More Effective Climate Nagging

We looked a bit earlier at the relative effectiveness, or lack thereof, of nagging folks to take personal action on climate and environmental issues.  Because of the relatively strong aversion that humans have to relative loss, this sort of political advocacy creates reactions that can make the problem worse.

A separate issue, however, is how we manage such risk issues at the societal level.

California and its continual water management issues are a good example.  California has had well-publicized water shortage concerns, with water usage being increasingly restricted.  Water access in California is a complex weave of interlocking water rights claims, irrigation and water management systems, and end-user usage restrictions.

Individuals face an array of rules on water usage, from daily consumption targets to lawn restrictions (and rebates of $1/sq-ft for getting rid of your lawn entirely) to shower flow restrictions and restrictions on open-air car washing.

Enforcement has ramped up over the years to the point where rumors of draconian $1000 fines for taking a shower have found fertile ground.  Clearly there is some latent resentment of governmental restrictions.

Nudge Theory would suggest managing default behaviors might be a more effective approach.  People who are truly exercised about water restrictions can jump the default behavior and pay the freight for changing their behavior.  I suspect nice California hotels do this informally as they don't seem to have those low-flow shower heads installed.

Appropriate water pricing is necessary to make this work, of course, and personal water usage rates in California are indeed generally quite high.  Los Angeles residents pay triple what I do, since they live in a lifeless desert and I live a mile from the world's largest freshwater lake system.

One challenge though is ensuring that pricing is evenly spread among water users.  California appears to miss on this.  California of course is one of the major agricultural regions of the world, and all manner of crops are grown in its fertile soil.  By some accounts, 80% of water usage is agricultural, and farmers pay much lower pricing on a combination of volume and sourcing arrangements.  This is subject to some debate.  But it's hard to ignore California growth of water-intensive crops like almonds, rice, and alfalfa when you are limiting your own water usage for showers and clothes washing.

Ultimately, how government exerts control on pricing affects risks, and there are many instances where the government's stated goals in reducing risk run up against politically unpopular pricing of goods and services.  Add in the ability for larger players to lobby the politicians, and risk ends up taking a back seat to politics-as-usual.