Motivations of Households towards Conserving Water and Using Purified Water in Czechia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
Aims of the Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area and Data Collection
2.2. Data Collection Tool (Questionnaire)
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results
Perceptions and Behavioural Patterns of the Target Group
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Recommendations for Communication with the Target Group
- Water quality is perhaps an even more important problem than water quantity. Even though the industry and agriculture consume more water than households, the households can still contribute to water conservation. Every single person in a household can conserve water.
- Households can effectively conserve water by using water-saving programs. In addition, economical programs for washing dishes or laundry are not difficult to operate. A large amount of water can be realistically saved, especially by flushing the toilet with a smaller volume of water or by saving water when brushing your teeth. Another possibility to save water is showering or dry cleaning instead of washing with water. By saving water, the household can also save money.
- Use rainwater whenever possible. Due to its composition and temperature, rainwater is suitable for watering lawns and flower beds, just like tap or bottled water. Moreover, its use is not complicated, and an interesting amount of tap water can be saved during the year.
- Water that undergoes treatment in the home using purification technologies is not significantly more harmful than ordinary tap water. It does not contain pathogens or remnants of the original impurities, is not harmful to health, does not smell, and does not have an unpleasant colour. If this purified water, coming from the sink or household appliances, is used as utility water to flush the toilet, there is no risk of any significant health or other complications.
- Installing water purification technologies is an investment that pays off in the long term, especially when building a new house or renovating an existing one. The financial return on this investment is around 10–15 years. In addition, by saving water, you will help protect water resources as a key strategic raw material, the value of which will rather increase in the future with the progress of climate change. On the other hand, it should be noted that water recycling technology is a financially demanding investment.
- Filling swimming pools or garden ponds, and frequent watering of lawns, consumes a large amount of water. This is a problem especially in the summer when there is a significant local shortage of high-quality drinking water in many places. Swimming pools, ponds, and lawns have high water evaporation in summer temperatures, which further increases the already high water consumption for filling and watering. Households can conserve water by not using swimming pools and garden ponds in areas with drought.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Alexander, K.S.; Price, J.C.; Browne, A.L.; Leviston, Z.; Bishop, B.J.; Nancarrow, B.E. Community perceptions of risk, trust and fairness in relation to the indirect potable use of purified recycled water in South East Queensland: A scoping report. Urban Water Secur. Res. Alliance Technol. Rep. No. 2 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Lockett, L.; Montague, T.; McKenney, C.; Auld, D. Assessing public opinion on water conservation and water conserving landscapes in the semiarid southwestern United States. HortTechnology 2002, 12, 392–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jorgensen, B.; Graymore, M.; O’Toole, K. Household water use behavior: An integrated model. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 91, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gilbertson, M.; Hurlimann, A.; Dolnicar, S. Does water context influence behaviour and attitudes to water conservation? Australas. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 18, 47–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Egyir, S.N.; Brown, C.; Arthur, S. Rainwater as a domestic water supplement in Scotland: Attitudes and perceptions. Br. J. Environ. Clim. Change 2016, 6, 160–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia-Cuerva, L.; Berglund, E.Z.; Binder, A.R. Public perceptions of water shortages, conservation behaviors, and support for water reuse in the US. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 113, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bruvold, W.H. Public evaluation of municipal water reuse alternatives. Water Sci. Technol. 1992, 26, 1537–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeffrey, P. Public attitudes to In-House water recycling in england and wales. Water Environ. J. 2002, 16, 214–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collins, R. Hard sell for new water. Water Wastewater 2003, 14, 39–40. [Google Scholar]
- Marks, J.; Cromar, N.; Fallowfield, H.; Oemcke, D. Community experience and perceptions of water reuse. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 2003, 3, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartley, T.W. Public perception and participation in water reuse. Desalination 2006, 187, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsagarakis, K.P.; Mellon, R.C.; Stamataki, E.; Kounalaki, E. Identification of recycled water with an empirically derived symbol increases its probability of use. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 6901–6908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nancarrow, B.E.; Leviston, Z.; Po, M.; Porter, N.B.; Tucker, D.I. What drives communities’ decisions and behaviours in the reuse of wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 2008, 57, 485–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nancarrow, B.E.; Leviston, Z.; Tucker, D.I. Measuring the predictors of communities’ behavioural decisions for potable reuse of wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 2009, 60, 3199–3209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Domènech, L.; Saurí, D. Socio-technical transitions in water scarcity contexts: Public acceptance of greywater reuse technologies in the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 55, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulteau, G.; Laffitte, J.D.; Marchand, D. Psychosocial analysis of public acceptance towards water reuse: Case study of rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling. In Proceedings of the 8th IWA Conference on Water Reclamation and Reuse, Barcelona, Spain, 26–29 September 2011; pp. 26–29. [Google Scholar]
- Friedler, E.; Lahav, O.; Jizhaki, H.; Lahav, T. Study of urban population attitudes towards various wastewater reuse options: Israel as a case study. J. Environ. Manag. 2006, 81, 360–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lamichhane, K.M.; Babcock, R.W., Jr. Survey of attitudes and perceptions of urine-diverting toilets and human waste recycling in Hawaii. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 443, 749–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Segura, D.; Carrillo, V.; Remonsellez, F.; Araya, M.; Vidal, G. Comparison of public perception in desert and rainy regions of Chile regarding the reuse of treated sewage water. Water 2018, 10, 334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berk, R.A.; Schulman, D.; McKeever, M.; Freeman, H.E. Measuring the impact of water conservation campaigns in California. Clim. Change 1993, 24, 233–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Syme, G.J.; Nancarrow, B.E.; Seligman, C. The evaluation of information campaigns to promote voluntary household water conservation. Eval. Rev. 2000, 24, 539–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howarth, D.; Butler, S. Communicating water conservation: How can the public be engaged? Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 2004, 4, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dolnicar, S.; Hurlimann, A.; Nghiem, L.D. The effect of information on public acceptance–the case of water from alternative sources. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91, 1288–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nelson, K.; Cismaru, M.; Cismaru, R.; Ono, T. Water management information campaigns and protection motivation theory. Int. Rev. Public Nonprofit Mark. 2011, 8, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kemp, B.; Randle, M.; Hurlimann, A.; Dolnicar, S. Community acceptance of recycled water: Can we inoculate the public against scare campaigns? J. Public Aff. 2012, 12, 337–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schultz, T.; Fielding, K. The common in-group identity model enhances communication about recycled water. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 40, 296–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Warner, L.A.; Rumble, J.; Martin, E.; Lamm, A.J.; Cantrell, R. The Effect of Strategic Message Selection on Residents’ Intent to Conserve Water in the Landscape. J. Agric. Educ. 2015, 56, 59–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gardiner, A. Do rainwater tanks herald a cultural change in household water use? Australas. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 17, 100–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spinti, J.E.; Hilaire, R.S.; VanLeeuwen, D. Balancing landscape preferences and water conservation in a desert community. HortTechnology 2004, 14, 72–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kish, L. A procedure for objective respondent selection within the household. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1949, 44, 380–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, A.M.; Krueger, J.I. The psychology (and economics) of trust. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2009, 3, 1003–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nunn, H.; Biressi, A. ‘A trust betrayed’: Celebrity and the work of emotion. Celebr. Stud. 2010, 1, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mondino, E.; Di Baldassarre, G.; Mård, J.; Ridolfi, E.; Rusca, M. Public perceptions of multiple risks during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and Sweden. Sci. Data 2020, 7, 434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gender | % |
---|---|
male | 50 |
female | 50 |
Education | % |
elementary | 7 |
high school without maturity exam | 32 |
high school with maturity exam | 46 |
university | 15 |
Occupation | % |
employee | 62 |
self-employed | 9 |
student | 5 |
economically inactive | 4 |
senior | 20 |
Monthly household income | % |
under EUR 400 | 1 |
EUR 400–600 | 4 |
EUR 600–700 | 4 |
EUR 700–800 | 5 |
EUR 800–1000 | 7 |
EUR 1000–1200 | 8 |
EUR 1200–1400 | 18 |
EUR 1400–2000 | 30 |
EUR 2000–2500 | 17 |
over EUR 2500 | 7 |
Socio-economic status | % |
socially weak class | 12 |
lower class | 14 |
lower middle class | 39 |
upper middle class | 25 |
high class | 11 |
Size of the city of residence | % |
under 10,000 inhabitants | 49 |
10,000–20,000 inhabitants | 9 |
20,000–50,000 inhabitants | 12 |
50,000–100,000 inhabitants | 8 |
over 100,000 inhabitants | 22 |
Type of residence | % |
owned house or flat | 71 |
rental house or flat | 29 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lyach, R.; Remr, J. Motivations of Households towards Conserving Water and Using Purified Water in Czechia. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2202. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032202
Lyach R, Remr J. Motivations of Households towards Conserving Water and Using Purified Water in Czechia. Sustainability. 2023; 15(3):2202. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032202
Chicago/Turabian StyleLyach, Roman, and Jiří Remr. 2023. "Motivations of Households towards Conserving Water and Using Purified Water in Czechia" Sustainability 15, no. 3: 2202. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032202