Treating and Drinking Well Water in the Presence of Health Risks from Arsenic Contamination: Results from a U.S. Hot Spot

The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 regulates water quality in public drinking water supply systems but does not pertain to private domestic wells, often found in rural areas throughout the country. The recent decision to tighten the drinking water standard for arsenic from 50 parts per billion (ppb) to 10 ppb may therefore affect some households in rural communities, but may not directly reduce health risks for those on private wells. The article reports results from a survey conducted in a U.S. arsenic hot spot, the rural area of Churchill County, Nevada. This area has elevated levels of arsenic in groundwater. We find that a significant proportion of households on private wells are consuming drinking water with arsenic levels that pose a health risk. The decision to treat tap water for those on private wells in this area is modeled, and the predicted probability of treatment is used to help explain drinking water consumption. This probability represents behaviors relating to the household's perception of risk.     

Using the CAUSE Model to Understand Public Communication about Water Risks: Perspectives from Texas Groundwater District Officials on Drought and Availability

Public communication about drought and water availability risks poses challenges to a potentially disinterested public. Water management professionals, though, have a responsibility to work with the public to engage in communication about water and environmental risks. Because limited research in water management examines organizational communication practices and perceptions, insights into research and practice can be gained through investigation of current applications of these risk communication efforts. Guided by the CAUSE model, which explains common goals in communicating risk information to the public (e.g., creating Confidence, generating Awareness, enhancing Understanding, gaining Satisfaction, and motivating Enactment), semistructured interviews of professionals (N = 25) employed by Texas groundwater conservation districts were conducted. The interviews examined how CAUSE model considerations factor in to communication about drought and water availability risks. These data suggest that many work to build constituents’ confidence in their districts. Although audiences and constituents living in drought‐prone areas were reported as being engaged with water availability risks and solutions, many district officials noted constituents’ lack of perceived risk and engagement. Some managers also indicated that public understanding was a secondary concern of their primary responsibilities and that the public often seemed apathetic about technical details related to water conservation risks. Overall, results suggest complicated dynamics between officials and the public regarding information access and motivation. The article also outlines extensions of the CAUSE model and implications for improving public communication about drought and water availability risks.