No abstract

Reclaimed water has been identified as a viable and cost-effective solution to water shortages impacting agricultural production. However, lack of consumer acceptance for foods irrigated with reclaimed water remains one of the greatest hurdles for widespread farm-level adoption. Using survey data from 540 adults in the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S., this paper examines consumer preferences for six sources of reclaimed irrigation water and identifies statistically significant relationships between consumers' demographic characteristics and their preferences for each type of reclaimed water. Key findings suggest that consumers prefer rain water to all other sources of reclaimed water. Women are less likely than men to prefer reclaimed irrigation water sources and are particularly concerned about the use of black and brackish water. Consumers who had heard about reclaimed water before are more likely to accept its use. Drawing on evidence from survey and experimental research, this paper also identifies disgust, neophobia and health concerns as the key issues that lead consumers to accept or reject foods produced with reclaimed water. Finally, we identify avenues for future research into public acceptance of reclaimed water based on our analysis and evidence from prior research.

This paper provides a selective overview of the linkages and complementary topics in behavioral economics and agricultural adoption literatures. The goal of the paper is to identify likely directions for future research at the intersection of behavioral economics and agricultural adoption. This research agenda has potential for providing valuable insight for policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders in agriculture and beyond.

Though both the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration claim that there is no evidence that handling and consuming food causes COVID‐19, many consumers may not be convinced. To assess concerns about potential COVID‐19 transmission from food, we surveyed more than 3,000 consumers in May, June, and July of 2020 using a nationally representative panel. Despite evidence to the contrary, consumers express multiple concerns about their food and how and where it is served and transmission of the virus. Between concerns about transmission of COVID‐19 while shopping for food versus consuming food, more consumers were concerned about exposure while shopping; however, the number of consumers concerned about transmission from consuming food steadily increased over the months of data collection. We also found that Black respondents were more concerned about COVID‐19 transmission from certain staple foods, suggesting that COVID‐19 could intensify standing racial inequities related to nutrition and health. Overall, these findings suggest that we may be observing the early stages of evolving food stigmas that could persist in the future and reshape how U.S. consumers shop for food and the foods they consume.

1 1. Introduction Water scarcity is a growing concern in many regions of the U.S. and across the world. Currently, 4 billion people worldwide, including 130 million people in the U.S., experience severe water shortages at least part of the year (Mekonnen and Hoekstra, 2016). Projected growth in populations and food demand, coupled with rising temperatures and changing weather patterns, will further strain available water resources. These issues pose a serious challenge for the agricultural sector, which currently uses more than 70% of the world's fresh water resources for irrigation (World Water Assessment Programme, 2016). In the U.S., the agricultural sector is responsible for 80% of the country's total water consumption and 90% of total water consumption in most western states (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2017). Furthermore, global agricultural output is projected to double in the next 30 years (World Bank, 2014), and therefore alternative sources of irrigation water are critically needed. Recycled water has emerged as a safe and cost-effective way to provide for the growing 1 demand for irrigation water around the world (Chen et al., 2013). Countries such as Israel and Australia have been using recycled irrigation water for decades, but its use by U.S. agricultural producers has been modest. Though 32 billion gallons of municipal wastewater are produced daily in the U.S. (National Research Council, 2012), only California, Florida, Arizona, and Texas augment their irrigation supplies with recycled water (McNabb, 2017). Perhaps the most According to the California Department of Water Resources (2018), "recycled water is highly treated wastewater 1 from various sources, such as domestic sewage, industrial wastewater and storm water runoff." This type of water has been referred to by several names, including reclaimed water, reused water, treated wastewater, repurified water, tertiary treated wastewater, advanced purified water, NEWater (

In this article, we present data from the monthly Pandemic Food and Stigma Survey (PFSS), a nationwide representative sample of adults in the United States designed to identify how the pandemic is affecting concerns about food and the environment. Two surveys were conducted in May and June 2020. Our analysis suggests that the public’s concern about contracting COVID-19 has been high; however, infection with COVID-19 was not the only concern. A majority of respondents remained strongly concerned about environmental issues, such as climate change, while responses to sudden relaxations of environmental and food safety policies varied. We analyze the PFSS data to identify factors associated with concerns about pandemic and environmental regulatory changes. In general, we find that people whose food security has been threatened by COVID-19 remain concerned about relaxation of environmental regulations, and those most inclined to take steps to reduce spread of the virus, such as wearing masks and social distancing, are more concerned about relaxed regulations than those less willing to take mitigating actions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10640-020-00438-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The first trigger to any form of personal and collective change begins with emotions. They influence whether and how our attention is drawn to stimuli, how we reflect upon those stimuli, and how we choose courses of action. Emotions are thus at the center of social responses to climate change. We offer a selective, interdisciplinary review of emotions research to inform the development of a hypothetical emotion–cognition model of climate change response, followed by exploration of the emotional precedents supporting three prevailing behavioral responses which support inaction: apathy, denial, and withdrawal. We then review research that can inform emotion triggers to pro‐climate adaptive and mitigative action. We conclude with a discussion of two key research needs: intersectionality and interdisciplinarity. Addressing these needs will enhance our ability to respond to the climate emergency. This article is categorized under: Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Behavior Change and Responses

No abstract