What’s Wrong with the Tap? Examining Perceptions of Tap Water and Bottled Water at Purdue University

The environmental impacts of bottled water prompted us to explore drinking water choices at Purdue University, located in West Lafayette, IN. A random sample of 2,045 Purdue University students, staff, and faculty was invited to participate in an online survey. The survey assessed current behaviors as well as perceived barriers and benefits to drinking tap water versus bottled water. 677 surveys were completed for a response rate of 33.1%. We then conducted qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of university undergraduates (n = 21) to obtain contextual insights into the survey results and the beliefs of individuals with a variety of drinking water preferences. This study revealed that women drink disproportionately more bottled water then men while undergraduate students drink more than graduate students, staff and faculty. The study also uncovered a widespread belief that recycling eliminates the environmental impacts of bottled water. Important barriers to drinking tap water at Purdue include: perceived risks from tap water and the perceived safety of bottled water, preferring the taste of bottled water, and the convenience of drinking bottled water. The qualitative interviews revealed that drinking water choices can be influenced by several factors—especially whether individuals trust tap water to be clean—but involve varying levels of complexity. The implications of these results for social marketing strategies to promote tap water are discussed.     

Locating Existing Best Management Practices Within a Watershed: The Value of Multiple Methods

There is an increasing need to document the impacts of conservation‐related best management practices (BMPs) on water quality within a watershed. However, this impact analysis depends upon accurate geospatial locations of existing practices, which are difficult to obtain. This study demonstrates and evaluates three different methods for obtaining geospatial information for BMPs. This study was focused on the Eagle Creek Watershed, a mixed use watershed in central Indiana. We obtained geospatial information for BMPs through government records, producer interviews, and remote‐sensing aerial photo interpretation. Aerial photos were also used to validate the government records and producer interviews. This study shows the variation in results obtained from the three sources of information as well as the benefits and drawbacks of each method. Using only one method for obtaining BMP information can be incomplete, and this study demonstrates how multiple methods can be used for the most accurate picture.     

Beyond water data: benefits to volunteers and to local water from a citizen science program

Survey results of citizen science water data collection volunteers are presented, indicating personal benefits (e.g., being in nature, helping local water quality), and suggesting potential long-term benefits of improved watershed health (e.g., behavior change). These results can inform citizen science program development and contribute to watershed planners’ understanding of the broad benefits of such programs. We suggest that respondents’ positive feelings toward the watershed's major river and desire to learn about science and nature are place-specific elements that watershed and citizen science program managers could utilize in program development. Moreover, we explore the potential of social diffusion and behavior change and suggest the need for further research in these areas. We conclude that citizen science has potential not just as a means to collect large amounts of data (cheaply), but as a means to engage citizens to make environmentally friendly decisions.     

Trust in Sources of Soil and Water Quality Information: Implications for Environmental Outreach and Education

Public trust in organizations focused on improving environmental quality is important for increasing awareness and changing behaviors that have water quality implications. Few studies have addressed trust in soil and water quality information sources, particularly for both agricultural and nonagricultural respondents of the same watersheds. Surveys in 19 watersheds across five states in the Midwest assessed trust in, and familiarity with, soil and water quality information sources. Overall, respondents most trusted University Extension, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and the Natural Resource Conservation Service, while lawn care companies, environmental groups, and land trusts were less trusted. Significant differences in trusted sources were found between watersheds, and between agricultural and nonagricultural respondents across and within watersheds. Among agricultural respondents, a clear relationship exists between familiarity and trust; as familiarity with an organization increases, so too does level of trust. This relationship is less clear‐cut for nonagricultural respondents in this region. We highlight implications of these findings for soil and water quality outreach efforts.     

Prevalence of Conservation Design in an Agriculture-Dominated Landscape: The Case of Northern Indiana

We examined the prevalence of residential development that occurs with consideration of the natural features of the site, known as conservation design, within county-level planning jurisdictions across Northern Indiana. Using data from telephone interviews with representatives of planning departments, jurisdictions were ranked based on reported use of conservation design. Three categories of use emerged from the data: no use, use of individual practices associated with conservation design, and integration of multiple conservation design practices. Qualitative data analysis revealed that conservation design practices were not being used widely and, when used, were often used to fulfill stormwater requirements. Statistical analysis, using data from interviews, spatial data sets, and the U.S. Census Bureau, identified several significant positive predictors of the levels of conservation design use including conversion of forest or agricultural land cover to urban uses and education levels in the jurisdiction. Many of the interviewees noted that agricultural land is perceived to meet open space needs within their counties. Given that agricultural land does not fully meet all ecosystem needs, education about the benefits of other types of open space is suggested.