The document discusses using behavioral change tools to better understand community attitudes towards introducing recycled drinking water. It suggests combining tools like core belief research and attitude/behavior matrices with traditional consultation. This would provide insights into stakeholders' beliefs and emotions, helping design effective education programs to build support for recycled water. The approach has been successfully used overseas but could help address the emotional responses that often impede recycled water projects.

1. 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

2. 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?

3. 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 is
the best way to ensure such support.’
• ‘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)’
• AWA Water Recycling Forum Position Paper (JM
Anderson):
‘There may be scope for greater use of indirect potable water recycling
but 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’

4. But Still So Many Questions….
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?

5. Great Deal of Work Underway
• 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
• Australian Guidelines For Water Recycling: (Phase 2,
July 2007) - includes guidelines for community
engagement, open to public comment for next 3 months
7. 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

6. Taking it One Step Further…
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

7. Taking it One Step Further…
These tools are designed to:
• Reveal the deep seated beliefs of the community -
which dictate their behaviour/response to recycled
drinking water
• Identify the emotions that are triggered in
individuals/ specific stakeholder groups - when
presented with the concept/possible introduction of
recycled drinking water
• Identify what % of the community are angry, in
denial, reasonable, accepting - about the
concept/possible introduction of recycled drinking water
• Provide a roadmap for designing/implementing an
effective, transparent, two way - ongoing community
consultation process

8. Couple of Tools to Consider
• Core Belief Research
• Attitude/Behaviour Matrix
Widely used around the world in the corporate arena
to achieve best practice:
- stakeholder engagement
- human resources
- conflict resolution
- leadership development
- customer retention/management
- investment/market positioning
- strategic planning

9. Core Belief Research
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)

10. 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’
10. ‘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!

11. It’s All in the Questions…
‘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?

12. 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?

13. Core Belief Research
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)

14. Attitude/Behaviour Matrix
Denial x% Anger x%
Acceptance x% Reasoning x%
• 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

15. Toowoomba Experience
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

16. 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?

17. Overseas Experiences
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

18. Scaleable & Flexible
• 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

19. 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)

20. In Summary
• 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

21. Your Questions Answered