Water conservation behavior: is what we say what we do?

Purpose The purpose of this study (mixed-method) was to examine the effectiveness of two types of marketing interventions on water conservation behavior and to compare behaviors to self-reported conservation claims. Design/methodology/approach This paper consists of four phases (advertisement selection focus group, behavioral trace field study, self-report survey and follow-up focus group). In the USA, residing in a dormitory typically includes a fee for water without quantity restrictions. The subjects for this research were college students who lived in dormitories at a medium-sized university in southeastern USA where metering individual water consumption is not possible. Findings The results of the field study phase of student water conservation behaviors were not congruent with the participants’ self-reported behaviors. Phase 2 yielded results contrary to published laboratory experimental research in which cause-related claims were effective. Research limitations/implications This research was limited by a single sample (one university), time (13 weeks) and the inability to measure individual consumption behavior. However, valuable findings were obtained, and suggestions surfaced for future research. Practical implications Using eco-feedback technology and advertisements may result in significant cost savings. While findings were somewhat inconclusive, there was evidence that the use of the eco-feedback technology could result in cost savings for the subject university. Originality/value The behavioral trace study is one of the first field research studies in the marketing discipline designed to examine resource conservation behavior in an impactful way. Further, this research used a single sample triangulated methodology across Phases 2, 3 and 4.