Grantee Research Project Results
2006 Progress Report: Perceptions of and Exposure to Arsenic in Private and Public Drinking Water Among Households
EPA Grant Number: R832235Title: Perceptions of and Exposure to Arsenic in Private and Public Drinking Water Among Households
Investigators: Shaw, W. Douglass , Moeltner, Klaus , Walker, Mark , Riddel, Mary , Jakus, Paul
Institution: Texas A & M University , Utah State University , University of Southern California , University of Nevada - Reno
Current Institution: Texas A & M University , University of Nevada - Reno , University of Southern California , Utah State University
EPA Project Officer: Hahn, Intaek
Project Period: April 18, 2005 through October 15, 2007
Project Period Covered by this Report: April 18, 2005 through October 15, 2006
Project Amount: $310,017
RFA: Valuation for Environmental Policy (2003) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Environmental Justice
Objective:
The project involves implementation of a survey questionnaire to households that are in potential violation of the new Safe Drinking Water Act standard for arsenic in drinking water, of 10 parts per billion (ppb). The key parts of the study relate to risk perceptions associated with arsenic. The survey and sampling plan involved a three-part (telephone, mail, telephone) survey, conducted in four cites:
- Albuquerque, New Mexico (public water system out of compliance)
- Fernley, Nevada (public water system out of compliance)
- Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (public water system out of compliance)
- Appleton, Wisconsin (private well households)
Progress Summary:
In part 1 of the survey, households were recruited and screened via telephone and asked questions to determine their water supply source. Recruits were asked their willingness to participate in a longer telephone survey (part 3), which would occur approximately 10 days after the initial recruit call. Selected demographic information was obtained in this screener (part 1) survey whether the respondents agreed to participate or not. An information brochure (part 2) was sent to all households that agreed to participate in the study, approximately 24 hours after the recruit.
The following tasks have now been completed:
- Focus Group and Pretest Survey Work and Final Design of All Three Survey Parts: Focus groups were held in early 2006 and are discussed in the 2006 Annual Report. Following the analysis of focus group results and review of survey instruments by several key expert reviewers (Dr. J.R. DeShazo, Dr. Trudy Cameron, and Dr. V. Kerry Smith), instruments and questionnaires were redesigned. Pretests were conducted in October 2006. Twenty-two households were recruited to complete the full survey (3 parts), and 10 of these completed all 3 parts.
- Implementation of the Third Part of the Drinking Water/Risk Survey Questionnaire: Following minor modifications based on pretest results, the full-scale surveys began in November, and continued through February 12, 2007. This study saw a very high level of effort to improve the overall response rate. This is evident in the number of attempts—the telephone recruit saw an average of 5.9 attempts, and the followup saw an average of 9.6 attempts, per sample point. Part of the difficulty in late 2006, the time of the implementation, related to a huge national effort to involve households in political surveys and getting out the vote. PA Consulting staff indicated that many households expressed fatigue and being overwhelmed with telephone calls related to voting behavior. Subsequently, PA Consulting decided to continue pushing to increase response rates in January of 2007.
- Data Entry: The survey/consulting firm, PA Consulting Group, entered the raw data from the questionnaires into a computer, and provided a codebook for all responses.
- Processing Tap Water: Households on private wells in Wisconsin were told that we would test their tap water if the household member would collect the water from the tap and mail it to a laboratory in Wisconsin. Only 65 households in the study chose to have their water tested.
- Entry of Tap Water Data: Laboratory data was collected for 65 tap water samples and entered into the computer. Out of those 65 results, most tap water tests indicated arsenic levels well below the new standard of 10 ppb. However, six households had tap water at levels above 10 ppb, and one had a level of over 50 ppb, the old standard.
- Provision of Codebook to Researchers: In February 2007, the codebook was delivered to primary researchers at Texas A&M University, along with a CD-ROM disk containing all data and final survey questionnaires.
- Continuing Theoretical Investigation of Risk/Uncertainty: During the past year, key researchers (primarily Shaw and Riddel) continued to explore theory related to risk, and more to the point here, to uncertainty (unknown probabilities, as distinguished from risk, where probabilities are known). The key researchers worked on theories relating maximum ex ante willingness to pay and uncertainty and produced two theoretical papers related to this project.
- Preliminary Analysis of Data: One M.S. thesis in Texas A&M’s Graduate Program in Hydrology was partially supported by this grant, and the student has now conducted some preliminary analysis (frequencies, means) of the survey data. In addition to work by the M.S. student, two Ph.D. students are partially supported by this grant and one Ph.D. has estimated hedonic income models to predict missing values for income.
The study and questionnaire focus on how households with children, and without children, perceive of the mortality risks associated with arsenic in drinking water.
Future Activities:
We will begin complete analysis of the data in early May 2007. One Ph.D. candidate student will work with the data on the households who are on public water systems, and the other Ph.D. candidate will focus on the households on private wells. An M.S. student will also finalize the model of the household’s decision to participate in the study as a function of key explanatory variables using a logit model. This will be used in conjunction with ZIP code census information to try to recover these households in the analysis. Key researchers (Drs. Moeltner, Riddel, Shaw, and Jakus) will also be exploring other dimensions of the research using the data.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 11 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
drinking water, decision making, nonmarket valuation, risk,, RFA, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Scientific Discipline, INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION, Water, POLLUTANTS/TOXICS, Health Risk Assessment, Arsenic, Biochemistry, decision-making, Environmental Policy, Water Pollutants, Economics & Decision Making, Social Science, children's health, environmental awareness, decision analysis, decision making, drinking water, environmental decision making, morbidity risks, household choice, efficient household framework, mortality risks, arsenic exposure, environmental risk assessmentProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.