Rural water use decision-making, adoption of water conservation practices in southwestern Ontario
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Almost all rural Ontarions use self-supplied water (e.g., private wells) for domestic, agricultural and other purposes. Shortages are increasingly common in Ontario, particularly during the drier summer months when water demand is at its highest. Water availability and related problems are expected to intensify with projected population growth and urban expansion, and with projected climate change. One approach to addressing water supply problems is the practice of water conservation. Promotion of water conservation initiatives is, however, dependent on identifying influences on certain water use decisions and subsequent behaviour. Factors associated with the adoption of conservation practices vary and include endogenous and exogenous influences, including, among others, attributes of the decision-maker, farm economic factors, and biophysical conditions. This research was an investigation into rural water conservation decision-making in southwestern Ontario. It aimed to identify and assess the importance of a range of factors influencing rural domestic and agricultural decision-making with regards to water conservation. Mail-back questionnaire responses from 291 agricultural and rural non-farm property owners revealed that most practice some form of water conservation, whether deliberately or incidentally. Analysis indicated that household water-saving was more common indoors than outdoors, and non-farm respondents were more active household conservers than agricultural respondents. Livestock operators favoured water equipment maintenance over all other livestock water-saving measures. Irrigators were more likely to adopt a series of conservation measures, most commonly scheduling of irrigation, and reducing water needs of agricultural crops. Statistical analysis revealed that adoption of water conservation measures in the home was influenced by program awareness and participation, level of formal education, and anticipation of future water shortages. Higher levels of livestock water conservation were associated with several factors, including greater farm gross sales, agriculture as the primary income source, and land tenure. Lengthy, in-depth interviews with seventeen agricultural households provided additional insight into the potential motivations and constraints for water conservation. Perceptions of limited opportunities to conserve water in the home and in agriculture were constraints to adoption. Furthermore, perceptions of water conservation, primarily conservation as a preventative measure to avoid water shortages, highlighted why experience with a water shortage did not influence water conservation behaviour. Technological fixes in response to past experiences may negate any motivation to implement preventative conservation. Awareness programs aimed at household water conservation may prove effective in rural households, although somewhat less effective in agriculture. Financial incentives to aid in the installation of water-saving equipment, along with awareness programs, may be necessary to improve water conservation within the agricultural sector.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».