IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v37y2017i10p2005-2022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Empirical Agent‐Based Model to Simulate the Adoption of Water Reuse Using the Social Amplification of Risk Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Venu Kandiah
  • Andrew R. Binder
  • Emily Z. Berglund

Abstract

Water reuse can serve as a sustainable alternative water source for urban areas. However, the successful implementation of large‐scale water reuse projects depends on community acceptance. Because of the negative perceptions that are traditionally associated with reclaimed water, water reuse is often not considered in the development of urban water management plans. This study develops a simulation model for understanding community opinion dynamics surrounding the issue of water reuse, and how individual perceptions evolve within that context, which can help in the planning and decision‐making process. Based on the social amplification of risk framework, our agent‐based model simulates consumer perceptions, discussion patterns, and their adoption or rejection of water reuse. The model is based on the “risk publics” model, an empirical approach that uses the concept of belief clusters to explain the adoption of new technology. Each household is represented as an agent, and parameters that define their behavior and attributes are defined from survey data. Community‐level parameters—including social groups, relationships, and communication variables, also from survey data—are encoded to simulate the social processes that influence community opinion. The model demonstrates its capabilities to simulate opinion dynamics and consumer adoption of water reuse. In addition, based on empirical data, the model is applied to investigate water reuse behavior in different regions of the United States. Importantly, our results reveal that public opinion dynamics emerge differently based on membership in opinion clusters, frequency of discussion, and the structure of social networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Venu Kandiah & Andrew R. Binder & Emily Z. Berglund, 2017. "An Empirical Agent‐Based Model to Simulate the Adoption of Water Reuse Using the Social Amplification of Risk Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(10), pages 2005-2022, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:37:y:2017:i:10:p:2005-2022
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12760
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12760?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fan, Kangqi & Pedrycz, Witold, 2016. "Opinion evolution influenced by informed agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 431-441.
    2. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    3. John H. Miller & Scott E. Page, 2007. "Social Science in Between, from Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life," Introductory Chapters, in: Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life, Princeton University Press.
    4. Bret A. Muter & Meredith L. Gore & Shawn J. Riley, 2013. "Social Contagion of Risk Perceptions in Environmental Management Networks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(8), pages 1489-1499, August.
    5. Joanna Sokolowska & Patrycja Sleboda, 2015. "The Inverse Relation Between Risks and Benefits: The Role of Affect and Expertise," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1252-1267, July.
    6. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    7. Clifford W. Scherer & Hichang Cho, 2003. "A Social Network Contagion Theory of Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 261-267, April.
    8. Andrew R. Binder & Dietram A. Scheufele & Dominique Brossard & Albert C. Gunther, 2011. "Interpersonal Amplification of Risk? Citizen Discussions and Their Impact on Perceptions of Risks and Benefits of a Biological Research Facility," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(2), pages 324-334, February.
    9. Norifumi Tsujikawa & Shoji Tsuchida & Takamasa Shiotani, 2016. "Changes in the Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Generation in Japan Since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 98-113, January.
    10. John H. Miller & Scott E. Page, 2007. "Complexity in Social Worlds, from Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life," Introductory Chapters, in: Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life, Princeton University Press.
    11. Meredith Frances Dobbie & Rebekah Ruth Brown, 2014. "A Framework for Understanding Risk Perception, Explored from the Perspective of the Water Practitioner," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 294-308, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Comrie, E.L. & Burns, C. & Coulson, A.B. & Quigley, J. & Quigley, K.F., 2019. "Rationalising the use of Twitter by official organisations during risk events: Operationalising the Social Amplification of Risk Framework through causal loop diagrams," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 792-801.
    2. Yuan, Shiwei & Li, Xin & Du, Erhu, 2021. "Effects of farmers’ behavioral characteristics on crop choices and responses to water management policies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    3. Dian Sun & Lupeng Zhang & Zifeng Su, 2020. "Evacuate or Stay? A Typhoon Evacuation Decision Model in China Based on the Evolutionary Game Theory in Complex Networks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Zagaria, Cecilia & Schulp, Catharina J.E. & Zavalloni, Matteo & Viaggi, Davide & Verburg, Peter H., 2021. "Modelling transformational adaptation to climate change among crop farming systems in Romagna, Italy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. Marvuglia, Antonino & Koppelaar, Rembrandt & Rugani, Benedetto, 2020. "The effect of green roofs on the reduction of mortality due to heatwaves: Results from the application of a spatial microsimulation model to four European cities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 438(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Francis G.N. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Strachan, Neil, 2015. "A review of socio-technical energy transition (STET) models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 290-305.
    2. Christopher D. Wirz & Michael A. Xenos & Dominique Brossard & Dietram Scheufele & Jennifer H. Chung & Luisa Massarani, 2018. "Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk: Social Media and Zika in Three Languages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2599-2624, December.
    3. Kenneth Pettersen Gould, 2021. "Organizational Risk: “Muddling Through” 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 456-465, March.
    4. P. J. Lamberson, 2018. "Approximating individual interactions in compartmental system dynamics models," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 284-326, January.
    5. Judith I. M. de Groot & Elisa Schweiger & Iljana Schubert, 2020. "Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1226-1243, June.
    6. Rand, William & Rust, Roland T., 2011. "Agent-based modeling in marketing: Guidelines for rigor," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 181-193.
    7. Bier, Vicki & Gutfraind, Alexander, 2019. "Risk analysis beyond vulnerability and resilience – characterizing the defensibility of critical systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 626-636.
    8. Citera, Emanuele & Sau, Lino, 2019. "Complexity, Conventions and Instability: the role of monetary policy," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201924, University of Turin.
    9. Theodosio, Bruno Miller & Weber, Jan, 2023. "Back to the classics: R-evolution towards statistical equilibria," ifso working paper series 28, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Socioeconomics (ifso).
    10. Jeffery S. McMullen & Dimo Dimov, 2013. "Time and the Entrepreneurial Journey: The Problems and Promise of Studying Entrepreneurship as a Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(8), pages 1481-1512, December.
    11. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    12. Levent Yilmaz, 2011. "Toward Multi-Level, Multi-Theoretical Model Portfolios for Scientific Enterprise Workforce Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-2.
    13. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    14. Gräbner, Claudius, 2016. "From realism to instrumentalism - and back? Methodological implications of changes in the epistemology of economics," MPRA Paper 71933, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Michael Rothgang & Jochen Dehio & Bernhard Lageman, 2019. "Analysing the effects of cluster policy: What can we learn from the German leading-edge cluster competition?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1673-1697, December.
    16. Christopher J. Burman & Marota Aphane, 2017. "Complex HIV/AIDS Landscapes: Reflections on How ‘Path Creation’ Influenced an Action-Oriented Intervention," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 45-66, February.
    17. Niceto S. Poblador, 2011. "The Strategy Dilemma : Why Big Business Moves Seldom Pan Out as Planned," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201105, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    18. Martha G. Alatriste-Contreras & Martín Puchet Anyul, 2021. "The Spreading of Shocks in the North America Production Network and Its Relation to the Properties of the Network," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-19, November.
    19. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "The impact of agent-based models in the social sciences after 15 years of incursions," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(2), pages 197-234.
    21. Yu‐Ru Lin & Drew Margolin & Xidao Wen, 2017. "Tracking and Analyzing Individual Distress Following Terrorist Attacks Using Social Media Streams," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1580-1605, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:37:y:2017:i:10:p:2005-2022. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.