Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
create a comprehensive list of all previously reported water information events and
publications and a list of desirable data formats. In return, the waster information
providers agreed to provide updated information, correcting 2005-2006 data
and contributing new information for 2006-2007. Further, it was agreed that both
count and economic proxy calculations would be aggregated into “high” “medium”
and “low” categories across
all
organizations before any analysis or public
presentations. Lastly, the study would use all six representations for analysis.
The resolution required all participants to make an additional time commitment
to the project. The methodological solution circumvented potential challenges to
the scientific credibility of the data by increasing the consistency in data reporting
measures and definitions used across all participants.
Differences in record keeping systems still presented a problem, but the
complete list of water information programs could aid recall. It was agreed with
the water information providers that the cumulative map should be constructed
using all combinations of three aggregation and two accounting methods, therefore
offering more weight to persistent differences in effort to inform neighborhoods
with different proportions of renters and minorities. Given the relative subjectivity
built in to data representation, evaluating each of the representations that had been
created and by comparing the consistency of results across representations presents
the most appropriate option for reducing the effect of arbitrary data boundaries.
While both academic and water information provider participants acknowledged
that
participation
in water information opportunities was unlikely to be constrained
by the boundaries in any of the representations, more specific methods of estimating
the distances people traveled for these events seemed likely to imply greater
accuracy and precision than exists in the underlying data.
Participants also agreed that the low level of consistency in reporting style meant
that using continuous data in either the program count or economic proxy account-
ing methods presupposed a level of certainty and differentiation that we weren't
sure was accurate. Instead, the study would divide the range of water information
effort scores created through count and economic proxy approaches into classes
using a quantile assignment method, assigning categories of “high”, “medium”, or
“low” information using either the number of programs or economic proxy scores,
depending on the representation.
In total, 31 of the 39 (79%) water information organizations contributed to
one or more of the participatory stages and have information represented in the final
maps. These groups represent each class of stakeholder: water utility providers,
education and research groups, environmental nongovernmental organizations,
non-utility governmental agencies, and collaborative stakeholder partnerships.
3.6.4 Results from the Final Map
Organizations provided the public with a range of information through landscaping
classes, information about technology rebates, advertisements about water conserva-
tion methods, and community meetings about the using reclaimed water for irrigation.
