Browne & Hoolohan Response to Second Consultation for Ofwat's Water Efficiency Fund

Research output: Other contribution

59 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The key points to our response to the second consultation are as follows. Further evidence for these points is presented in the following section.

1. Need to reduce demand. Important that action has an impact. Limited evidence of communications leading to behaviour change. Not well-justified in spending this scale of investment in communication campaigns.

2. Rather than a focus on micro-component use (showers, toilets etc), a focus on practices (personal cleanliness, laundry, garden use, water use for leisure etc) will encourage a more systemic approach to intervention, and invoke a multi-partner approach.

3. Similarly, rather than individual water users, recognising a variety of collectives – households, communities, practice clusters (e.g. frequent daily showerers), and social groups to deliver bespoke and sensitive activities.

4. The amount spent on WEL versus WEF is disproportionate. A centrally organised communications campaign should not require £75m to deliver, whereas a multi-partner approach to WEL will require considerable investment and deliver more creative approaches to social change.

5. Ensuring the vast majority of funds are ringfenced to focus on meaningful, demonstrable change projects is essential.

6. Evaluation: Evaluation of water efficiency activities needs to verify behaviour change, using mixed methods to confirm actual behaviour change (not reported change, or change in attitudes/awareness) and understand how and why change occurred. Longitudinal studies to understand the long-term impact of any intervention would also be worthwhile, and principles of Open Data to ensure lessons are accessible between water companies and beyond the sector.

7. Involvement of academics and scientific oversight: Ensuring that there are strong connections to academic bodies (e.g. via an academic steering group) to make the most of recent research in this field. Presently there is a lack of evidence for the scope and framing of the fund, and if it is too late too substantially reframe what the funding can be spent on – then ensuring academic input into the design, conduct and evaluation of activities is needed. This requires organisation and funding.

8. There is a need to consult with a wider range of organisations involved in behaviour change (including for example, Natural Environment Social Research Network which is a group of social science researchers within the UK government and devolved authorities). Oversight of the fund needs to be led by organisations experienced in water, as while there are transferable insights from energy and other sectors, water use/demand is fundamentally different to other forms of resource use.

Original languageEnglish
TypeResponse to Ofwat (UK Government) consultation
Media of outputPDF document
Number of pages8
Publication statusPublished - 13 Jun 2024

Keywords

  • water demand
  • water efficiency
  • social sciences
  • social practices
  • everyday practices
  • mixed methods

Research Beacons, Institutes and Platforms

  • Sustainable Consumption Institute

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Browne & Hoolohan Response to Second Consultation for Ofwat's Water Efficiency Fund'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this