Abstract:The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 required U.S. utilities to report on drinking water quality to their customers annually, beginning in fall 1999, on the assumption that such reports would alert them to quality problems and perhaps mobilize pressure for improvement. A random sample of New Jersey customers read alternative versions of a water quality report, in an experiment on reactions to water quality information under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) rules. Experiment design was 2 x 3 + 1: two versions each--one with, one without, a violation of a health standard--of a report that was (1) Qualitative (without water quality numbers, thus not meeting USEPA rules); (2) Basic, with minimal information meeting the rules; or (3) Extended, adding reading aids and utility performance information; plus a control instrument without any hypothetical report. Results of ANOVA suggest the reports will have less effect than hoped or feared. These manipulations were successful: people reading the Qualitative versions were less likely to say that the report gave the amounts of substances found in the water, and those reading Violation versions were more likely to report a violation of a health standard. The main differences in responses to the report involved the judged adequacy of the information, and to a lesser extent responses on a Concern scale (constructed from measures of concern, judged risk, clean-up intentions, distrust of utility information, and doubt that the utility was doing all it could to improve water quality). Overall judgments of water quality and utility performance did not change, either relative to the controls or in before versus after responses. Qualitative reports performed worse than others, confirming the decision to have utilities report actual contaminant levels. Extended reports did only slightly better than the Basic versions on these measures. Many respondents had trouble identifying the presence or absence of substance amounts or violations, despite their seeming obviousness (e.g., in a "bottom line" summary on the front page of each report), suggesting many were not processing this information carefully. However, the pattern of responses for those who accurately identified the presence or absence of substance amounts or violations did not differ substantially from that for the group as a whole. Generic risk beliefs (serious local environmental problems; lack of control over risks to one's health) dominated demographic variables, attitudes toward utility water quality or trustworthiness, and the content and format of water quality reports in influencing concern about drinking water quality. Previous empirical and theoretical evidence for lack of change in public risk attitudes due to one-time or infrequent communications--e.g., role of personal experience, perseverance of prior trust or distrust--seems to be confirmed for annual water quality reports.

The importance of being informed: Experimental evidence on demand for environmental quality

Information Interventions and Health Promotion Behavior: Evidence from China after Cadmium Rice Events

Price Response to Government Disclosure of Food Safety Information in Developing Markets

The Impact of Environmental Information Disclosure on Water Quality

The Role of Public Information in Increasing Homebuyers' Willingness-to-pay for Green Housing: Evidence from Beijing

Valuing Open Defecation Free Surroundings: Experimental Evidence from a Norm-Based Intervention in India

The impact of water quality on children's education: evidence from 39 districts in the Ganges Basin of India

Product preferences and willingness to pay for potable water delivery: Experimental evidence from rural Bihar, India

Do reports on drinking water quality affect customers' concerns? Experiments in report content

Determinants of the use of alternatives to arsenic-contaminated shallow groundwater: an exploratory study in rural West Bengal, India

A cross-sectional study of inequalities in digital air pollution information access and exposure reducing behavior uptake in the UK

Is there a stronger willingness to pay for air quality improvement with high education: new evidence from a survey in China

Willingness to Pay to Prevent Water and Sanitation-Related Diseases Suffered by Slum Dwellers and Beneficiary Households: Evidence from Chittagong, Bangladesh

Does Education Increase Pro-Environmental Willingness To Pay? Evidence From Chinese Household Survey

Improved water and sanitation in early life and cognition in adolescence: Evidence from four countries

Comparing willingness to pay for improved drinking-water quality using stated preference methods in rural and urban Kenya

Contamination and Incomplete Information:: Bounding Implicit Prices using High-Profile Leaks

Consumers' perception of piped water supply and their willingness to pay for improved water supply: evidence from an Eastern Indian state

Effective Demand for In-Line Chlorination Bundled with Rental Housing in Dhaka, Bangladesh

Impact of risk information on health beliefs and behaviours: experimental evidence

From Fog to Smog: The Value of Pollution Information