Getting Past the “Yuck Factor”: Public Opinion Research Provides Guidance for Successful Potable Reuse Outreach

Abstract

Leveraging the right research, terminology, and tools can make all the difference in successfully garnering public support for potable reuse water.

Direct potable water reuse in five arid inland communities: an analysis of factors influencing public acceptance

“…While most were initially uncomfortable with DPR, they became somewhat more comfortable after exposure to detailed messaging: information about the treatment process, the effluent water quality, and monitoring systems proved to increase acceptance of potable reuse among focus group participants. Telephone surveys conducted as part of the same research also showed that people had higher levels of comfort with IPR than DPR because of the natural processes included in IPR (Tennyson, Millan, and Metz 2015).…”

“…These considerations were clearly made by our case study communities; for example, Wichita Falls sought the assistance of the medical and university communities when introducing DPR. Also, since public awareness about the need for DPR due to water shortages may be necessary, but not sufficient to drive public acceptance of reuse (Po, Kaercher, and Nancarrow 2003;Tennyson, Millan, and Metz 2015), "trust in the governance and administration" that would be responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing the reuse project is likely a critical component of acceptance (Po, Kaercher, and Nancarrow 2003, 22); our interviewees emphasized that public awareness of the need for DPR went hand-in-hand with trust in the individuals and entities promoting it.…”

“…Public attitudes toward potable water reuse According to Po, Kaercher, and Nancarrow (2003, 3), the first potable reuse projects, such as those in Windhoek, Namibia, Water Factory 21 in California, and the Upper Occoquan Sewerage Authority in Northern Virginia, were introduced at a time when public involvement in decision making was not the norm: "the public trusted the experts or governments to make the right decision and they therefore did not usually participate in or challenge project decisions". However, more recent potable reuse projects have been tabled or cancelled because of public opposition (Tennyson, Millan, and Metz 2015). Today, public acceptance is crucial to the success of any water reuse project and it is influenced by many factors, such as the perceived value of water, the history of the water to be reused, trust in the entities promoting the reuse project, trust in the technologies used to purify the reuse water, education on fundamental water concepts, as well as those that apply more specifically to water reuse, the timing of the proposed reuse project with local circumstances (e.g., drought), inclusion of water quality monitoring in the reuse scheme, attitudes toward the environment, and the cost of the reuse water or water reuse project (Po, Kaercher, and Nancarrow 2003;Bridgeman 2004;Ormerod and Scott 2013).…”

“…Water planners cannot solely rely on drought or water shortages as a strategy to gain public acceptance of potable reuse (Po, Kaercher, and Nancarrow 2003;Tennyson, Millan, and Metz 2015). However, when residents are aware of such issues, and options are effectively communicated, they may consider potable reuse as an option if it is shown to be safe for health and the environment (Simpson 1999).…”

“…In 2004, Bridgeman went so far as to conclude that "the public is perhaps not yet ready to accept potable water reuse on a large scale, whilst other options still exist, regardless of the feasibility of those alternatives" (154). While there are now numerous IPR plants operating in the US, researchers have recently reported that the public is less accepting of DPR than IPR (e.g., Tennyson, Millan, and Metz 2015;Ormerod and Scott 2013). Importantly, it has not yet been demonstrated whether the same public education, outreach, and engagement recommendations for IPR projects also apply to DPR projects, or if other strategies are needed to help the public make informed decisions about water supply options.…”