Lessons learnt from spying on sinks

CCW carried out a Gogglebox style study of kitchen sink habits that revealed people have no clue about the way or the amount of water they use. Mike Keil, director of policy research and campaigning at CCW talks to Utility Week about what the work showed about water meters and how to communicate efficiency messages.

Last week CCW published details of a study of 15 households’ kitchen sink habits that showed a disconnect between people’s habits and their attitudes towards water use. It was something of a step change from the water watchdog, but an approach we can expect more of in future.

What was the thinking behind the study?

No one in water had done an observational study like this before; there have been lots that ask people about their habits but not that actually observe. We had a feeling it would be really revealing.

We did this as proof-of-concept research that’s freely available to the sector so people can look at it and build on it. It’s an innovative approach and could be expanded to water use in the garden based on the same techniques.

We want people to repeat this work but better – a bigger sample could be really influential.

Although this study was small, what can the sector learn from it?

You don’t need to do a large study to see people had no clue about the amount of water they used. People struggled to understand what a litre or ten litres of water looks like, and what running a tap for one minute looks like. There are some great messages for us all in the sector to take away about how to communicate.

Did anything surprise you in the results?

There wasn’t any sign that people’s behaviours were in any way influenced by having a meter or not. We know metering is the way forward for water savings, but this showed that it’s more nuanced than simply sticking a meter in. It needs to be thought through and accompanied by clear communications and practical help to use less water. A bigger sample study could really show that metering needs to be accompanied with other things so people will only use less water.

How could companies use a personal approach like this?

I loved the Gogglebox element of this study. Watching the participants’ reactions is much more powerful than a patronising lecture on why you should use less water. There’s a lesson there for all of us in the sector about finding creative ways of getting that message across, the last thing you want to do is put people off by being patronising. There were some quite strong reactions. It would be great to revisit people to see if the experience changed their habits.

How can the sector collaborate on this?

There’s an opportunity to be creative and have some fun with this. We need to try lots of different things to see what approaches work. This is where the sector having a collaborative approach will help.

Ofwat’s innovation fund is a good way to take forward ideas, especially those that might be a bit risky because you do ensure that a collaborative result is taken and results are shared.

There are areas we can’t take risks, like water quality, but there’s a danger that attitude to risk spills over to other areas like how we talk to customers about water efficiency. Then you end up having a very risk averse approach that stifles creativity.

The participants said they were concerned about the environment, does that come across in their habits?

The connections between what people do at their sink and environmental impact didn’t translate. Talking to people afterwards they still weren’t making the connection, which is consistent with other research that showed people didn’t connect their habits with water in the environment. That’s a real focus going forward, not just the water sector but more widely in climate change response.

How could that be moved forward?

We need to go beyond a summer campaign to save water. It needs to be much bigger, coordinated and sustained on really hitting home the point that we are so lucky to have water and sewerage services in this country and we need to really value that. If we don’t, we run the risk of having a devastating impact on the natural environment.

We need to take a step back and think about water in our daily lives – not just water and sewerage services but ponds and rivers as well as enjoying a shower. The connection with nature and valuing water needs to be bigger, by taking a step back and helping people make that connection with what water means to our daily lives and the natural environment. It’s not going to be done in a six-month campaign. It needs sustained action. We can’t afford not to be ambitious.

How does this link to other work by CCW?

We know affordability concerns can act as a blocker to big investment decisions, so this is where the affordability review is very relevant. The recommendation of comprehensive support for anyone who can’t afford to pay their bills changes the equation when it comes to future investment. On one hand, we’re acknowledging we need to invest but on the other there are people who can’t afford their bills. If we can sort out affordability – and the single social tariff is the most logical sensible answer – then that has a big impact on how we deal with future challenges.

We can’t approach policy in silos. We need to look after those who can’t afford to pay and invest in the future.

This isn’t a case of CCW saying the sector needs to do this. We all need to do something much more enduring and coordinated than we’ve done before, because it’s quite clear that these one off campaigns aren’t really cutting the mustard.