Seven core issues for water demand management under CC and uncertainty: Reflection on practice and sociological approaches
Seven core issues for water demand management under CC and uncertainty: Reflection on practice and sociological approaches Dr Alison L Browne Lancaster Environment Centre With Dr Will Medd (LEC) and Dr Ben Anderson (Essex)
1. Why do some approaches to demand seem soformulaic and others so fluffy?And can these differences be resolved?• pcc=ioi.Fi.VI + pcr (Herrington, 1996)• “What emerges from this systematic investigation is a picture of a highly complex relationship with water, in which physical, sensory and cognitive experiences articulate with cultural meanings and values” (Strang, 2004, p. 3)
2. Embracing Complexity and an Idea ofDISTRIBUTED DEMAND: Different lenses seedifferent things• A practice based lens sees water demand as distributed amongst a wide array of systems within and outside of peoples homes and daily lives.• Different levels of intervention, adaptation and change: – Micro (practices, individuals, households, technology) – Meso (streets, communities, families, decentralised systems) – Macro (systems of provision, infrastructure, societal values and images of water use)
3. If we recognise complexity as important is thereanyway we can quantify it? We want numbers!• We can try to develop proxies of practice• Datasets that reveal information about stuff related to different practices e.g., Expenditure and Food Surveys capture (in a lot more detail). – Laundry related items e.g., detergents – Personal hygiene items e.g., soaps, shampoo – Food consumption items e.g., leaf and stem veg – Drinking related items e.g., fruit juices and tea – Gardening items such e.g., seeds, flowers and plants
0.3000.2000.1000.000-0.100-0.200-0.300-0.400 Lawn mowers vegetables Tea Coffee Soap/shower gel Leaf & stem Vegetable juices Mineral/spring water Potatoes powder Plants, flowers, Detergents/washing gloves/cloths seeds Pasta Garden tools Rice Kitchen Fruit juices (incl squash) Laundry/Laundrettes 95% CI (upper) 95% CI (lower) b (coefficient) Figure 4: Effects of practice proxies on water usage (metered households), Error bars are +/- 95% confidence intervals for the estimates. Error bars straddling zero indicate non- significant effects at the 0.05% level.
4. How will demand respond to keytechnological, cultural and weather changes?• Mixed methodologies e.g., – Tracking ‘stuff’ associated with water use over time to spot trends. – Time use data – Micro-component data – Engaging with ‘managers’ of distributed demand – Capturing practices and change (qual and quant)• BUT Doesn’t history show us that the ‘spontaneous and chaotic’ are probably the biggest influences to social order, technology and infrastructure development? Not planning?
100 90 Phone/email friends Travel 80 Computer Hobbies/other 70 Going out Friends/Family at home Sport/exercise 60 Reading TV/radio% 50 shopping adult care child care 40 civic acts education 30 work housework 20 eating/drinking washing sleeping 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 : 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 00 0: Time Figure 1. Time Use Surveys Source UK ONS 2005 (Ben Anderson calculations[)
5. Managing drought as crisis (not as increasing variability under CC scenarios and conditions)• Role of crisis definition in communication• Role of crisis definition for legislation• Does this definition restrict adaptive options?
6. Has the UK really thought aboutMaladaptation of Water Resources?• 5 characteristics of a maladaptive system (Barnett & O’Neill): – Increasing emissions of greenhouse gases – Disproportionally burdening the most vulnerable – Having high opportunity costs – Reducing incentives to adapt – Increasing path dependencies
7. What would happen if we stopped thinkingjust about water?• Responsibilities shift from individuals (in homes, individual companies) to a range of interventions focused on a range of different actors at various scales (micro-meso-macro)• Research pushing this agenda forward: – Practice based survey: quantifying a practice based understanding of demand – Micro-econometric modeling – Trajectories of practices: Workshop on imagining future trajectories of sites of demand – Interviews on practice based change during and after metering of households – Broader ARCC-Water project: agricultural demand, licensing, institutional and legislative change etc