« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Chapter Two Water Quality
2.1 Forty-three texts were reviewed in this chapter which concerns literature on perceptions and attitudes in connection with water quality and water pollution. 'Water quality' refers to the level of purity of water. If water quality is negatively defined, it can be said that water pollution is present. Indicators of water pollution include a lack of water clarity and few (or dead) fish (Faulkner et al, 2001).
Scotland and UK
2.2 Few exclusively Scottish studies exist which analyse public perceptions and attitudes toward a polluted water environment. However, in a 2002 survey of public attitudes to the environment in Scotland (Scottish Executive, 2005), 30% of respondents indicated that they were very worried about pollution of rivers, lochs and seas. In addition, 49% of all respondents stated that they were very worried about raw sewage discharged into the sea, while 27% were very concerned about the quality of drinking water. The 4,000 person sample was representative of people throughout Scotland, and the findings indicate how important water quality issues are rated in relation to other environmental concerns, such as waste disposal (25% were very worried about this), global warming by greenhouse gases (25%), genetically modified crops (24%), forestry (11%) and using up non-renewable resources (21%). Raw sewage put into the sea came top of a list of 23 current environmental concerns.
2.3 Hanley et al (2003) used a combined stated and revealed preference approach to value the benefits of coastal water quality improvements, focussing on Scotland's south-west coast, where beaches had consistently failed to meet water quality standards under the Bathing Waters Directive. A series of focus groups with the local population indicated that people were aware that there was a water quality "problem" at their local beaches and that sewage discharges were in some way to blame. In a subsequent questionnaire survey, 414 respondents were asked to rate site water quality on a five-point scale ranging from very good to very poor. Over all beaches, 30% of ratings were for either poor or very poor water quality. In terms of the likely impact of water quality improvements on people's behaviours, 63% of respondents stated that they would visit the beach more frequently if quality improved. An average of ten additional visits per person would be made to a beach area should water quality improve. Using aggregate benefits, if water quality were to improve, 2.6 million more trips per annum would be made to bathing waters in south-west Scotland, with an overall economic value of £1.25 million.
2.4 In a similar study, Cooper et al (2004) used the contingent valuation method to analyse the impacts of possible lake water quality improvements, using a lake in East Anglia as a case study. From a small-scale questionnaire (of just 200 people), they concluded that an individual's 'willingness-to-pay' for improved water quality was determined by motivational factors. Specifically, an individual's attitude toward water quality improvements was influenced by whether and how they presently use the water environment; whether they perceive they have an option to use the water environment in the future; altruism (whether they are concerned that other people can enjoy water environment); a sense of bequest (how important is leaving it for future generations); existence values (the water environment should exist even if no one sees it); intrinsic values (all ecosystems have the right to be supported by humans); and obligation (the general public have a responsibility to respect the water environment). Thus, although this sample was relatively small, the findings were valuable.
2.5 In a study of perceptions of water quality improvements following remediation work in the Pymme's Brook catchment, north London, Faulkner et al (2001) found that local residents were aware of, and concerned with, indications of water pollution. Following completion of the remediation scheme, residents perceived the watercourse to contain less rubbish and sewage fungus, and to have an improved colour and smell. However, respondents' perceptions were found to vary when the study population was sub-divided using a range of parameters. For instance, frequent observers of the brook were most likely to correctly identify sewage as the main form of pollution, and residents who lived in the area for over twenty years gave higher value to the remedial work, pointing to individual and group differences in perceptions and attitudes.
2.6 In 2001 DEFRA carried out a survey of public attitudes to quality of life and the environment, including public perceptions of river water quality. When prompted, over half of all respondents (54%) were very worried about pollution in rivers, bathing waters and beaches. Without prompting, water pollution was regarded as an issue of concern for the future. Like the Scottish Executive 2002 survey, water pollution was the environmental issue about which respondents had most concern.
2.7 Both these governments surveys, undertaken through a concern to understand public perceptions and priorities in relation to quality of life and the environment, found that water quality was a public priority. 2
2.8 Additional quantitative and qualitative research to elicit the values placed on the water environment by the public is being undertaken by Ipsos MORI for the Scottish Executive. For the quantitative work-stream, the Scottish Executive (2006) commissioned a module of questions in the April/May 2006 wave of Ipsos MORI's Scottish Social Policy Monitor. The results indicate that the public value the water environment and consider important to people's quality of life. Around half of respondents stated that it was very important, and only 7% said that it was not important. In terms of water quality, most people think that the quality of Scotland's water environment is good, but that coastal waters around Scotland are of a lesser quality than lochs, rivers and streams, and that the quality is poorer in urban areas than in rural areas. Pollution and sewage were seen as the biggest threats to Scotland's water environment, but, only a small minority of people were pessimistic about the future of the water quality in Scotland. Recently commissioned qualitative research will analyse perceptions, attitudes, values and priorities in greater depth.
2.9 Another UK text, Richards et al (2002), attempted to ascertain the attitudes of regulators and industry towards water pollution, as they diverge importantly from those of the general public.
Europe
2.10 Based on a 2001/2002 study, Kelly et al (2003) focus on the cultural sources of environmental attitudes and behaviour in Ireland and show that respondents are deeply concerned about water pollution. Of the various socio-demographic variables considered (gender, age, education, residence, religious attendance, social class, income and public sector employment), education proved to be the most powerful predictor of environmental attitudes, with high incomes and social class also predictive of perceptions. Those with high educational obtainment, greater incomes and identifying as middle or upper class were more likely to be concerned about the environment and to recognise water pollution.
2.11 Eggert and Olsson (2003) implemented a valuation study of water quality in the Swedish West Coast. They determined that the water environment provides different values to various groups in society, which engenders conflicting interests. For instance, fish which represents one value to commercial fishers, another to recreational fishers, and others to the broad public in terms of biodiversity. In general, water quality values were found to be substantial and avoiding potential losses an important task for policy-making. Eggert and Olsson's results show that respondents have a high level of environmental concern and heterogeneous preferences for water environments.
2.12 A study of water quality is provided by Euzen (2002), who investigated perceptions of water quality in Paris. The conclusion reached was that the perceptions of water producers and water consumers do not correspond.
2.13 A 2004 survey of 24,786 EU citizens, conducted for the European Commission, identified water pollution as one of the environmental problems that people worry most about ( TNS, 2005), echoing the findings of the earlier Scottish Executive and DEFRA surveys. Nearly half of the respondents were worried about water pollution (47%), with the highest percentage (71%), in Slovenia. It was the most important environmental concern for the Finns, with a score of 66%. This was also the case for Greece (59%), Denmark and Portugal (both at 57%), Belgium and Spain (both at 52%) and Ireland (50%).
2.14 Policy interest in Europe is evident through the gathering of evidence by the Danish, Irish, German and French Governments and the European Commission.
2.15 The Danish Ministry of Environment commissioned Pedersen's (2005) water quality study on the economic value of clean aquatic environments calculated the economic value of clean aquatic environments in Denmark. Pedersen concluded that economic values vary for different study-areas, partly due to differences and uncertainties in economic valuation methods, and partly due to the different locations and respondents characteristics. 3
2.16 The Irish Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) has initiated investigations into the social aspects of the WFD and undertaken studies on general public attitudes. In particular, they have commissioned a number of research projects under a programme-title, "Environmental Attitudes, Values and Behaviour in Ireland". Grounded in a representative sample survey of the adult population in the country, as well as an in-depth exploration of environmental meanings using qualitative methodologies, it started in January 2002. Findings provide evidence of high public concern about water pollution (Irish EPA, 2006).
2.17 Both the French and German Governments have conducted research into freshwater systems, water quality and water pollution (for example, Cemagref (2006) in France). A survey for the German Federal Environmental Ministry in 2004, entitled Environmental Awareness in Germany, which investigated the public's perception of water quality through interviews with 2,018 persons, discovered a lower environmental awareness in younger age groups. There was generally a positive judgement of environmental quality in Germany and 43% percent of respondents believed that there had been great advancements in the quality of German waters from 2002 to 2004 (German Federal Environment Ministry, 2006).
Global
2.18 Beyond Europe, a number of English-language texts concerned with perceptions of water quality originate from the USA. For example, Brody et al (2005) explored perceptions of water quality across watersheds in San Antonio, Texas, investigating the extent to which perceptions of water quality were spatially correlated across two watersheds. Using a mapping technique they were able to explain why clustering of perceptions occurred in specific locations, their results demonstrating that environmental perceptions are spatially dependent across the landscape.
2.19 Elaborating on the spatial dimension, Burger (2003) investigates an urban area, examining the perceptions amongst users of the waterfront area of New York/New Jersey Harbour estuary. Water pollution was viewed as the most important problem in New Jersey, and removing pollution was rated the most important way to improve the waterfront habitat. People valued the waterfront for walking, providing open green space, and as a place to commune with nature without people. Management options people favoured were removing pollution and cleaning up rubbish and adding educational signs and information brochures about the remaining, natural habitat. Age, income and education influenced environmental perceptions.
2.20 Two other, relevant US studies explore the public perceptions of beaches and water quality. Turbow et al (2004) conducted a survey of beachgoers in California to assess perceived water quality and the perceived health risk for swimming. Proximity of residence to the beach was strongly associated with perceptions of water quality. Although 83% of respondents felt that water quality was important in deciding to go to the beach, only 25% of respondents who did not plan to swim cited pollution or contamination as a reason not to swim. Similarly, Pendleton et al (2001) conducted a survey of beach use and perceptions in the coastal beaches of Los Angeles, uncovering that Los Angeles County residents viewed the ocean as a place of pollution rather than a vibrant and healthy place for bathing and swimming. In this random survey of 400 households, respondents were asked about their beach use and perceptions of coastal water quality. The results suggested that residents tend to hold perceptions of marine water quality that are at odds with data on bacteriological measures of water quality, and that perceptions of coastal water quality may be influenced less by coastal education campaigns and more by the media.
2.21 Education and awareness-raising also emerge as pertinent in a study conducted by Tran et al (2002) in Holbox Island, Mexico. A survey to ascertain public attitudes and perceptions of water pollution, showed that local inhabitants did not perceive pollution as a serious menace to their coastal community but that most would be willing to participate in long-term water quality monitoring. The study indicates the importance of making local players more articulate and skilled at expressing themselves and engaging with policy. It also shows the usefulness of environmental education and public awareness campaigns in providing important local players with knowledge about environmental and social issues, thereby enabling policy makers to incorporate the desires of the local inhabitants in making the appropriate choices for preservation and development of water environments.
2.22 In the context of this review, New Zealand offered the most abundant, accessible evidence for how policy-makers have engaged with how people value the water environment. There, the Ministry for Environment has commissioned a yearly survey of 2,000 respondents on "Public Perceptions of New Zealand's Environment". The 2004 survey examined a variety of environmental issues, and pollution issues (air, water, and solid waste disposal) were rated as the most important environmental issue facing the country. There was a 96% increase, compared to an equivalent survey in 2002, in the percentage of respondents who judged that water pollution was the most important issue (Hughey, 2004). The latter results also illustrated that 24% of respondents rated the quality of rivers, lakes, wetlands and marine fisheries as 'bad' or 'very bad' and water pollution was rated as the most important environmental issue facing New Zealand. Respondents were asked to identify up to three main causes of damage to water in rivers and lakes, with farming (43%) and sewage and stormwater (41%) emerging as the main ones selected. Regional responses differed significantly, as did perception by ethnic group (New Zealand Ministry for Environment, 2004).
2.23 A smaller study, undertaken on behalf of the Waikato Regional Council in 2004, found that 45% of respondents (local residents) were concerned about water pollution, and that water pollution was considered the most important issue facing the region (Environment Waikato and Gravitas Research and Strategy Limited, 2004). In relation to the region's natural environment, specifically, 14% of respondents valued rivers highly and 7% valued the coast and beaches highly.
2.24 Additional relevant international texts include a paper by Alam and Marinova (2003), in which they estimate the total value for the community of a cleanup of the Burigana River in Bangladesh. The cleanup programme aimed to improve water quality and the findings suggested that not only were a significant proportion of residents willing to pay for water quality improvements, they were also willing to contribute in non-monetary ways (mainly their time). Johnson et al (2005) in an analysis of public opinion and environmental attitudes in the USA, suggest that environmental opinions, including attitudes to water quality, are influenced by real environmental conditions and are responsive to policy outputs alongside improved environmental conditions. In an Australian context, Friend and Coutts (2006) consider the importance of local community involvement for the implementation of a Water Quality Improvement Programme.
Summary
2.25 The evidence, particularly data from general population surveys, suggests that water quality is a concern amongst the public, and often the most significant factor affecting perceptions of, and attitudes to, the water environment. Across the literature a common theme is that perceptions of water quality vary by socio-demographic and geographical variables.
2.26 Of particular relevance to Scotland is that water quality is an important issue for the public and that people believe they are relatively well informed about water pollution.
« Previous | Contents | Next »