the european water label: an analysis and review

The European Water Label: An analysis and review D.A. Kelly [email protected] School of the Built Environment, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland. Abstract In recent years household water consumption has become a critical issue as the availability of potable water supplies struggle to keep up with escalating demands. Households themselves have the potential to conserve water by installing and using water saving devices. However, at present, consumers have little information about the water saving capabilities of these devices, and even less about the environmental, and often financial, benefit that water efficient devices can offer. The European Water Label is a new initiative to be launched in 2014 aimed at promoting water efficient devices, and providing consumers with information on the water consumption and efficiency ratings of water-using devices in order to influence their choice in selecting more water efficient devices. This paper reviews the planned European Water Label scheme and compares it with similar schemes already in place in countries around the world. By analysing best practice, or lessons learnt, from these schemes, together with findings from literature on consumer attitudes and behaviour towards water conservation, recommendations for enhancing the European Water Label scheme are provided to ensure it achieves its full water-saving potential. Keywords Water conservation, water efficiency, labelling schemes

1 Introduction Throughout the world, there is an escalating demand on potable water supplies due to population increase, economic growth, and lifestyle changes. Whilst these factors have triggered higher rates of water consumption, increasingly unpredictable weather patterns and drought conditions, attributable to climate change, mean that water availability is now recognised as a major global issue (Inman and Jeffrey, 2006; Willis et al., 2010). In order to address the imbalance between the supply and demand of potable water resources, governments and environmental organisations (Defra, 2008; European

CIBW062 Symposium 2013

393

Commission, 2012) have developed water strategies primarily aimed at influencing water consumption on the demand-side. These water demand strategies focus on reducing the amount of water consumed by the user and, hence, offset the need for additional water supply measures which would not only be expensive, but would also carry significant social and environmental implications (Willis et al., 2011). As a result, a significant amount of research effort is now aimed at predicting future water demand and estimating potential savings through the introduction of water demand strategies such as imposed water restrictions, water metering, information campaigns, and promoting the installation of water efficient devices (Allon and Sofoulis, 2006; Millock and Nauges, 2010; Beal at al., 2011). A number of countries and regions have offered rebate programs to promote the installation of water efficient devices with the aim of reducing household water consumption. For example, several State Governments in Australia currently offer rebates for a number of water efficient devices, including dual flush toilets, water efficient showerheads, and water efficient washing machines (www.smartwatermark.org). To be eligible for the rebate, the user must select a device which carries the Smart Approved WaterMark label which proves that the device has been assessed by an independent technical expert panel. Labelling initiatives such as this are gaining increased backing from governments and environmental organisations as a means of helping consumers choose a more water efficient device. This year, the European manufacturing industry has agreed to introduce a voluntary labelling scheme across a wide range of water-using devices with the aim of providing consumers with clear and comparable water efficiency information. It is hoped that the European Water Label, due for release in summer 2014, will help to influence consumer choice in selecting a more water efficient device and, in doing so, help to achieve the European Commission (2012) target of reducing water demand in the domestic sector. This paper compares The European Water Label with other labelling initiatives from other counties and, from a review of the literature on user attitudes towards water conservation and their perceived barriers to the uptake of water efficient devices, proposes some recommendations aimed at enhancing the appeal of such labelling initiatives to the user.

2 Water consumption in Europe The quantity of water used by European households has increased significantly over the past 30 years and now represents approximately 70% of the total water use in buildings (European Commission, 2009). Although some of this rise is attributed to an increased population and economic growth, the main factor has been the increased prevalence of water-using devices such as washing machines and power showers and heightened lifestyle expectations of comfort and cleanliness (Allon and Sofoulis, 2006). A report by the Office of Community and Economic Development (2002) estimates that 35-40% of household water consumption is used for personal hygiene (shower and bath), 20-30% for toilet flushing, and 10-20% for laundry. Research has shown that replacing high water-using devices with water efficient alternatives can reduce annual water consumption by 32-50% (Mayer et al., 2004; Inman and Jeffrey, 2006, European Commission, 2009). Focusing on household water consumption, and in particular the use of water efficient devices, offers significant potential for water savings.


394

3 Labelling and certification of water efficient devices The labelling and certification of water-using devices, in order to provide efficiency information to consumers, is a relatively new initiative, being implemented in some countries only over the last decade. Labelling schemes, such as the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards (WELS) scheme in Australia, generally use a rating system to indicate the efficiency of the device whilst also stating the water consumption or flow rate figures. Certification schemes, however, are quality marks awarded to devices whose water consumption is below a certain efficiency target, such as WaterSense (www.epa.gov/watersense/) in the USA and Waterwise (www.waterwise.org.uk/) in the UK. Both types of scheme can be voluntary or mandatory and are often combined with device-specific performance standards. The following sections review some of the water efficient device labelling schemes implemented in countries around the world, beginning first with a review of the planned European Water Label scheme.

3.1 The European Union The European Water Label, to be introduced in 2014, is a voluntary labelling scheme developed and supported by The European Industry for Taps and Valves (CEIR) and will be applicable, not only throughout the EU, but also in Israel, Switzerland, Russia, Ukraine, and Turkey. The primary aim of this new labelling scheme is to provide a single classification system across all member countries to inform consumers of the water consumption of water-using devices. In doing so, it hopes to make water efficient devices on the market easily identifiable and, thus, help promote the efficient use of household water (The Water Label, 2013). The scheme plans to set common requirements for water efficient devices throughout all of the member countries, whilst also conforming to any legal national requirements and standards. There have been several attempts in that past to introduce labelling schemes across the EU, such as the EU Eco-label (www.ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/) and the Ecodesign Directive (2009), however, both have focused generally on just dishwashers and washing machines, and only with very limited success. The European Water Label will cover a wide range of devices including: showerheads, shower controls, electric showers, taps, toilets, baths, urinals, grey water systems and flow regulators (The Water Label, 2013). To join the scheme, manufacturers will be required to register before they can submit any devices for approval. An annual registration fee of £500 will be payable per brand, together with an annual fee of £100 to use the label in an additional country, or £1000 to use the label throughout all member countries. Additionally, a licence fee of £2000 is payable to register up to 2000 devices under each device category. This increases to £3000 per category to register over 2000 devices (The Water Label, 2013). To join the scheme, manufacturers will be required to sign a Declaration of Conformity confirming that the device complies with the relevant water efficiency standards. Copies of test certificates, either conducted or witnessed by approved third parties, will also be required. Once approved, devices will undergo an annual audit to ensure compliance with the scheme and performance tests will be carried out on randomly selected devices.


395

The label, which was developed by the UK’s Bathroom Manufacturer’s Association (BMA), is based around the Energy Efficiency Label found on appliances such as fridges and freezers. It uses a coloured scale to indicate performance bands of water efficiency ranging from red (least efficient) to green (most efficient). The label also indicates the actual water consumption of the device (flow rate or total volume), see Table 1. The performance bands for showerheads, shower controls, and taps (including bathroom and kitchen, single and dual mixer, and manual and automatic taps) will range from > 13 l/min (red) to ≤ 6.0 l/min (green); for toilets from > 6.0 l/flush (red) to ≤ 3.5 l/flush (green); and for baths from > 200 l (red) to ≤ 155 l (green). The stated toilet flush volumes are based on average values calculated from three flushes for a single flush toilet, or one full-flush and three reduced-flushes for a dual-flush toilet. No performance bands are given for urinals, however, a flow rate of 1.5 l/flush is recommended, and while electric showers, flow regulators, and grey water systems are also included under the scheme, no specific performance bands are currently given for these devices. The scheme suggests that the label can be fixed to either the device or its packaging, on the marketing or technical literature, or on the manufacturer’s website, or in any combination of these. As well as the label, consumers can refer to an online database (www.europeanwaterlabel.eu) of water efficient devices which currently holds information of around 2200 devices.

3.2 Portugal Launched by the National Association for Quality in Building Installations (ANQIP) in 2008, to meet the requirements of the National Plan for Efficient Water Use (Batista, et al., 2001), the ANQIP labelling scheme uses a rating system to indicate water efficiency by use of an alphabetic scale from E (least efficient) to A++ (most efficient), see Table 1. Further graphical representation of water efficiency is provided by means of water drops (Silva-Afonso and Pimentel-Rodrigues, 2011), however, the actual water consumption or flow rate figures of the device are not provided. This voluntary scheme covers toilets, showers, and taps and, as well as water efficiency, also takes account of the user-friendliness and performance of each device. To use the label, manufacturers must comply with a set of water efficiency standards which are used to assign the appropriate rating. The performance of labelled devices is continually checked and monitored by random testing by devices on the market. The scheme provides technical specifications for different types of each device (i.e. toilets: both double-action and dual-flush; showers: both thermostatic tap and eco-stop function; and taps: both aerator and eco-stop function). Only the standard type of each device will be considered, here, however, a full description is provided by Silva-Afonso and Pimentel-Rodrigues (2011). For dual-flush toilets, the water efficiency ratings range from 9.0/4.5 litres (E rating) to 4.0/2.0 litres (A++ rating); showers from > 30.0 l/min (E rating) to ≤ 5.0 l/min (A+ rating); bathroom taps from > 8.0 l/min (E rating) to ≤ 2.0 l/min (A rating); and kitchen taps from > 10.0 l/min (E rating) to ≤ 4.0 l/min (A rating). From its implementation in 2008, some 110 toilets have been awarded the label, representing 75% of the national market (Silva-Afonso and Pimentel-Rodrigues, 2011). No information could be found regarding the awards to showers and taps.


396

3.3 Hong Kong The Hong Kong Government operates a voluntary Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme (WELS) as a water conservation initiative covering the most common devices. The scheme has been introduced in phases for different devices. It was first implemented for showerheads in 2009, before expanding to include taps in 2010, washing machines in 2011, and most recently, urinals in 2012. Application to register a device is done in writing and any device applying for registration must be tested to ensure compliance with the relevant water efficiency standards. To ensure on-going compliance with the scheme, Inspecting Officers carry out random inspections (WSD, 2011). The label uses a four-point grading system to represent water efficiency depicted by water droplets: Grade 1 = one water droplet (most efficient) to Grade 4 = four water droplets (least efficient), see Table 1. In addition to showing the relevant water efficiency grade and water consumption information, the label also includes the brand, model name, and WELS registration number. The grading system for showerheads is from > 16.0 l/min (Grade 4) to ≤ 9.0 l/min; for non-mixing taps from > 6.0 l/min (Grade 4) to ≤ 2.0 l/min (Grade 1); for mixing taps from > 9.0 l/min (Grade 4) to ≤ 5.0 l/min (Grade 1); horizontal drum washing machines from > 13.0 l/kg/cycle (Grade 4) to ≤ 9.0 l/kg/cycle (Grade 1); impeller type washing machines from > 22.0 l/kg/cycle (Grade 4) to ≤ 16.0 l/kg/cycle; and urinals from > 4.5 l/flush (Grade 4) to ≤ 1.5 l/flush (Grade 1).

3.4 Singapore As part of an on-going effort by Singapore’s national water agency, the Public Utility board (PUB), to encourage people to embrace water conservation as a way of life, the Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme (WELS) enables consumers to make informed purchases based on the water efficiency of a device and is also aimed at providing manufacturers with an incentive to produce more water efficient devices. WELS was first introduced in 2006 as a voluntary scheme, but since 2009, all taps (basin, sink, and shower), dual-flush toilets, urinals (including waterless urinals), and washing machines are now covered under a Mandatory WELS. Only showerheads remain under the Voluntary WELS (PUB, 2013). The scheme is free to join and applications for a WELS label can be made online accompanied with test certificates showing compliance with the relevant standards. The label uses a three tick rating system to indicate the water efficiency of the device, see Table 1. A zero tick is given to devices that are not water efficient, while one, two or three ticks are awarded to devices with good, very good, or excellent water efficiency ratings, respectively. Similar to the Hong Kong scheme, this label includes the brand, model name, and WELS registration number, in addition to the device’s rating and water consumption information. The label must be fixed to the packaging as well as being displayed next to the device at the point of sale. All WELS labelled devices are listed online (www.pub.gov.sg). Over 10,000 devices have been rated under the Mandatory WELS and over 700 devices (showerheads) under the Voluntary WELS. To qualify for a WELS label, the device must comply with the relevant water efficiency standards stipulated by PUB. Shower taps and mixers have a rating range from > 9.0 l/min (zero ticks) to ≤ 5.0 l/min (three ticks); basin taps and mixers from > 6.0 l/min (zero ticks) to ≤ 2.0 l/min (three ticks); sink taps and mixers from > 8.0 l/min (zero


397

ticks) to ≤ 4.0 l/min (three ticks); dual-flush toilets from > 4.5/3.0 l/flush (one tick) to ≤ 3.5/2.5 l/flush (three ticks); urinals from > 1.0 to 1.5 l/flush (one tick) to ≤ 0.5 l/flush (three ticks); washing machines from > 12 to 15 l/kg (one star) to ≤ 9 l/kg (three stars); and finally, showerheads from > 7 to 9 l/min (one star) to ≤ 5 l/min (three stars).

3.5 Australia The Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards (WELS) scheme was established in 2005 under the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act 2005. This mandatory scheme covers a wide range of devices including toilets, urinals, showers, taps and flow controllers, as well as washing machines and dishwashers. To register a device, the manufacturer must apply online and, depending on the number of devices to be registered, pay a registration fee of between AU$1000 (1-10 devices) and AU$16,800 (2001-4000 devices). Registration is renewed annually. A test report from an approved laboratory must be provided to prove compliance with the scheme’s water efficiency requirements (AS/NZS 6400:2005) . The label, which must be displayed at the point of sale, uses a six star rating system to indicate water efficiency, as well as including the water consumption or flow rate of the device, see Table 1. The more stars displayed on the label, the more water efficient the device. A zero star rating is used to indicate a device that is either not water efficient or that does not comply with the applicable standards. In addition to the star rating and water efficiency information, the label also includes the brand, model name, and the WELS registration number. AS/NZS 6400:2005 sets out the specific water rating for each device. For showers, the water ratings range from > 16.0 l/min (0 stars) to < 9.0 l/min (3 stars); urinals from > 2.5 l/flush (0 stars) to ≤ 1.0 l/flush (6 stars); taps from > 16.0 l/min (0 stars) to ≤ 4.5 l/min (6 stars); and toilets from > 4.5 l/flush (1 star) to ≤ 2.5 l/flush (6 stars). When considering dual-flush toilets, the water consumption is based on the average of one full-flush and four reduced-flushes which is different to that of the European Water Label which, as stated previously, is based on an average of one full-flush and three reduced-flushes. The latter produces a slightly higher average flush value. The rating system does not differentiate between different types of tap and, therefore, both bathroom and kitchen taps are included within the same rating. The water efficiency rating of a dishwasher and washing machine is based on the water consumption and load capacity of the device and is calculated using a formula provided in the standard. The scheme is mandatory for all showers, toilets, washing machines, dishwashers, urinals, and taps, but is voluntary for flow control devices and there are plans to extend the scheme to include washer-driers, evaporative air conditioners, instantaneous gas hot water systems, hot water re-circulators, and irrigation systems. Scheme compliance and enforcement has primarily focussed on educating the industry about its legal obligation to comply with the WELS scheme and investigators, undertaking both random and targeted inspections, ensure continual monitoring of compliance.

4 Discussion From this review of some of the labelling schemes for water efficient devices from around the world, it can be seen that toilets, showers and taps feature most prominently, see Table 1. This is understandable since they are some of the most water consuming


398

Tab

le 1

: Sum

mar

y of

wat

er e

ffici

ency

stan

dard

s for

sele

cted

wat

er-u

sing

dev

ice

labe

lling

sche

mes

Eur

ope

Port

ugal

H

ong

Kon

g Si

ngap

ore

Aus

tral

ia

Dev

ice

Vo

lunt

ary

Volu

ntar

y Vo

lunt

ary

Man

dato

ry

Man

dato

ry

Toi

lets

(l/

flush

) 3.

5 ≥

L >

6.0

4.0 ≤

L ≤

9.0

3.

5 ≥

L <

4.5

2.5

> L

< 5.

5 Sh

ower

s (l/

min

) 6.

0 ≥

Q >

13.

0 5.

0 ≥

Q >

30.

0 9.

0 ≥

Q >

16.

0 5.

0 ≥

Q <

9.0

4.

5 <

Q >

16.

0 Ta

ps

(l/m

in)

6.0 ≥

Q >

13.

0 2.

0 ≥

Q >

8.0

12.

0 ≥

Q >

6.0

32.

0 ≥

Q >

6.0

14.

5 >

Q >

16.

0

4.0 ≥

Q >

10.

025.

0 ≥

Q >

9.0

44.

0 ≥

Q >

8.0

2

Uri

nals

(l/flu

sh)

L =

1.5

1.

5 ≥

L >

4.5

0.5 ≥

L <

1.5

7.0

> L

> 2.

5 B

aths

(l/

bath

) 15

5 ≥

L >

200

Was

hing

Mac

hine

(l/kg

/cyc

le)

9.0 ≥

L >

13.0

59.

0 ≥

L <

15.0

X

16

.0 ≥

L >

22.

06

D

ishw

ashe

rs

X

Fl

ow c

ontr

olle

rs

X

X

Gre

ywat

er sy

stem

X

E

lect

ric

show

ers

X

Not

es:

1 B

athr

oom

taps

3

Non

-mix

ing

taps

5

Hor

izon

tal d

rum

was

hing

mac

hine

2 K

itche

n ta

ps

4 M

ixin

g ta

ps

6 Im

pello

r typ

e w

ashi

ng m

achi

ne


399

devices within households, and therefore, represent a significant potential to save water. Baths, washing machines and dishwashers, on the other hand, are generally less well addressed. Although the European Water Label similarly, does not include washing machines and dishwashers, it is the only one of the schemes to include a label for baths as well as grey water systems and electric showers. Across all of the schemes, water efficiency standards vary greatly, not only between different devices due to their different applications and uses, but also between the minimum and maximum water consumption targets stipulated by each scheme. For example, the maximum water consumption target for toilets varies from as low as 4.5 l/flush (Singapore) to 9.0 l/flush (Portugal). This difference is due mainly to variations between the requirements of the relevant national standards or national aspirations of water conservation. However, it serves to highlight the varying degrees to which different countries and labelling schemes are working to drive down water consumption. Another difference between the schemes is whether it is implemented as a voluntary initiative or a mandatory requirement. From the schemes reviewed, both the Singapore and Australian schemes are mandatory and require certain water using devices to be labelled before they can be placed on the market. The other schemes, including the European Water Label, are voluntary schemes that require manufacturers to see a benefit or incentive to using the label. Previous voluntary schemes (such as the Australian 5-A scheme and the Dublin Water Conservation Label) have suffered due to low awareness by consumers and low uptake by industry (European Commission, 2009). However, voluntary schemes also offer the opportunity for manufacturers to introduce new standards of water efficiency that exceed current regulation and, therefore, provide incentives for water efficiency “champions” to take the competitive advantage. The European Water Label is a voluntary scheme, but one that is backed by major manufacturers and retailers, which will significantly help towards its implementation and the inclusion of both national and international manufacturers, will give the scheme a wider scope and range of products.

5 Recommendations Having reviewed some of the more established water efficiency labelling schemes, this section proposes a number of recommendations on improving the planned European Water Label based on best practice and “lessons learnt” from existing schemes, as well as a review of the water conservation literature.

1. The appearance of the European Water Label has been based around that of the Energy Efficiency Label. The label itself is clear and bold. However, the decision to follow this familiar and easily recognisable format may prove over simplistic and to the detriment of the information that consumers come to expect from such labels. Including only the performance rating and water consumption value, the label includes no information about the brand or model that the label refers. With no means of identifying the device, the wrong label could be inadvertently, or intentionally, displayed with the wrong device. An independent review of the Australian labelling scheme (Guest, 2010) found this issue to be of concern to consumers and subsequently those scheme labels were updated to include this information. Therefore, it is recommended that the European Water Label should include the brand, model name, and also the scheme registration number in addition to the performance rating and water consumption values.


400

2. This second recommendation also concerns the information included on the label. A

large proportion of the literature examining people’s behaviour and attitude towards water conservation, reports that investment costs and payback of new water efficient devices are still an issue for most consumers (Adeyeye, 2011; Graymore and Wallis, 2010; Dolnicar and Hurlimann, 2010). A survey by Dolnicar and Hurlimann (2010) found that 76% of consumers identified cost as the biggest barrier to them purchasing water efficient devices. None of the labelling schemes reviewed include any information regarding potential cost, or water, savings. Although all labels, except the ANQIP (Portuguese) label, include figures of the actual water consumption per use, these figures are only useful for comparing like-for-like devices, yet give no information about potential future savings that the consumer could use to help justify the initial cost. Therefore, it is recommended that the European Water Label include generalised figures of potential cost (payback) and water (litres or glasses of potable water, perhaps) savings to better inform the consumer and to help remove this barrier to the uptake of water saving devices.

3. The European Water Label scheme gives no formal instructions of where the label should be displayed, other than suggesting where the label “may appear”. This could result in inconsistencies and confusion for consumers. It is recommended that the scheme provide explicit instructions of where the label must be displayed, i.e. on the device packaging and at the point of sale.

4. From all of the labelling schemes reviewed, the European Water Label appears to

have one of the most complicated, and costly, pricing structures for registering and licensing devices. This could be prohibitive to attracting manufacturers to join the scheme, particularly due to its voluntary status. It is, therefore, recommended that the pricing structure be reviewed and simplified.

5. The European Water Label is a voluntary scheme, and although there are some advantages to voluntary schemes, discussed earlier, there are also major advantages to mandatory schemes. A mandatory scheme would (i) involve all manufacturers and retailers and, therefore, encourage a greater market transformation than voluntary programmes; (ii) ensure fair competition and provide consumers with relevant information about all devices on the market that are included in the scheme; (iii) increase consumer awareness about water conservation issues and help encourage them to buy more water efficient devices. Furthermore, considering the fact that the main objective of introducing water efficiency labelling schemes is to help conserve water, a study by the Institute of Sustainable Futures (Chong et al., 2008) provides further evidence of the benefits of a mandatory scheme over a voluntary scheme. The study, which examines the effectiveness of the mandatory Australian scheme, estimates that the implementation of the mandatory scheme will reduce national water consumption by 800GL over the period 2005/6 to 2020/21 compared with that of a voluntary scheme. The recommendation is that the European Water Label should consider moving to a mandatory scheme as soon as possible in order to realise full water conservation benefits. Consideration should also be made to working with water authorities and governments to incorporate incentives, such as cash rebates, for consumers who purchase highly water efficient devices.


401

6. It will be important to measure the effectiveness of the European Water Label in meeting its aim of reducing water consumption throughout the member countries. Indicators of the scheme’s success could include: (i) changes in customer awareness and attitude towards water conservation; (ii) change in consumer purchasing behaviour; and (iii) changes in overall water consumption. It is recommended that the European Water Label carries out regular monitoring and analysis of its impact.

7. And finally, it is well understood that water efficient devices save water when

installed and used correctly. However, literature shows that offsetting behaviour can negate any potential water savings offered by the water efficient device and, in some circumstances, lead to increased water consumption (Geller et al., 1983; Campbell et al., 2004, Olmstead and Stavins, 2009). People engage offsetting behaviour when they know devices are conserving water. For example, if people know that their showerhead is low-flow, they may feel free to take longer showers. There is, therefore, a need to provide education and communication for consumers on the motivation behind water efficient devices and also to manage their expectations.

6 Conclusion The European Water Label will, for the first time, provide consumers with water efficiency information of water-using devices on the market throughout the whole of the EU, Israel, Switzerland, Russia, Ukraine, and Turkey. Introducing a single label will contribute to establishing basic minimum standards of water efficiency throughout all of the member countries and help to harmonise targets and strategies on water conservation. This paper has reviewed the planned European Water Label scheme and compared it with that of other labelling schemes currently implemented around the world. Recommendations have been proposed for the European Water Label based on best practices found from other schemes and also from the literature. In summary, the recommendations for ensuring the full benefits of introducing a Europe-wide labelling scheme are: (i) the label should include the brand, model name and scheme registration number together with the performance rating and water consumption values; (ii) values of potential cost and water savings should be added to the label; (iii) explicit instructions of where the label must be displayed should be provided; (iv) the registration and licensing pricing structure should be simplified; (v) the scheme should move from a voluntary to a mandatory scheme; (vi) the effectiveness of the labelling scheme in helping to conserve water should be monitored; (vii) the scheme should actively educate and communicate with consumers in order to avoid offsetting behaviour. The potential benefits of the European Water-Label, in terms of water conservation measures, are extensive and if implemented and managed correctly this labelling scheme could greatly help towards the conservation of Europe’s vital water resources.

7 References Adeyeye, K. (2011). “Beyond the minimum requirements: policy-led strategies for increasing water efficiency in buildings.” EPSRC/Defra Policy Fellowship Summary Report. Allon, F. and Sofoulis, Z. (2006). “Everyday Water: cultures in transition.” Australian Geographer. 37(1), 45-55.


402

AS/NZS 6400:2005. “Water efficient products – Rating and labelling.” Batista, J.M., Almeida, M.C., Vieira, P., Silva, A.C.M., Ribeiro, R., Fernando, R.M., Serafim, A., Alves, I. and Cameira, M.R. (2001). Programa Nacional para o Uso Eficiente da Agua. Beal. C., Stewart, R.A. and Fielding, K. (2011). “A novel mixed method smart metering approach to reconciling differences between perceived and actual residential end use water consumption.” Journal of Cleaner Production. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.09.007. Campbell, H.E., Johnson, R.M. and Hunt-Larson, E. (2004). “Prices, devices, people, or rules: The relative effectiveness of policy instruments in water conservation.” Review of Policy Research, 21(5), 637-662. Chong, J., Kasagalis, A. and Giurco, D. (2008). “Cost Effectiveness Analysis of WELS: Final Report.” Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney. Defra. (2008). “Action taken by Government to encourage the conservation of water.” London: The Stationary Office. Dolnicar, S. and Hurlimann, A. (2010). “Australian’s water conservation behaviours and attitudes.” Australian Journal of Water Resources, 14(1), 43-53. Ecodesign Directive (2009). “Establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products.” DIRECTIVE: 2009/125/EC. European Commission. (2009). “Study on Water Efficiency Standards.” Reference: 07037/2008/5208889/ETU/D2. European Commission. (2012). “A Blueprint to Safeguarding Europe’s Water Resources.” COM(2012) 637. Geller, S.E., Erickson, J.B. and Buttram, B.A. (1983). “Attempts to promote residential water conservation with educational, behavioural and engineering strategies.” Population and Environment, 6(2), 96-112. Graymore, M.L.M. and Wallis, A.M. (2010). “Water savings or water efficiency? Water-use attitudes and behaviour in rural and regional areas.” International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology.” 17(1), 84-93. Guest, C. (2010). “Independent Review of the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Scheme.” Inman, D. and Jeffrey, P. (2006). “A review of residential water conservation tool performance and influences on implementation effectiveness.” Urban Water Journal. 3(3), 127-143. Mayer, P., DeOreo, W., Towler, E., Martien, L. and Lewis, D. “Tampa Water Department residential water conservation study: impacts of high efficiency plumbing fixture retrofits in single-family homes. Tampa: Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management, 2004.


403

Millock, K. and Nauges, C. (2010). “Household adoption of water-efficient equipment: The role of socio-economic factors, environmental attitudes and policy.” Environmental and Resource Economics. 46(4), 539-565. Office of Community and Economic Development (2002). “Household Energy and Water Consumption and Waste Generation: Trends, Environmental Impacts and Policy Responses. Environment Directorate, National Policies Division. Olmstead, S.M. and Stavins, R.N. (2009). “Comparing price and nonprice approaches to urban water conservation.” Water Resources Research, 45(4). PUB. (2013). “Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme (Voluntary and Mandatory).” PUB, Republic of Singapore. Silva-Afonso, A. and Pimentel-Rodrigues, C. (2011). “The importance of water efficiency in buildings in Mediterranean countries. The Portuguese experience.” International Journal of Systems Applications, Engineering and Development. 5(1), 17-24. The Water Label. (2013). “The Water Label European Industry Scheme: To promote both consumer and professional awareness of water delivery equipment.” June, 2013. Willis, R.M., Stewart, R.A., Panuwatwanich, K., Jones, S. and Kyriakides, A. (2010). “Alarming visual display monitors affecting shower end use water and energy conservation in Australian residential households.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 54, 1117-1127. Willis, R.M., Stewart, R.A., Panuwatwanich, K., Williams, P.R. & Hollingsworth, A.L. (2011). “Quantifying the influence of environmental & water conservation attitudes on household end use water consumption.” Journal of Environmental Managt.. 92, 1996-2009. WSD. (2011). “Voluntary Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme on Showers for Bathing.” Water Supplies Department, Hong Kong.

8 Presentation of author

Dr David Kelly is a Lecturer within the School of the Built Environment at Heriot-Watt University. His research interests include the monitoring and prevention of cross-contamination from building drainage systems, the impact assessment of climate change on rainwater systems, and the promotion and analysis of water efficiency measures in buildings.


404

the european water label: an analysis and review

Documents