Predictors of local support for a seawater desalination plant in a small coastal community

Environmental Science and Policy

Volumn 66, Issue , 2016, Pages 101-111

  Heck, Nadine ^a   Paytan, Adina ^a   Potts, Donald C ^a   Haddad, Brent ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitude; Desalination; NIMBY; Resilience; Water supply

Indexed keywords

DRINKING WATER; SEA WATER;

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; CALIFORNIA; COASTAL WATERS; DESALINATION; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ETHNICITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL STATUS; WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT; WATER SUPPLY;

EID: 84984628472     PISSN: 14629011     EISSN: 18736416     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.08.009     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M., Theory of Reasoned Action-theory of Planned Behavior. 1988, University of South Florida.
2. Anderson, E., Drinking Water Starts Flowing from Carlsbad Desalination Plant. 2015, KPBS.
3. Bourne, G., California Desalination Planning Handbook. 2008, Sacramento: Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University Sacramento.
4. Bridgeman, J., Public perception towards water recycling in California. Water Environ. J. 18:3 (2004), 150–154.
5. Côté, P., Siverns, S., Monti, S., Comparison of membrane-based solutions for water reclamation and desalination. Desalination 182 (2005), 251–257.
6. California Coastal Commission. (2004). Seawater Desalination and the California Coastal Act, in: Commission, C.C. (Ed.), San Francisco, CA.
7. California Demographics. (2014). Carlsbad Demographics.
8. California Department of Water Resources. (2003). Desalination, in: Resources, C.D.o.W. (Ed.), Sacramento.
9. California Water Boards, Desalination Facility Intakes, Brine Discharges, and the Incorporation of Other Nonsubstantive Changes State of California. 2014, Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento.
10. Ching, L., A lived-experience investigation of narratives: recycled drinking water. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 32:4 (2016), 637–649.
11. City of Santa Cruz. (2013). Draft Environmental Impact Report- Public Comments. Santa Cruz, CA.
12. Connelly, N.A., Brown, T.L., Decker, D.J., Factors affecting response rates to natural resource-focused mail surveys: empirical evidence of declining rates over time. Soci. Nat. Resour. 16 (2003), 541–549.
13. Cooley, H., Heberger, M., Key Issues in Seawater Desalination in California: Energy and Greenhosue Gas Emmission. 2013, Pacific Institute Oakland, CA.
14. Cooley, H., Ajam, N., Heberger, M., Key Issues in Seawater Desalination in California: Marine Impacts. 2013, Pacific Institute Oakland, CA.
15. Dawoud, M.A., The role of desalination in augmentation of water supply in GCC countries. Desalination 186 (2005), 187–198.
16. Desal Alternatives. (2013). Desals’ Problems. Desal Alternatives, Santa Cruz, CA.
17. Devine-Wright, P., Howes, Y., Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: a wind energy case study. J. Environ. Psychol. 30:3 (2010), 271–280.
18. Devine-Wright, P., Place attachment and public acceptance of renewable energy: a tidal energy case study. J. Environ. Psychol. 31 (2011), 336–343.
19. Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D., Christian, L.M., Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-mode Surveys: the Tailored Design Method. 2014, John Wiley & Sons.
20. Dolnicar, S., Schäfer, A.I., Desalinated versus recycled water: public perceptions and profiles of the accepters. J. Environ. Manage. 90 (2009), 888–900.
21. Dolnicar, S., Hurlimann, A., Nghiem, L.D., The effect of information on public acceptance—the case of water from alternative sources. J. Environ. Manage. 91 (2010), 1288–1293.
22. Dolnicar, S., Hurlimann, A., Grün, B., What affects public acceptance of recycled and desalinated water?. Water Res. 45 (2011), 933–943.
23. Domènech, L., March, H., Saurí, D., Degrowth initiatives in the urban water sector? A social multi-criteria evaluation of non-conventional water alternatives in Metropolitan Barcelona. J. Cleaner Prod. 38 (2013), 44–55.
24. Ek, K., Public and private attitudes towards green electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 33 (2005), 1677–1689.
25. Elimelech, M., Phillip, W.A., The future of seawater desalination: energy, technology, and the environment. Science 333 (2011), 712–717.
26. Friedler, E., Lahav, O., Jizhaki, H., Lahav, T., Study of urban population attitudes towards various wastewater reuse options: Israel as a case study. J. Environ. Manage. 81 (2006), 360–370.
27. Fuentes-Bargues, J.L., Analysis of the process of environmental impact assessment for seawater desalination plants in Spain. Desalination 347 (2014), 166–174.
28. Gee, K., Burkhard, B., Cultural ecosystem services in the context of offshore wind farming: a case study from the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein. Ecol. Complexity 7 (2010), 349–358.
29. Gibson, F.L., Tapsuwan, S., Walker, I., Randrema, E., Drivers of an urban community's acceptance of a large desalination scheme for drinking water. J. Hydrol. 528 (2015), 38–44.
30. Gray, D.L., Canessa, R.R., Rollins, R.B., Dearden, P., Keller, C.P., Understanding recreational boater attitudes to zoning in a proposed marine protected area. Coastal Manage. 38 (2010), 575–597.
31. Halpern, B.S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K.A., Kappel, C.V., Micheli, F., D'Agrosa, C., Bruno, J.F., Casey, K.S., Ebert, C., Fox, H.E., A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science 319 (2008), 948–952.
32. Hartley, T.W., Public perception and participation in water reuse. Desalination 187:1 (2006), 115–126.
33. Heberger, M., Cooley, H., Herrera, P., Gleick, P., Morre, E., The Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast. 2009, Pacific Institute, Oakland, CA.
34. Hinkebein, T.E., Price, M.K., Progress with the desalination and water purification technologies US roadmap. Desalination 182 (2005), 19–28.
35. Hurlimann, A., Dolnicar, S., When public opposition defeats alternative water projects—the case of Toowoomba Australia. Water Res. 44 (2010), 287–297.
36. International Desalination Association. (2014). Desalination by Numbers.
37. Jacquet, J.B., Landowner attitudes toward natural gas and wind farm development in northern Pennsylvania. Energy Policy 50 (2012), 677–688.
38. Johansson, M., Laike, T., Intention to respond to local wind turbines: the role of attitudes and visual perception. Wind Energy 10 (2007), 435–451.
39. Kahn, R.D., Siting struggles: the unique challenge of permitting renewable energy power plants. Electr. J. 13 (2000), 21–33.
40. King, T.J., Murphy, K., Procedural Justice as a Component of the Not In My Backyard (nimby) Syndrome: Understanding Opposition to the Building of a Desalination Plant in Victoria Australia. 2012, Alfred Deakin Research Institute.
41. King, T.J., Ooi, D., Cary, J., Fisher, A., Schibeci, R., Murphy, K., O'Toole, K., Mearns, M., Donaldson, J.A., Public Perceptions Of, and Responses To, Desalination in Australia, Alfred Deakin Research Institute Working Paper Series. 2012, Deakin University.
42. Lattemann, S., Höpner, T., Environmental impact and impact assessment of seawater desalination. Desalination 220 (2008), 1–15.
43. Lejano, R.P., Leong, C., A hermeneutic approach to explaining and understanding public controversies. J. Public Administration Res. Theory 22:4 (2012), 793–814.
44. Liu, T.-K., Sheu, H.-Y., Tseng, C.-N., Environmental impact assessment of seawater desalination plant under the framework of integrated coastal management. Desalination 326 (2013), 10–18.
45. Mainali, B., Ngo, H., Guo, W., Pham, T., Wang, X., Johnston, A., SWOT analysis to assist identification of the critical factors for the successful implementation of water reuse schemes. Desalin. Water Treat. 32 (2011), 297–306.
46. Mankad, A., Tapsuwan, S., Review of socio-economic drivers of community acceptance and adoption of decentralised water systems. J. Environ. Manage. 92:3 (2011), 380–391.
47. Manning, R., Studies in Outdoor Recreation: Search and Research for Satisfaction. 2011, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
48. Marks, J.S., Advancing Community Acceptance of Reclaimed Water. 2004, Australian Water and Wastewater Association.
49. Martin, C.A. (2015). Landscape water use in Phoenix, Arizona. Desert Plants.
50. Michaud, K., Carlisle, J.E., Smith, E.R.A.N., Nimbyism vs: environmentalism in attitudes toward energy development. Environ. Politics 17 (2008), 20–39.
51. Miller, S., Shemer, H., Semiat, R., Energy and environmental issues in desalination. Desalination 366 (2015), 2–8.
52. Mirchi, A., Madani, K., Roos, M., Watkins, D., Climate change impacts on california's water resources. Schwabe, K., Albiac, J., Connor, J.D., Hassan, R.M., Meza González, L., (eds.) Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions, 2013, Springer, Netherlands, 301–319.
53. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, National Marine Fisheries Service. (2010). Guidelines for Desalination Plants in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
54. Natural Resources Defense Council, N. (2014). Proceed with Caution: California’ Drought and Seawater Desalination, NRDC Issue Brief May 2014. Natural Resources Defense Council, New York.
55. Oki, T., Kanae, S., Global hydrological cycles and world water resources. Science 313 (2006), 1068–1072.
56. Pasko, J., A Change of Plans. 2013, Good Times.
57. Peel, J., Choy, J., Water governance and climate change. Drought in California as a Lens on Our Climate Future, 2014, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford.
58. Perry, E.E., Needham, M.D., Cramer, L.A., Rosenberger, R.S., Coastal resident knowledge of new marine reserves in Oregon: the impact of proximity and attachment. Ocean Coastal Manage. 95 (2014), 107–116.
59. Pidgeon, N.F., Beattie, J., The Psychology of Risk and Uncertainty. 1998, Blackwell Science, London.
60. Pierce, J. (2013). A History of Santa Cruz's Desal Fight.
61. Poseidon Water. (2008). Poseidon Resources Marine Life Mitigation Plan Poseidon Water, Carlsbad.
62. Poseidon Water. (2016). Carlsbad Desalination Plant. Online available at http://carlsbaddesal.com/faqs (accessed 08.01.2016).
63. Ressurreição, A., Simas, A., Santos, R.S., Porteiro, F., Resident and expert opinions on marine related issues: implications for the ecosystem approach. Ocean Coastal Manage. 69 (2012), 243–254.
64. Roberts, D.A., Johnston, E.L., Knott, N.A., Impacts of desalination plant discharges on the marine environment: a critical review of published studies. Water Res. 44 (2010), 5117–5128.
65. San Diego County Water Authority. (2012). Seawater Desalination.
66. San Diego County Water Authority, Seawater Desalination: The Carlsbad Desalination Project. 2014, San Diego County Water Authority, San Diego.
67. Sanchez-Lizaso, J.L., Romero, J., Ruiz, J., Gacia, E., Buceta, J.L., Invers, O., Torquemada, Y.F., Mas, J., Ruiz-Mateo, A., Manzanera, M., Salinity tolerance of the Mediterranean seagrass Posidonia oceanica: recommendations to minimize the impact of brine discharges from desalination plants. Desalination 221 (2008), 602–607.
68. Schiffler, M., Perspectives and challenges for desalination in the 21st century. Desalination 165 (2004), 1–9.
69. Seller, J., Desalination policy in a multilevel regulatory state. Escuder, C., Bert, G., (eds.) Desalaction de agua con Energias Renovables, 2008, National Autonomous University of Mexico Press, Mexico City, 173–188.
70. Sellers, J., Desalination policy in a multilevel regulatory state. Escuder, C.N., Bert, G.H.L., (eds.) Desalaction de agua con Energias Renovables, 2008, National Autonomous University of Mexico Press, Mexico City, 173–188.
71. State Water Resources Control Board, Amendment to the water quality control plan for ocean waters of California. Agency, C.E.P., (eds.) Draft Staff Report Including the Draft Substitute Environmental Documentation, 2014, State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento.
72. State Water Resources Control Board. (2015). Emergency Conservation Regulations. Implementing 25% Conservation Statewide.
73. State of California Public Utilities Commission, Am Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project. 2015, California Public Utilities Commission.
74. Stedman, R.C., Toward a social psychology of place predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environ. Behav. 34:5 (2002), 561–581.
75. Swofford, J., Slattery, M., Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making. Energy Policy 38 (2010), 2508–2519.
76. Theodori, G.L., Wynveen, B.J., Fox, W.E., Burnett, D.B., Public perception of desalinated water from oil and gas field operations: data from Texas. Soc. Nat. Resour. 22 (2009), 674–685.
77. Tortajada, C., Joshi, Y.K., Water demand management in Singapore: involving the public. Water Resour. Manage. 27:8 (2013), 2729–2746.
78. United States Census Bureau. (2014). Carlsbad, California.
79. Vaske, J., Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation, and Human Dimensions. 2008, Venture Publishing, State College, PA.
80. Vorkinn, M., Riese, H., Environmental concern in a local context: the significance of place attachment. Environ. Behav. 33 (2001), 249–263.
81. Water Corporation, 2014. Annual Report. Online available at https://www.watercorporation.com.au/-/media/files/about-us/our-performance/annual-report/annual-report-2014/water-corporation-annual-report-2014.pdf (accessed 08.27.16.).
82. Williams, D.R., Vaske, J.J., The measurement of place attachment: validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. For. Sci. 49 (2003), 830–840.
83. Wolsink, M., Entanglement of interests and motives: assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on facility siting. Urban Stud. 31 (1994), 851–866.
84. Wolsink, M., Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy 21 (2000), 49–64.
85. World Water Assessment Programme. (2009). The United Nations World Water Development Report 3: Water in a Changing World. UNESCO Paris.
86. Wynveen, C.J., Kyle, G.T., Absher, J.D., Theodori, G.L., The meanings associated with varying degrees of attachment to a natural landscape. J. Leisure Res., 43, 2011, 290.