Empowering water consumers through smart metering:
evidence from a field study in a residential suburb of Montpellier (south of France)
Marielle Montginoul et Arnaud Vestier
SH2016, 22-25 August 2016, Monte Verità – Switzerland
An increasing water scarcity (less supply – more demand)
INTRODUCTION
Smart metering: a technology with many advantages
Advantages Forusers*/forwatermanagers**
Highmeterreadingfrequency
Awaterleaks’detection(*+**)Analert toinformusersincaseofsuspicionofwaterleaks(*)Todesignwaterpricingtakingintoaccountwaterscarcityandothermanagerialconstraints(**)
Betterwaterconsumptionmonitoring
Aprecise knowledgeofindividualwaterconsumption(*+**)Benchmarking(*)Configuringalerts(SMS orEmail)toinformuserswhenwaterconsumptionexceedsapre-definedthreshold(*)
AutomatedremotemeterreadingAnabsenceofdisturbances(*)Productivitygains(**)A billonrealdata,anopportunitytoincreasebillingfrequency(*)
↔Aneedtosavewater
… but a low subscription rate (even if free of charges)
INTRODUCTION
2%ofthe23,000watersubscribers(February2015)
Why a such gap? Looking forward factors determining the adoption:1. Information2. Intends to take action (the theory of planned behavior, Ajzen, 1991)
Smart metering: a technology with many advantages …
Being informedFactors determining smart metering adoption
Who says What to Whom in Which channel with What effect (Lasswell - 1902-1978)
Mediaofcommunication CODAH Metz Mulhouse SEDIF SMGC
Directly: towatersubscriberorwateruserPersonalized
Mail x x x x x
Flyer x x x x x
TargetedNew subscription x
Meter inspectors x x
Neighborhood council x x x
Mayor communication x 1district
GeneralizedWeb page x x x x
Newspaper article x x
Municipalnewsletter x x x x x
Indirectly:through localauthoritiesormayorsMail x
Oral communication x
Being « well meaning »(Plannedbehavior– Ajzen,1991)
Factors determining smart metering adoption
The attitude toward water and new technologyEnrolment
Subjective norm or perceived social pressureSmartmeterasasocialobjectconsideredasrewarding
Perceived behavioral controlAbilitytocontrolthenewtechnologyAbilitytotranslateinformationintoaction- workingknowledge(Darby,2010)(e.g.understandingiswaterlevelisnormalornot)
Factors determining smart metering adoption
Information
Being informedIndividualinformation:facetofaceand/orbyletter(signedbytheMayorinchargeofwater)DirectlydonebyMontpellierMétropole staff(andnotbythewateroperator:Veolia)Aleafletexplainingthesmartmeteringservice
A residential areaThe case study
261householdswithsmartmetersofMontpellierMétropole (2015)Anaturalfieldexperiment
Being « well meaning »Testedthroughaface-to-facesurvey
A residential areaThe case study
261householdswithsmartmetersofMontpellierMétropole (2015)
• ToanalyzerelationshipsbetweenhouseholdsandwaterserviceEx:waterpriceperception,computerskills,paymentofwaterbillthroughthewebsite
• ToidentifysocialrepresentationsofwaterandsmartmetersTogive3wordsorphrasesreferringtoitems« water »/« intelligentmetering »,toorderthemofimportance,andtoprioritizethemonascalefrom-3to+3
• TocollecthouseholdcharacteristicsEx:size,housingtype,socio-professionalcategory…
The subjectsThe case study
Targetedhouseholds
Surveyedhouseholds
Media of communication
House (even-numbered) 123 35 Face-to-face (for surveyed pop., letter to others)
House (odd-numbered) 68 25Letter M3MApartment (social building) 16 6
Apartment (other) 54 11Total 261 77
Average water consumption (liters/day/household) (jan-june 2015)
Targeted households Surveyed households
Apartment House Total Apartment House Total
- Mean
- Median
211
187
403
304
354
278
247
168
402
324
374
318
Observations (number) 54 157 211 11 50 61
Surveyedhouseholds’characteristics2,7peopleperhouseholdAveragedateofbirthofthesurveyedrespondent:1961Retiredpeople:31%Profession:managers(47%),employees(31%)Renters:27%Houses:60%withswimmingpool,12%withrainwatercollector,33%withborehole
Social representationThe case study
Throughprioritizedevocations’method
Levelofinterest
High (rank<2) Low(rank≥2)
Frequencyofoccurrence
High(≥10%)Thecore:quantitative andqualitativecentralityarea
Firstperimeter
Low(<10%) Contrasting elements Secondperimeter
Motsassociésàl’eauNombredecitation
Fréquencedecitation
Rangmoyendecitation
Echellemoyennedu
motZonedunoyaudelareprésentation lavie 27 12% 1,11 2,9lavage 27 12% 1,81 2,7Zonedepremièrepériphérie plaisirdétente 22 10% 2,45 2,1Elémentscontrastésdelareprésentation boissonetalimentation 20 9% 1,75 2,5nécessité 16 7% 1,69 2,7pureté 11 5% 2,00 2,4rareetprécieux 5 2% 2,00 1,4soif 4 2% 1,50 0,8eaupotable 3 1% 2,00 2,3qualité 3 1% 2,00 2,7liquide 2 1% 1,50 0,0manqued'eau 7 3% 1,86 -2,6inégalitédepartage 2 1% 2,00 -2,5Zonedesecondepériphérie lanature 13 6% 2,46 1,8fraîcheur 12 5% 2,50 1,8économiserl'eau 10 4% 2,20 2,0environnement 7 3% 2,57 1,9abondancedébitaccèsàl'eauconsommation 6 3% 2,17 1,0arrosage 5 2% 2,40 0,8relaxationpurification 4 2% 2,25 2,5banal 1 0% 3,00 0,0coûtdel'eau 10 4% 2,30 -1,8mauvaisequalitédel'eau(calcaire,goût,odeur) 4 2% 2,50 -0,5inondationpollution 2 1% 2,50 -3,0gaspillage 2 1% 2,50 -1,5demoinsenmoinsnaturel 1 0% 3,00 -2,0
Togive3wordsorphrasesreferringtoitems« water »/« intelligentmetering »Toorderthemofimportance
Toprioritizethemonascalefrom-3to+3
Water social representationThe case study
Water-relatedwordsFrequency
ofoccurence
Citationaverageranking
Wordaveragescale
Corearea Life 12% 1,11 2,9Washing 12% 1,81 2,7Firstperimeter Pleasureand/orrelaxation 10% 2,45 2,1Contrastingelements Drinkandfood 9% 1,75 2,5Aneed 7% 1,69 2,7Purity 5% 2,00 2,4Scarceandprecious 2% 2,00 1,4Thirst 2% 1,50 0,8Drinkingwater 1% 2,00 2,3Quality 1% 2,00 2,7Liquid 1% 1,50 0,0Watershortage 3% 1,86 -2,6Inequityofsharing 1% 2,00 -2,5
Intelligent metering social representationThe case study
Intelligentmetering-relatedwords
Frequencyof
occurence
Citationaverageranking
Wordaveragescale
Corearea Useful 18% 1,49 1,94Improvedconsumptionmonitoring 11% 1,77 2,05Simple 10% 1,95 1,58Contrastingelements Realtimealert 7% 2,00 2,15Leakageoroverconsumptionalert 6% 1,73 2,45Modernity 6% 2,00 2,00Watersaving 4% 1,57 2,00Abillbasedonrealconsumption 2% 2,00 3,00Effective 1% 1,50 2,00Indifference 1% 1,50 2,00Environmentallyfriendly 1% 2,00 1,50Havetobepaidbywatermanager 1% 2,00 3,00Assistance 1% 2,00 3,00Billmanagement 1% 1,00 2,00Unemployment 4% 1,75 -3,00Unuseful 3% 1,40 -1,60Manipulation 1% 2,00 -3,00AneedtobeconnectedonInternet 1% 1,00 -3,00Privatisation 1% 2,00 -3,00
Still a low subscription rate (2 months after being informed)
… but not because of a negative representation: aneedtoexplorethelaststepthatonewhichgoesfromintentiontoaction
Ø Aneedtobeperceivedasanimportantissue:WaterbilllevelAFrenchwaterlawwhichprotectswaterusersagainstexceptionalleakages(debtcancellationwhenplumberinvoiceprovingleakagerepair)
Ø Enhancedbilling(e.g.awaterpricinglinkedtointelligentmetering):Likeelectricitywheretime-of-daypricing(Ehrhardt-Martinezetal.,2010)
Ø Aneedofafeedback(Schleich etal.,2013)orofanautomatedprogramwhichinformswateruserwhenheoverconsumes(Lafaye etal.,2013)
Conclusion
Media of communication Number of households Before being informed 2 Letter communication only 6 Face-to-face communication 4 Total 12
LowincomeHighwaterusers
Information
Intention
Behavior
Conclusion
Further researches: Ø Exploringadatasetof23,000watermeters(numberofobservationsfrom2012toJune2016:
44,000,000):detectionoftrendsandbreaks,explorationofpotentialcorrelationwiththesubscriptionornottointelligentmeteringserviceortypeofwateruser…
Montpellier
Many thanks for your attention