘Receptivity’ applied to the design and development of water policy mechanisms. Environ Sci 1(3):277–300

  31. Kemp R, Rotmans J (2004) Managing the transition to sustainable mobility. In: Elzen B, Geels F, Green K (eds) System innovation and the transition to sustainability: theory, evidence and policy. Edward Elgar Publishing, pp 137–167

  32. Krippendorff K (2004) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Sage Publications, London

  33. Langley A, Mintzberg H, Pitcher P, Posada E, Saint-Macary J (1995) Opening up decision making: the view from the black stool. Organ Sci 6(3):260–279

  34. March GJ, Simon AH (1958) Organisations. Wiley, USA

  35. Maria L (2005) EU environmental Law. Challenges, change and decision making. Hart Publishing, Portland

  36. Miles M, Huberman A (1994) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications

  37. Mintzberg H, Raisinghani D (1976) The structure of ‘unstructured’ decision processes. Adm Sci Q 21(2):246–275

  38. Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Havard University Press, USA

  39. Nill J, Kemp R (2009) Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: from niche to paradigm? Res Pol 38(4):668–680

  40. Porter ME, van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9(4):97–118

  41. Postel SL, Thompson BH Jr (2005) Watershed protection: capturing the benefits of nature’s water supply services. Nat Resour Forum 29(2):98–108

  42. Rip A, Kemp R (1998) Technological change. Human Choice and Climate Change 2:327–399

  43. Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovation, 5th edn. Free Press, London

  44. Schouten M, Van Dijk M (2008) Private sector involvement according to European water liberalisation scenarios. Int J Water 4(3):180–196

  45. Simon AH (1997) Administrative behavior. A study of decision-making processes in administrative organisations. The Free Press, New York

  46. Spiller M, McIntosh B, Seaton R (2009) The influence of supply and sewerage area characteristics on water and sewerage companies responses to the Water Framework Directive. Water Sci Technol 60(7):1811–1819

  47. Spiller M, McIntosh BS, Seaton RAF, Jeffrey PJ (2012a) An organisational innovation perspective on change in water and wastewater systems—the implementation of the Water Framework Directive in England and Wales. Urban Water J 9(2):113–128

  48. Spiller M, McIntosh BS, Seaton RAF, Jeffrey PJ (2012b) Pollution source control by water utilities—characterisation and implications for water management: research results from England and Wales. Water and Environment Journal. doi:10.1111/j.1747-6593.2012.00340.x

  49. Strauss AL, Corbin JM (1998) Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. SAGE Publications, London

  50. Thomas AD, Ford RR (2005) The crisis of innovation in water and wastewater. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, UK

  51. Tidd J, Bessant J, Pavitt K (2005) Managing Innovation Integrating technological market and organizational change. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Sussex

  52. Trott P (2005) Innovation management and new product development. Pearson Education Limited, Essex

  53. UK Government (2003) Water Act 2003. vol 2008. Office for Public Sector information

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the EC funded ISBP project (NEST-PATHFINDER-CUL 043199, Integrated Systems and the Boundary Problem), the kind co-operation of all the interviewees. Furthermore, the authors would like to thank the two anonymous reviews for their valuable comments and suggestions.

Author information

Correspondence to Marc Spiller.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Spiller, M., McIntosh, B.S., Seaton, R.A.F. et al. Implementing Pollution Source Control—Learning from the Innovation Process in English and Welsh Water Companies. Water Resour Manage 27, 75–94 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-012-0161-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Innovation
  • Pollution source control
  • Water framework directive
  • Water utilities
  • Catchment management
  • Co-operative agreements