Introduction of Recycled Drinking

Water in Modern Water Supply

Systems

Is it realistic or tangible for the

community to decide?

Presenter:

Janet Saunders, Managing Director

Introduction

• Within Australia, recycled water still ‘perceived’ as a

‘relatively new concept’ - means a great deal of

misinformation, myths and rumours continue to be

circulated

• One common theme - ‘emotional response’ can be very

intense, on both sides of the debate

• Announcing a recycled water project and then trying to

defend it to the community - can now often be an ‘uphill

and ineffective’ battle’

• But how much influence should the community have in

deciding where/how their drinking water is sourced - do

they have the necessary abilities to make such an important

decision?

• Would communities prefer their water utilities to

provide drinking water from a range of sources - so

people can make their own individual choices about drinking

recycled water?

Everyone Agrees….1. Australian Guidelines For Water Recycling: (Phase 2,

July 2007)

‘Community support is vital for the successful introduction of drinking water augmentation schemes and effective community engagement isthe best way to ensure such support.’

2. ‘Refilling the Glass’ (WSAA Position Paper No. 02)

‘For the community to support recycled water for drinking, there needs to be effective communication and information transfer between the community, key stakeholders and the scheme proponent (usually a water utility)’

3. AWA Water Recycling Forum Position Paper (JM Anderson):

‘There may be scope for greater use of indirect potable water recyclingbut its introduction should only be progressed after community acceptance of its necessity’

4. Advances in Water Recycling in Australia 2003-07 (REUSE 07, John C Radcliffe, Commissioner, National Water Commission)

‘Community education is supported but it should be supplementary to a process of effective two-way consultation. Those with genuine concerns deserve a fair hearing’

Q1. How well does the water industry understand community attitudes/likely stakeholder behaviour to the introduction of recycled drinking water?

Q2. Was Toowoomba’s reaction to the 2006 Referendum reflective of the Australian population at large?

Q3. What are the risks/benefits of enforced/mandatory introduction of recycled drinking water versus building community support and acceptance prior to its introduction?

Q4. Is community consultation still as vital as it was in achieving public acceptance for recycled drinking water?

Q5: Is there a right or wrong way to consult with your communities about the introduction of recycled drinking water?

Q6: Is a referendum/vote necessary to decide whether a community supports the introduction of recycled drinking water?

Q7: Will the Western Corridor Project in Queensland be the trailblazer for wider spread community support for the introduction of recycled drinking water?

But Still So Many Questions….

1. ACTEW Water2Water - 3 month consultation program

in-depth report to ACT Government, August 2007

2. Western Corridor Project - in-depth review of

community attitudes by Queensland Water Commission

prior to project being announced

3. Australian Guidelines For Water Recycling: (Phase 2,

July 2007) - includes guidelines for community

engagement, open to public comment for next 3 months

4. Ongoing Research:

- CSIRO/AWA’s ‘Australian Water Conservation & Reuse

Research Program’

- Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality &

Treatment’s ‘Community Views on Water Recycling’

5. Other water utilities/local councils talking to local

communities - about recycled water for both drinking/

non-drinking purposes

Great Deal of Work Underway

Combine ‘behavioural change tools’ and traditional

‘community consultation’ methodologies to:

• Provide a better understanding of stakeholders’

sometimes ‘irrational’ beliefs about recycled drinking

water

• Identify to what degree these ‘beliefs’ influence

stakeholders’ behaviour/response to the introduction of

recycled drinking water

• Provide water utilities with more accurate predictions (up

to 98% accuracy) about the degree to which the

community will ‘support’ the introduction of recycled

drinking water

• Help create effective, ‘scientifically based’ community

consultation programs that achieve wide spread,

sustainable acceptance for the introduction of recycled

drinking water

Taking it One Step Further…

These tools are designed to:

1. Reveal the deep seated beliefs of the community -

which dictate their behaviour/response to recycled

drinking water

2. Identify the emotions that are triggered in individuals/

specific stakeholder groups - when presented with the

concept/possible introduction of recycled drinking water

3. Identify what % of the community are angry, in

denial, reasonable, accepting - about the

concept/possible introduction of recycled drinking water

4. Provide a roadmap for designing/implementing an

effective, transparent, two way - ongoing community

consultation process

Taking it One Step Further…

• Core Belief Research

• Attitude/Behaviour Matrix

Widely used around the world in the corporate arenato achieve best practice:

- stakeholder engagement

- human resources

- conflict resolution

- leadership development

- customer retention/management

- investment/market positioning

- strategic planning

Couple of Tools to Consider

Core Beliefs:

• Deep seated views about ourselves, other people, world we live in

• Core beliefs are either positive or negative, are formed through

individual life experiences/personal circumstances

• Specific view is only a ‘core belief’ when it’s held by more than 75%

of people in a particular stakeholder group

• Core beliefs cannot be changed, only the intensity with which they

are held can be influenced

• Core beliefs of a stakeholder group are impacted by the ‘bandwagon

effect’

Core Belief Research:

• Relies on carefully worded questions to delve beyond a person’s

attitudes and perceptions

• Primary source of data = surveys, other stakeholder feedback

processes

• Secondary source of data = detailed analysis of written

correspondence, physical actions of stakeholders (body language,

tone of voice, choice of words/phrases)

Core Belief Research

Examples of Core Beliefs:

1. ‘Weather forecasters never get it right’

2. ‘Governments/politicians can’t be trusted, they’re all as bad as each other’

3. ‘It will rain eventually’

4. ‘Water is safe to drink it if comes out of my kitchen tap’

5. ‘My water provider has a responsibility to provide me with safe, high quality drinking water’

6. ‘If discoloured water comes out of my tap it isn’t safe to drink’

7. ‘Water from sewage is dirty and not safe to drink’

8. ‘Water in our dams and rivers is a natural source of drinking water’

And of course everyone’s favourite:

All women are bad drivers!

Core Belief Research

‘ACTEW has recently initiated the Water2Water project which is an option to

secure ACT and the region’s water supply. This proposal would supplement our

water supply by purifying Canberra’s used water (or wastewater) and adding this

to the Cotter Reservoir. Technology exists that can treat used water to a standard

safe for human consumption.

Once purified, the water would blend with the water in the catchment and after

some time go through the normal treatment process at the Stromlo Treatment

Plant before being distributed to households. The purification project would take

2-3 years to implement.

In addition, the Cotter Reservoir would also be enlarged to provide additional

storage for the purified water and catchment flows. Water2Water will only proceed

if the ACT Government and ACTEW are assured that the quality of water

produced will meet Australian drinking water standards.’

Q: Based on this brief description, how would you

describe your initial reaction to this project?

Positive, Positive initial reaction but conditional, Neutral initial

Reaction, Negative initial reaction but conditional, Negative

Q: Why do you say that?

It’s All in the Questions…

Additional questions could include:

Q1: Please describe, in your own words, where you believe

recycled water originates from

Q2: What else do you know about recycled water?

Q3. How does the thought of drinking recycled water make

you feel?

Q4. How do you believe recycled water should be used to

supplement traditional sources of water, both drinking

and non-drinking?

Q5: If you have never sampled purified recycled water, how

do you believe it would look, taste and smell?

Q6. If you have sampled purified recycled water, how did it

look, taste, smell?

Q7. In your own words describe how it differed, if at all, from

traditional tap water?

It’s All in the Questions…

Core belief research includes a detailed analysis of:

• All written interaction between community members

and their water utility - to identify their core beliefs

• Media coverage - to identify other factors that may be

impacting/triggering people’s core beliefs

• Body language of community members at forums,

community meetings, shopping centre displays,

focus groups - to help identify their ‘personality profiles’

Resulting data used to help identify:

- positive/negative core beliefs

- key drivers/barriers to changing stakeholder behaviour

- key phrases that tap into positive core beliefs/trigger

negative core beliefs

- people’s preferred information delivery mechanisms

(visual, written, direct/indirect)

Core Belief Research

• Data collected as part of core belief research - identifies what % of the community are in each quadrant at a specific point in time, can then track their movement through the process

• Findings have an enormous impact on how water utilities -should be communicating/consulting effectively with their communities

• Aim is to move as many people as possible into the reasoning/acceptance quadrants - thus reducing the emotions of anger or denial to ensure recycled drinking water gets ‘fair and reasonable consideration’

• By not knowing which of the four states of emotion stakeholders are in - increases the risk of community consultation programs intensifying people’s emotions, with fear likely to become the dominant emotion

Attitude/Behaviour Matrix

Denial x% Anger x%

Acceptance x% Reasoning x%

Based on anecdotal feedback from Toowoomba

Council staff:

• Original plan was to undertake a 2-3 year community

consultation program - to gradually build acceptance for

recycled drinking water

• Communications program was beginning to deliver results -

strong indications of increasing support for introduction of

recycled drinking water

• Decision to hold a Referendum - changed the community

consultation dynamics

• Emotive ‘No’ campaign included ‘powerful’ television

advertisements - based on fear which eroded community

support

• Stakeholders were suddenly faced with making a black or

white decision - they could only vote Yes or No

• The ‘No’ campaign argued that a ‘Yes’ vote meant people

would no longer have a ‘choice’ - and that by voting NO would

ensure all possible options to boost the region’s water supply

would remain on the table

Toowoomba Experience

Additional behavioural change tools would not necessarily

have changed the outcome but may have identified:

1. Whether the community understood what made Toowoomba

unique - and where recycled water fitted into the mix of other

available options to boost water supplies? People needed to be

sure these other options had been comprehensively explored

2. Whether it was ‘too hard’ for people to put their ‘trust’ in the

local Council/Mayor - to provide safe, reliable, recycled drinking

water? Did people believe the Council had the skills/technologies

to protect public health?

3. Did fear overwhelm the community - because they became

convinced that a Yes vote would lock them into a single long-term

option, and rule out other perhaps less risky options

4. Whether issues such as affordability were key factors - or

just sub-issues that disguised people’s real core beliefs?

• Whether people having to ‘formally vote’ made it easier for

them to say no - and in reality what they wanted was for their

water utility/State Government to make the ‘difficult’ decision?

Toowoomba Experience

UK Nuclear Industry

• Research into attitudes to the nuclear power industry, in

particular the building of new nuclear reactors

• July 2001 - 60% public opposition, 20% support

• November 2005 - 41% public support, 28% opposition

• Turnaround achieved through comprehensive core belief

research and resulting community consultation program

UK Customer Trust Index

• Survey of 2,441 adults in UK to identify key drivers for

generating trust in retail brands and organisations

• Research conducted on behalf of Microsoft, EDF Energy,

London Underground, BT, Royal Bank of Scotland, The Body

Shop and Orange

• Total of six core beliefs identified which most commonly

influence consumers’ buying decisions

• Found that what people ‘believe’ about a brand or organisation

was a more powerful influence on buying habits than price,

quality or reputation

Overseas Experiences

• Recommended tools not just limited to engaging

communities - about the introduction of recycled

drinking water

• Community engagement/education becoming

increasingly important for water utilities - particularly

as part of demand management/project risk management

processes

• Degree to which tools are used can be scaled up or

down - to suit the particular circumstances/desired

outcomes

• Resulting data and analysis can be used - across a

range of key management functions

• Enables water authorities to better evaluate and

improve their return on investment - in stakeholder

engagement and community consultation activities

Scaleable & Flexible

Current/potential uses include:

- Project Management (reduce risk of delays due to

stakeholder related issues, assist with early

identification of other potential ‘people related’ risks

- Customer Service (improve overall performance,

reduce number of complaints, keep customers better

informed, deal with queries more effectively/quicker)

- Project Reporting Processes (increase depth of

available data analysis about specific stakeholder

groups, communities, issues)

- Demand Management (increase likelihood of

permanent changes in water usage habits/future

demand for town water, improve ROI on community

education/engagement programs)

Scaleable & Flexible

• Widespread agreement that decision to introduce

recycled drinking water - should be made with

community support

• To generate strong community support - early and

best practice stakeholder engagement/community

consultation is vital

• Because recycled drinking water is such an emotive

issue - traditional community consultation techniques

may not be enough

• Water utilities need a clear understanding of the deep

seated beliefs - of their communities and other key

stakeholders

• Data must be obtained BEFORE a successful and

effective two-way community consultation program -

can be implemented

• Only then can communities make a sensible,

reasonable and balanced assessment - about the

potential introduction of recycled drinking water

In Summary

Your Questions Answered